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

Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 245 posts

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#191

Post by JumpCrisscross »

lokar wrote: post #173
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you should consider: "what if everyone did that?" Literally every academic conference. > but was not accepted to the conference (so they had no formal chance to present it) One, source for it not being accepted to the conference? It was accepted to the conference organizer’s journal. Two, again, literally every academic conference. Folks handing out their papers, including preprints not published at the organizer’s…

The last CS conf I went to (admittedly, a while ago), I did not run into people passing out papers unprompted. Is that what you mean? Just going up to people you don't know and handing it to them? Or, giving it to people you know, or are already talking to? I'm not sure I understand the situation.

> Just going up to people you don't know and handing it to them?

Standing in a hallway handing them out and discussing? I’ve seen it at aerospace conferences aplenty.

> giving it to people you know, or are already talking to?

This, too.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#192

Post by JumpCrisscross »

trumpdong wrote: post #175
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does this advice apply in every case or does it have a restricted scope? In case you’re being serious, this has been debated in various liberal traditions since the conception liberalism was first born. In essence, the modern liberal tradition (modern as in post-Enlightenment, i.e. about the whole time America has existed) says you don’t censor anything except for forces seeking to censor (paradox of tolerance).

So now every force seeking to censor will just say its opposition is a force seeking to censor, and get them censored. Like how the Nazis claimed the Jews were the ones destroying Germany, then the Nazis destroyed Germany. How do you stop that?

> How do you stop that?

Better minds than mine have debated the paradox of tolerance (a name only given in the 1950s, but a concept recognized for longer).

Also, not tolerating something doesn’t mean forcefully censoring it. Norms and conventions largely keep e.g. frowned-upon slurs out of common usage. The person getting told to shut up for using the N- word isn’t being censored by the state, but they are being encouraged to engage respectfully.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#193

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wileydragonfly wrote: post #184
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bhattacharya is an unlicensed MD Doesn’t this just mean not practicing? Broadly speaking, that per se seems fine.

You could have simply searched this versus posting, but he never completed a residency. To go into US medical school debt and not complete your training is strongly indicative of deep rooted problems.

Huh, are there credible suspicions around what went wrong?

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#194

Post by convolvatron »

mannanj wrote: post #151
KnuthIsGod wrote: post #23

[flagged]

BtW it is at least partially fake news. Or engineered and coopted by powerful interests. I've personally reversed my own prediabetes, and helped my mom manage her own with a diet change. (yes it consisted of avoiding seed oils). No a brainwashed populace that believes doctors are whom you are supposed to get nutrition advice from, or that believes an industry that profits off of sick people who has their hands in the…

the medical system has been opt-in forever. I completely support your decision to make your own health care decisions. glad that's working out for you. that doesn't mean you get to decide that the rest of us can't invest in medical research or pay experts that know more than us about how our bodies work to treat us.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#195

Post by lokar »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #191
lokar wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last CS conf I went to (admittedly, a while ago), I did not run into people passing out papers unprompted. Is that what you mean? Just going up to people you don't know and handing it to them? Or, giving it to people you know, or are already talking to? I'm not sure I understand the situation.

> Just going up to people you don't know and handing it to them? Standing in a hallway handing them out and discussing? I’ve seen it at aerospace conferences aplenty. > giving it to people you know, or are already talking to? This, too.

Another thought:

There could be some people who are afraid to be seen as involved in criticism of the administration, either for themselves or students/staff in the lab, for immigration or funding reasons. Not sure how relevant this is or how aggressive the approaches are. It would be helpful to hear from a neutral eyewitness.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#196

Post by trumpdong »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #192
trumpdong wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So now every force seeking to censor will just say its opposition is a force seeking to censor, and get them censored. Like how the Nazis claimed the Jews were the ones destroying Germany, then the Nazis destroyed Germany. How do you stop that?

> How do you stop that? Better minds than mine have debated the paradox of tolerance (a name only given in the 1950s, but a concept recognized for longer). Also, not tolerating something doesn’t mean forcefully censoring it. Norms and conventions largely keep e.g. frowned-upon slurs out of common usage. The person getting told to shut up for using the N- word isn’t being censored by the state, but they are being enco…

In practice, it seems that whenever someone is told to shut up for using the N- word, they react by saying it many more times. So it doesn't work very well.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#197

Post by like_any_other »

throwaway173738 wrote: post #153
joemazerino wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One man's censorship is another man's social justice and equity policy.

No, it’s not. You shouldn’t have to muzzle your opposition to feel safe, or to threaten them with jailing to feel like your ideas are being heard. That speaks to some pretty deep seated insecurity if you feel that way.

The comment is not excusing censorship, but illustrating that censors don't like to call what they do "censorship". Even a justification for it is not enough - they don't want to call it "justified censorship", they want to call it something else entirely, and even then they want as little attention paid to it as possible, to trick people into thinking their discussions are free.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#198

Post by roenxi »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #183
roenxi wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> that has little to do with the actual science of diabetes Not the takeaway I got from the article. They describe specific research and specific dollar-drawdown amounts. The tools of science are just as relevant as the science per se to the process of science. I may be extrapolating from the astronomical circles I’m more familiar with. But folks debating telescopes and whatnot is commonplace, political, and absolute…

> They invited a political appointee to speak!

And it appears that is about their limit for politics at the event. They put their foot down at letting it turn into a debate club.

I suspect if Bhattacharya didn't control the purse strings somehow he wouldn't have been invited to talk politics either, I bet the organisers were gritting their teeth when they offered him a slot. And nothing short of a significant cash infusion being involved would have induced them to let him speak. This appears to be a technical conference.

Post reply on HN