211–220 of 299 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dropout rate is not relevant, because we're only looking at high achievers and we believe their dropout rate is negligible. There are roughly equal numbers of boys and girls graduating high school (technically, there are more girls!), but there are many more high-achieving boys than girls. Boys are much more likely to excel. This is not a statement about the group average, but about the group variance. The SAT is not…
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> His analysis was quickly dismissed as being unscientific and incorrect by experts in the impact of research. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47478537 Racists and misogynist have been using bad science to justify their views for centuries. (See, for example, phrenology.) Once identified as such, we are under no obligation to continue suffering such fools.
What do racists and misogynists have to do with anything being discussed? See, you’re doing it too. Maybe one day you can consider accepting the possibility that a non-racist, non-misogynist might wonder if race or sex can influence general outcomes in a given domain! Personally, I find the idea that it can only influence athletic performance (which I understand is a difference that polite society allows us to acknow…
I'm nearly 50 and decided some years ago that life was just too short to bother accommodating people who are assholes. Perhaps he's brilliant, but there's quite a lot of brilliant people around and if there's a discovery just waiting to be made it's more likely that someone else will do than that the opportunity to make it will be lost forever. I'm not arguing that everyone has to hold the same views, but if your nee…
Not just that but, how many (potentially smarter) people would refuse to work in that company/field/lab because of people like him?
By listening to him, he's potentially doing more damage to the field than he could ever contribute, because that then makes it clear to everyone thinking about entering the field (or even in the field) that bigots like him are listened to. By shutting him down and removing his platform, it's clear that speech like that is not accepted there, thus making bigotry of that sort less prevalent in the field as a whole.
The question boils down to "is this acceptable talk for the workplace, does this talk create a hostile workplace for anyone", and the answers to that are pretty clear cut.
You can't start neutral discussion with weak evidence, strong conclusion and open hostility. Strumia could have just presented his findings neutrally, without already made up his mind and having a clearly visible agenda and hostility. There is a pattern that is repeating: 1. Scientist has a political opinion on difficult politically volatile issue that is outside his field. 2. Scientist finds some supporting evidence…
I went into this leaning towards "they probably are mistreating the guy", but nope, dude's... wrong, manipulative, a liar to further his own goals? The guy quotes the Istanbul Convention, article 4, as being "Discriminations against men 'shall not be considered discrimination'" https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/01A6/production/... But what it actually says is "Special measures that are necessary to prevent…
Why would measures meant to protect somebody from violence ever be considered discriminatory in the first place?
I'm nearly 50 and decided some years ago that life was just too short to bother accommodating people who are assholes. Perhaps he's brilliant, but there's quite a lot of brilliant people around and if there's a discovery just waiting to be made it's more likely that someone else will do than that the opportunity to make it will be lost forever. I'm not arguing that everyone has to hold the same views, but if your nee…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would he be qualified to state that men and women are equally skilled at physics? Surely you would need the same credentials to determine that.
No and he would still be just as dumb for using weak science and fake research to justify the position that he is unqualified to assert. But obviously there wouldn't be as big of a reaction from the scientific community because the assertion wouldn't have been tinged with vitriolic bigotry. Any other weak what-ifs you want to discuss?
We ban accounts that keep doing this. It's what we're trying to prevent from destroying this place, and we need your help along with everyone else's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we are seeking truth, as we do in science, we must accept that there can never be anything wrong with attempting to analyze whether A outperforms B, no matter what A and B are . It doesn’t matter if it’s offensive or politically incorrect. So, what he did seems to be no more “overt” than attempting to analyze which thruster design is most efficient. If he’s wrong, the most appropriate and most effective rebuttal i…
No, for several reasons. First and most obviously, the purpose of this workshop was to further women's participation in high-energy physics (physics and computer science are the two most lopsided science fields; the need for need for more participation is obvious prima facie ). It was not the purpose of the workshop to hash out Strumia's political beliefs, and had the workshop known what Strumia was going to present,…
You lost me there, because in no way is that obvious prima facie.
[Trigger warning, because adults can’t have dispassionate conversations about facts and ideas, and will cherry-pick then knee jerk, probably even in spite of this warning: I’m not saying that women don’t want to enter these fields in the next sentence. I’m not saying that the lack of women is purely because they aren’t interest in the subject. I’m not saying the opposite, either.]
If women don’t want to enter these fields, there is absolutely no need to force them to. Taking this prima facie, and denying anyone the opportunity to even question the premise, is exactly the problem people have with this topic and the activism around it.
You could not be more wrong about your claim that he was unserious. He was very serious and he thinks this is an important issue worthy of his time. There is nothing unserious about using cartoons to make a point, nor with using the term “cultural marxism.” That’s far better than “mansplaining”, and I dare you to tell anyone throwing that term around that they are unserious.
And I don’t agree that he was depantsed by his peers and sponsors due to a lack of credibility. Personally, I think the motivations were emotion-driven. But it’s rarely productive to argue motivations.
I don’t know what the Ted Hill thing is, but when I read comments like that, I wonder if they were actually embarrassed, or if you just want them to be.
I think all of this posturing distracts from what really happened here. The guy is sick of identity politics (are we allowed to say that, or is it like cultural marxism?) and the distraction it’s causing in his field. That’s definitely a position I can relate to.
Edit: Oh, that Ted Hill thing. No, his supporters certainly were not embarrassed. I do agree that it was an embarrassing moment for HN, likely for precisely the opposite reasons.
You can't start neutral discussion with weak evidence, strong conclusion and open hostility. Strumia could have just presented his findings neutrally, without already made up his mind and having a clearly visible agenda and hostility. There is a pattern that is repeating: 1. Scientist has a political opinion on difficult politically volatile issue that is outside his field. 2. Scientist finds some supporting evidence…
Yes and no. As others pointed, Larry Summers wasn't provocative and suffered a similar backlash. And when you have a strong political pressure on a topic, it is logical that the only people who will speak up will tend to be the more provocative, anti-establishment outliers.
Did Larry Summers receive backlash, consequences and pressure from academia (his peers) like Strumia or just from from social media and public.
Public backlash is to be expected in the time of moral panic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol Firstly, the guy isn't qualified to make such a sweeping statement about the opposite sex. So before we even step into the problems with why it's a dumb idea to say such things, lets just make it clear that he's a physicist and not an anthropologist, biologist, or sociologist. We definitely care about his moral character, but it's also just flat out incredibly naive to discredit women in his field when they've be…
It is comments like yours that is currently fuelling the ‘diversity’ meme pushback. You are denying someone the right to express facts just because of its gender and divergent political opinion. The guy is a physicist, he is way more qualified than any sociologist to deal with statistics. Your position is not only ridiculous virtue signaling but you are also creating a scary world where the messenger is more importan…
If you'd review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the spirit of this site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Here are some other links that might help with that:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html