Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–209 of 209 posts

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#201

Post by jstarfish »

rightbyte wrote: post #179
jstarfish wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We like these fall-from-grace stories but there's a subpattern to this that can't be articulated so easily. Literal "corruption" comes close. See also: every freedom fighter that launches a coup to overthrow a dictator, then becomes a dictator themselves within a decade. Or cops that get caught stealing child porn from the evidence locker, despite not being pedophiles by any definition. Not all these types start this…

> Or cops that get caught stealing child porn from the evidence locker, despite not being pedophiles by any definition. Has this happened? He thought it was normal porn?

Not quite. Before commercial forensics tools started pixelating and obfuscating images so investigators didn't have to witness CSA constantly, they'd get desensitized to this stuff and occasionally end up spiraling. We're seeing it again with Facebook moderators and AI trainers.

I haven't heard any new cases of exfiltration in a very long time (at worst, just vice cops soliciting prostitutes) so I like to think the technical/procedural changes are working as intended.

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#202

Post by rightbyte »

jstarfish wrote: post #201
rightbyte wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or cops that get caught stealing child porn from the evidence locker, despite not being pedophiles by any definition. Has this happened? He thought it was normal porn?

Not quite. Before commercial forensics tools started pixelating and obfuscating images so investigators didn't have to witness CSA constantly, they'd get desensitized to this stuff and occasionally end up spiraling. We're seeing it again with Facebook moderators and AI trainers. I haven't heard any new cases of exfiltration in a very long time (at worst, just vice cops soliciting prostitutes) so I like to think the t…

Ye well I imagine watching CSA to any great extent messes you up.

I read some article about some poor cop watching and trying to identify victims for all CSA cases in the country where I live. I wonder if you give such a task to some "psychopath", or atleast I hope so.

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#203

Post by qup »

rossdavidh wrote: post #180
qup wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, they had such little practice that they weren't good at it.

Perhaps, but I think a first-timer would be able to avoid those mistakes, especially if they were thinking, "oh boy, this is a really bad and risky thing I am doing here, I better double and triple check". On the other hand, if it's a normal (for you) thing you're doing, which you have to do on most of your papers, then on some days you're going to rush it.

Normalized deviance, sure

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#204

Post by JenrHywy »

spondylosaurus wrote: post #198
telotortium wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, the people in support of DEI are fond of the expression "the personal is political" or even "everything is political", so why wouldn't DEI be political? Given that it involves the organization of society and is controversial, DEI seems like the prototypical example of something political. It would be clearer for everyone if DEI openly accepted their role as political commissars.

I have literally never once heard language like that from DEI professionals; in every context I've encountered them, they've basically been an emissary of HR and had a "be nice but don't rock the boat" mentality, for better or for worse. And I'm speaking as someone who falls into several ""diverse"" hiring categories. As much as I appreciate the philosophy of DEI work, I personally find most of it pretty toothless. T…

I had someone from our diversity team say, in a meeting of 100+, that the problem that the team are trying to combat is "whiteness". This coming from a white woman who quite openly said that she'd only recently started identifying as diverse because one of her parents spoke a non-English language.

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#205

Post by UncleMeat »

paulpauper wrote: post #32

Maybe he is to blame, but the social sciences in general are inherently vulnerable to this sort of problem. There have been many instances of similar incidents over the past few decades or so. not just overt academic fraud but misconstruction of data, excel errors, poor methodology, publication bias, etc. This calls into doubt if anything in the social sciences can really be trusted.

This is just you presenting your preexisting beliefs.

We saw a widely publicized and long career of false data in biology over the past couple of years following roughly the same structure (just sticking garbage data into excel spreadsheets). Methodological errors and publication bias are also widespread in CS. When I was in grad school, the method I was told to use to choose tools was to choose the second best tool in a paper, since the authors' tool was invariably the best but their evaluations were inherently less likely to transition into my work.

Drawing a further conclusion that whole entire fields of research are simply untrustworthy based on media coverage of bad actors, especially as a nonexpert, is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The field that is actually tackling the reproducibility crisis even in a small way is Psychology. This is one reason why there are so many "X doesn't actually replicate" headlines. Yes, replication studies should be even more common. But it is hard to conclude that the social sciences are uniquely horrible when Psychology is actually ahead of the curve here.

