Live data from Hacker News

Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

washingtonpost.com

31–40 of 551 posts

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#31
post #8

[flagged]

I'm not sure what word would be better since "after" carries the same implication.

A casual reader may infer the same for both words, but "following" is much stronger. If I may take some liberties with usage: Following someone to a faraway place is much more likely to involve causation than going to that same place after they do.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#32
Her actual whistleblower declaration contains a lot of the evidence some may be looking for:

https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/up...

To sum up the first few pages after skimming it, Facebook tried to bribe her (well "fund" her research), she refused. Later she had a meeting with the former head of comms at Facebook, who was now on the Dean's council, where he became incredibly angry with her research (page 4, 13). Following this, she got an email from the Dean of the Kennedy school which sounds very much like someone tattled to them and they now want to "review" her research (see page 5, 15). It continues from here.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#33
post #9

From regulatory capture through revolving doors and lobbying, to media capture through purchase, and now academic capture through donation, it seems no activity is safe from large concentrations of wealth.

And it never will be. This is a human problem. No amount of laws and regulations will ever solve it.

Is this an appeal for a different form of governance?

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#37
post #9

From regulatory capture through revolving doors and lobbying, to media capture through purchase, and now academic capture through donation, it seems no activity is safe from large concentrations of wealth.

Politics (as in the game of power) and corruption are human nature. Pushing back against these are equally human nature. The worse it gets the more intense the push back. The push back seems to be at moment taking the shape of voting in far right or trump like politicians accross the world. They won't solve the issue. Therefore the next level of intensity may very well be revolution.

imho, you're wrong: it may not be "human nature" as much as it is prisoner's dilemma. few, but some, humans are just as inherently averse to corruption as someone may be inherently prone to it. it's a matter of "if I don't take this bribe, someone else will"

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#38
post #9

From regulatory capture through revolving doors and lobbying, to media capture through purchase, and now academic capture through donation, it seems no activity is safe from large concentrations of wealth.

And it never will be. This is a human problem. No amount of laws and regulations will ever solve it.

Perhaps we can rely on a capricious unaligned AGI to run our universities.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#39
post #17

The linked blog doesn't actually include any details and is instead just a vitriolic series of paragraphs from what sounds like an angry fired employee. It's hard to actually believe anything about this without having specific examples of what was done. The title is pretty farcical given this.

More details in the whistleblower complaint, which is linked from the post. https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/up...
Post reply on HN