Online activists are silencing us, scientists say • Hacker News Board

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#241

Post by nathan_long » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:09 PM UTC

barry-cotter wrote: post #233

nathan_long wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A genetic test to see whether someone has ancestry from Melenasia or Sudan or Scotland is likely to give a different result than casual visual classification. The latter is what we commonly call "race".

I can tell the difference between German and Irish people at better than chance and you think people can’t tell the difference between Melanesians, Caucasians and Sub Saharan Africans? Bone structure, skin tone, hair colour and hair texture don’t give as much information as a whole genome sequence but telling the difference between an East Asian and a West Eurasian isn’t rocket surgery. By the same token it’s not har…

> You think people can’t tell the difference between Melanesians, Caucasians and Sub Saharan Africans?

Get someone to show you pictures and have you identify them. I bet you'll make a lot of mistakes.

Historically, not only can people not tell the difference objectively, they decide what the difference is subjectively. In the United States, the child of a white slave owner and a black slave, if their parentage was known, was ... black. People of "mixed race" might be deemed a different race than their own full siblings, based on which visible characteristics they got from which ancestor.

Even today, people migrating from one country to another are often surprised that their racial classification is different in the new country than at home.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#242

Post by manfredo » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #171

triplewipeass wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a capitalist society, I will see in a negative light any statement or action that negatively impacts my livelihood. I don’t care if the most vocal activists think that it’s “right” in an absolute sense to enact a policy of reverse discrimination. Anything that detracts from my ability to provide for my family is bullshit.

Just to clarify, you're saying that being on a team that isn't diverse and consequently makes provably worse decisions means you're likely to earn less than the amount you'd earn on a diverse team making better decisions, so you're absolutely in favor of maximizing your earnings by enforcing diversity through positive discrimination, right?

The studied that found diverse teams are more effective often some fishy methodology. In particular, one of the more widely circulated studies reaches their conclusion by making diverse and non-diverse teams plan a wedding using dances, rituals, and food from two or more culturs. A lot of these studies start with a conclusion determined a priori and the design an experiment to support it.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#243

Post by alexandercrohde » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:11 PM UTC

llamaz wrote: post #194

tomp wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The purpose of your circumlocution is to remain ambiguous enough to fall back to a less controversial position when called out. Just say what mean, which is that skin colour correlates with IQ. No, parent is rightfully pointing out that it's IQ in general , not any specific trait X. X could stand for race/skin color, but it could also stand for ancestry (e.g. Askenazi Jew, which IMO have same skin color as the rest…

You're right, maybe I should have said race instead of skin colour and added sexism to my list of accusations.

What I said was pretty well-worded, I think it's much larger than the example you're thinking of.

For example, any of these studies would drive the internet angry (if they found a strong result):

- Midgets vs IQ

- Attractiveness vs IQ

- Attractiveness vs Likelihood of birth defect

- Wealth vs Emotional Stability

- HN vs Autism Spectrum

- Eye Color vs Empathy

The formula is (visible trait) x (valued trait) x (has this trait already been historically used to justify atrocities).

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#244

Post by kstenerud » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:12 PM UTC

If you think it's bad now, wait until "activists" have easy access to AI that most people can't distinguish from real humans.

It's simple: Just pick a target of your ire, be it someone with ideological, political, lifestyle differences, or just someone you don't like, point your AI bot to it, and watch it harass your victim and anyone associated with them, until they lose their job, reputation, friends, family, etc. Bots never get bored, never forget to keep the pressure going. They continue, relentless, until their target is destroyed, even if you've forgotten and moved on.

It'll start out as character-assassination-for-hire, but eventually the source will leak, and then all hell will break loose.

It's a bully's paradise.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#245

Post by cwyers » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:14 PM UTC

There's a lot of people in the thread who are saying that people are reacting the way they are to this study because of the "stigma" against mental illness. Well, maybe that's part of it. But there are other things going on here. The Reuters article references the PACE study. And people are not just objecting to the "stigma" but the actual consequences of the study.