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#206

Post by spondylosaurus »

JenrHywy wrote: post #204
spondylosaurus wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have literally never once heard language like that from DEI professionals; in every context I've encountered them, they've basically been an emissary of HR and had a "be nice but don't rock the boat" mentality, for better or for worse. And I'm speaking as someone who falls into several ""diverse"" hiring categories. As much as I appreciate the philosophy of DEI work, I personally find most of it pretty toothless. T…

I had someone from our diversity team say, in a meeting of 100+, that the problem that the team are trying to combat is "whiteness". This coming from a white woman who quite openly said that she'd only recently started identifying as diverse because one of her parents spoke a non-English language.

Oh boy... sounds like a piece of work :P

I know the type you're referring to—people punchdrunk on their own performative "activism" who love to make everything about themselves—and they're pretty cringey, but at least in my experience they're far from the norm on corporate DEI teams. Honestly super ballsy of her to pull the Diverse White Lady move like that... I'd be shocked if no one else on the team gave her a talking-to, unless (1) she's the boss or (2) everyone else on the diversity team is white.

(Which does happen, and isn't great, but also is pretty funny in juxtaposition with the claims you'll hear about DEI teams being radical Marxist plots or whatever. Half the time these teams are just a bunch of HR managers named Linda who get the letters in LGBT mixed up.)

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#207

Post by chalst »

chalst wrote: post #172

Andrew Gelman has written about this case, drawing parallels with past cases and asking about the psychology of the fraudsters. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/06/21/ted-talkin...

He has returned to the topic, this time with a focus on those who are capable of exposing the fraud but instead turn a blind eye. He calls this 'passive corruption'.

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/06/23/its-worse-...

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#208

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

spondylosaurus wrote: post #161
LawTalkingGuy wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should DEI teams be hiring people who are against [...] Yes, otherwise you're saying hiring is just a political test.

No it's not, lol. Logistically speaking, it makes zero sense to hire an anti-diversity advocate for a DEI role. Companies only have DEI teams because they want to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion; they wouldn't hire someone who's actively going to detract from that effort. It'd be like hiring a reckless loudmouth who loves to make people look bad as your head of PR. Literally the opposite of what you need the…

> I also find it suspect that equity or inclusion are "political,"

The way you say "suspect" seems like an attempt to sway opinion, which seems like a tacit admission that that the terms are political.

For instance, inclusion of who? What groups do you divide the world's people into such that you need one of every group for proper representation?

> Logistically speaking, it makes zero sense to hire an anti-diversity advocate for a DEI role.

I think most people can do jobs they don't agree with. An engineer can design a bridge that they didn't vote for, an administrator can follow rules they wouldn't have chosen, etc.

> Companies only have DEI teams because they want to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion;

How should you do that though? Is any diversity of thought allowed? For instance, is anyone allowed to think that affirmative action is ultimately harmful and focus on the diversity and inclusion over "equity", and/or argue for what they feel are more helpful methods?

Is DEI defined as a specific set of practices or a general goal of bettering society?

Re: Harvard dishonesty expert accused of dishonesty

#209

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

spondylosaurus wrote: post #198
telotortium wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, the people in support of DEI are fond of the expression "the personal is political" or even "everything is political", so why wouldn't DEI be political? Given that it involves the organization of society and is controversial, DEI seems like the prototypical example of something political. It would be clearer for everyone if DEI openly accepted their role as political commissars.

I have literally never once heard language like that from DEI professionals; in every context I've encountered them, they've basically been an emissary of HR and had a "be nice but don't rock the boat" mentality, for better or for worse. And I'm speaking as someone who falls into several ""diverse"" hiring categories. As much as I appreciate the philosophy of DEI work, I personally find most of it pretty toothless. T…

> There have even been multiple instances of myself and other rank-and-file coworkers trying to have discussions about bigotry at large (not even in the workplace itself), only to be shut down by those very same DEI coordinators under the guise of "let's use kind words instead of unkind words

How do you have these conversations such that you're using unkind words? Are you racially stereotyping people as bigots?

> I'm speaking as someone who falls into several ""diverse"" hiring categories.

Yeah, that makes sense. If your intersectionality was switched those conversation probably would have gotten people fired.

> I have literally never once heard language like that from DEI professionals

Like the "whiteness" thing from the other post. Rules for thee and not for me.

> not good HR-speak to call a spade a spade.

"Although the term has its origins in Greek literature, the subsequent negative connotations with the word 'spade' means that the phrase should be used with caution or not at all." -- Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative, Stanford

You might not be held to the same standard as other employees, if you can freely speak in this fashion...

Post reply on HN