Live data from Hacker News

China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

npr.org

181–190 of 204 posts

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#181
post #24

This may not be accurate, but I feel like the US benefited a lot from many foreigners knowing English. This does not seem to be the case for Chinese, though I imagine that will change.

Because of the difficult writing system (thousands of characters to memorize, rather than a mere 26), Mandarin is unlikely to replace English as a world language.

I always considered this a bizarre argument. Chinese characters are more alike English words than English letters. English also has thousands of words, prefixes required to achieve competency. Chinese characters consist of only around 200 radicals, more than 26, but hardly thousands. I would say the smallest unit in Chinese is a stroke, of which there are 10. Theres just an extra dimension about where strokes are placed relative to each other that makes the characters seem complex, but if you study it for a few days you would find that there arent actually that many degrees of freedom. In other words, - strokes to letters - radicals to prefixes, suffices - characters to words

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#182
post #164
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am employed by one of the big tech companies in the bay and was recently chosen to interview candidates for our new grad program. I was astonished by how many top of class graduate students we brought into the program that had identical backgrounds. Around 90% had studied in and were from China, usually undergrad there and Ivy League grad school with close to perfect GPAs. If they are keeping their students, I have…

The American Physical Society recently found that international enrollment in graduate physics programs I'd down by around 10%. But, it's uneven. At say Harvard or Stanford, things are probably still fine, but a smaller institutions, it can be much greater. What's worrisome (as an American) is that these trends may not be reversible

What makes you think this is a secular trend, and does it apply to domestic grad students too?

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#183
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wow that's messed up :(. We experimented on a baby that : 1) never had the need of this experiment, it was not to cure him but to test the effect of messing with a certain gene. 2) we never had its consent (obviously) I don't know about US, but in EU we don't experiment with people, without their concent and in order not to cure them, but to find how to build a stronger race. That's a whole higher level of screwed up…

> in EU we don't experiment with people, without their concent and in order not to cure them, but to find how to build a stronger race. "Involuntary Sterilization and Castration in Sweden and the Nordic Countries" "In 1934, the first sterilisation act was enacted in Sweden followed by the first castration act in 1944. In 1972, Sweden became the first country in the world to enact legislation for the amendment of lega…

authists -> autistics

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard similar things about English being among the harder languages to learn. I think it depends more on what kind of language you already know.

English CAN be easy for several reasons: 1. Very analytical, wake in inflections. 2. No genders for nouns.(As an Eastern Asian, I have serious problem understanding the motivation of introducing such concept into a language.) 3. Reasonable number of tenses comparing with rest of European languages, with the exception of probably present perfect tense, which can be fairly confusing. It CAN be hard for the following re…

3. Use of four or five characters to express a single sound with the rest mangled or silent. But one single character often represents two sounds, just because.

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#185
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As bad as the US is in many different ways, China is immeasurably worse. A future dominated by a hegemonic China would be a dark world. Little steps like these are helping to contribute to that possibility in 50-100 years.

If current trends prevail, it's inevitable. When all else is equal, won't the largest countries dominate?

Great powers historically have not usually been the largest countries population-wise. That would seem to indicate that there's no reason we should expect the inevitability of all else becoming equal.

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#186

As a former researcher I am not surprised to see another nation capitalizing on the counter-productive politicization of US science. I used to be a researcher and writing proposals suddenly started taking up much more time around 2010 to 2013 because each grant became much smaller. Each grant also became more specific in what science you were expected to produce, which essentially made us all contractors for NSF plus…

I don't think biology explains away the gender gap.

I think the main reason there is so much opposition is what happens when it does. Then there is no reason to change the laws/policies (because they don't override how humans are built). That means there is no reason for the careers of politicians and activists and no money for the initiatives to fix it. So it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In practice, of course, biology explains a large portion of differences between humans, both where it pertains to gender, and where it pertains to race.

There are a few "forbidden truths" for them:

1) That there are in fact biological reasons for some aspects of a gender gap.

2) More general there are reasons for discrimination in certain limited cases (it used to be the case that the law had specific exceptions for diversity regulations. The big example given was "no cripples in the emergency response team in the fire department" (I think you can imagine why). That was a valid discriminatory demand that could be put in job applications)

3) There can be no differences in the source population (because ... well if you calculate it out specifically, then the Bay Area is not racist in hiring at all. But wait ! Why are there soooo few blacks working for the Bay Area tech companies ? Why so many Asians ? Well ... those values are very close to what you'd expect them to be if well-established (but heavily denied) racial differences in intelligence are taking into account and one assumes that when silicon valley invites 10 people to compete for a job, they hire the smartest)

So in order to have "equality", defined as "distribution in the winners of competitions is the same as the distribution of participants" you can't have even tiny differences at all in the population beyond their proportion of the population, otherwise that'll never happen. Unfortunately there's another problem here (see next point)