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2015/12/18/28362/

> I agree it’s an absolute disaster of a paper. It otherwise should not be the object of my attention but there is some nastiness associated with its dissemination. Peter White, one of the authors is paid for working with a group trying to get social welfare payments denied to people with chronic physical illness. He promotes the idea that chronic fatigue syndrome, whatever its origins, is perpetuated by fears of exertion. The deconditioning model that is the basis for these claims has been discredited. So he is forced to rely on dodgy research like this to promote the view that chronic fatigue syndrome is largely “cognitive” and psychosomatic. I’ve seen horrible testimony from him that patients who “appear” to be disabled should be denied handicap parking passes because that will force them to walk more. He has personally testified in a number of hearings where patients with chronic fatigue syndrome have had the benefits revoked.

In other words, the study is being used _by one of the authors_ to deny people state benefits meant to help people with chronic conditions.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#246

Post by btilly » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:14 PM UTC

Here is a simple rule.

Any condition that can be improved with a placebo, has a possible psychological component that can either be a cause or a contributing factor. This is not to say that it is all in your head, or that all people with it have it due to psychological reasons. But some of the people have at least some of their symptoms worsened by psychological factors.

Anyone who finds this controversial has psychological issues with reality. And this is true whether your condition is CFS or high blood pressure+heart disease.

Now people don't want to believe that acupuncture is a placebo, but there is ample evidence that it is. Therefore this applies to every condition that people find that acupuncture can help for. And that is a lot.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#247

Post by jayd16 » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:15 PM UTC

ddorian43 wrote: post #114

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have evidence of your claim that "These topics are so sensitive because of the current political climate that they are literally career suicide for any western scientist."? For example, an investigative piece similar to the one here, except about behavioral genetics?

See anyone who has touched "differences of iq between races".

The conflict here is one side thinks this is some kind of political correctness scheme when in reality, IQ and race are just terribly unscientific social constructs.

You'll get much less push back from something like "genetic marker found to influence spatial thinking in young children.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#248

Post by sandov » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:17 PM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #244

If you think it's bad now, wait until "activists" have easy access to AI that most people can't distinguish from real humans. It's simple: Just pick a target of your ire, be it someone with ideological, political, lifestyle differences, or just someone you don't like, point your AI bot to it, and watch it harass your victim and anyone associated with them, until they lose their job, reputation, friends, family, etc.…

That already happens, but instead of bots, it's dumb people with a political agenda doing the harassing, and they even do it with their own resources, you don't have to pay for bot servers.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#249

Post by Pimpus » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:17 PM UTC

mcv wrote: post #204

hirundo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

John Sarno's theory is that such pain is indeed caused by physical mechanisms ... which are triggered by psychological mechanisms. Such things are common, like a blush to the cheeks, hair on your arm raised by fright, erections and other sexual responses, etc. He was also clear that this is not always the case, and that direct physical causes should be looked for by a specialist before pursuing psychological remedies…

You mean that stress can play a factor in RSI? I don't think that's in any way controversial, but that doesn't make it in any way less real, or less physical. Although in the case of RSI, there are a lot more factors than that: bad posture, lack of exercise, and most importantly of course repetitive motions that very slowly build up strain on surrounding tissue, wrists, shoulders, back, etc.

It's not stress and it's not playing a factor. Unconscious, repressed emotions are the direct cause of RSI and many other ailments, including Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. I highly recommend reading the book.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#250

Post by phonypc » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:18 PM UTC

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #69

I feel like the topic of CFS is irrelevant to the story. Why is there such toxicity online creating these echochambers. If you point out anything that might question climate change for example, you will be called all kinds of names. Nobody looks at the points you are making. Let's test it right now. I'm sure I'll get downvoted and nobody will respond. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record#/m... Ov…

You'll be downvoted for being off-topic, excessively contrarian and uttering non-sequiturs.

Paleoclimatology bears no relevance to the effects climate change will have on human civilization, and extant life more generally. i.e. it does not follow from the fact that life has (and could again be) adapted to Eocene-like conditions, that "climate change is good".