Of course the whole reason different races exist is to have them be different. I mean from the perspective of evolution, which while it isn't a conscious entity, does have both the means to change humans and a reason to do so (a goal to achieve). This means races/genders don't just differ in skin color, they differ in anything. Obviously the skin is one important difference, but it is just one component of profound differences in energy regulation of the body, which affects nearly everything relating to energy use in the body, which ... even affects brain size. Specifically one big difference between races is how much energy gets dedicated to body temperature maintenance (cooling and warming are different systems, so that's 2 separate things), digestion, muscles/movement, and ... yes ... how much energy gets dedicated to thinking, and even the balance between cortex and neocortex. And if it favors the cortex, that is just not going to help out your chess game. It even affects how big you are on average (of course bigger = everything requires more energy, because the human body is not that different from a robot. Fortunately bigger requires exponentially more energy, so the differences there can't be that big)

4) The effect of average differences on competitions. Specifically, say you have group 1 and group 2, and they compete. Let's assume N(100, 10) distribution. Let's say group 1 has a x% higher average, how often would a one-on-one competition between a member of group 1 and group 2 end in favor of the member of group 1 ? Let's call that value y.

for x = 1%, odds of group 1 winning = 53.01% for x = 2%, odds of group 1 winning = 55.57% for x = 5%, odds of group 1 winning = 64.04% for x = 10%, odds of group 1 winning = 76.08% for x = 20%, odds of group 1 winning = 92.19%

And if you have repeated competitions (you only advance to the next round if you win round 1, and there's N rounds) ... it gets pretty bad pretty rapidly.

So unfortunately competition amplifies small differences in averages. Although this is to be expected, this is why natural selection works.

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#187

As a former researcher I am not surprised to see another nation capitalizing on the counter-productive politicization of US science. I used to be a researcher and writing proposals suddenly started taking up much more time around 2010 to 2013 because each grant became much smaller. Each grant also became more specific in what science you were expected to produce, which essentially made us all contractors for NSF plus…

On [1], I found that tptacek's commentary [4] was much helpful to shape my own opinion about it. At the very least I believe the Quillette article is inadequate as an example of, say, biology under the leftist attack.

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17949340

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#188
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Esperanto[1] is an attempt at this, but I am not aware of any significant adoption. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

While it's not "widely adopted" in comparison to other languages in the world, it's still the most successful constructed language in the world. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto I think that our collective understanding of how constructed languages could influence study is very lacking, but could probably take some hints from our experience with computer programming languages. Some languages could have…

I wonder how Klingon compares. I once read an amicus brief with a substantial amount of Klingon.

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#189
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And also the competition to get into good school etc. Basically a student life doesn't start at 18, 16, or 12, but 2years old, if not one and half (interviews for kindergarten). Constant ranking, placement exams, number of school hours etc makes western education pathetic. At the end of P1, Chinese kids are supposed to read something like 800 Chinese words, write 60% of them (if my memory serves me well), in France/S…

Meanwhile in China, people are bashing the education system hard as well, saying it "Teaching to the test" (a Wikipedia term [0]), "Serving political purpose" and "Like a factory". In my opinion, a successful education system is the one which can produce people who are capable of learn new knowledge my themselves, resolve problems by themselves and create new things by themselves. So maybe, reading 800 Chinese words…

And in France people are saying the same bullshit over bac and classes préparatoires. Same in Switzerland. It's lieing to students, reality is a harsh one. If you don't perform during your studies, your life will be tough unless you are an outlier.

Re: China Expands Research Funding, Luring U.S. Scientists and Students

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think biology explains away the gender gap.

I think the main reason there is so much opposition is what happens when it does. Then there is no reason to change the laws/policies (because they don't override how humans are built). That means there is no reason for the careers of politicians and activists and no money for the initiatives to fix it. So it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. In practice, of course, biology explains a large portion of differences b…

You make some good points, but I would like to add caveats on the usefulness to think in terms of groups when judging an individual and make the point that group inferences has severe limitations when making decisions about an individual.

There are bigger differences within groups than between them, although there are also large differences between groups. For instance, people of jewish descent have an average IQ that is much higher than any other group. However, if you are trying to find the best person for a cognitively demanding job or to build a relationship with them then it doesn't matter what the average for any group you might perceive them as part of is as you might need an individual that belong to a small subset of any group.

That is why we in the west made the essential discovery that we are different amongst so many dimensions that we in the end are a group of one, the individual, and that we should aspire to judge a person as an individual on their merit in any situation.

Judging people as individuals goes against some of our basic tendencies as humans. Our natural tendency is to be tribal and to judge individuals for group "guilt". Our judicial and political system is intentionally adversarial to counter this tendency, and that is why we need to fight hard against anyone trying to destroy this process in the name of equity or because they think they deserve special treatment due to their group belongings.

Post reply on HN