Live data from Hacker News

“Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

nature.com

481–490 of 883 posts

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#481
post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure: the LDS church teaches that pre-marital sex is a sin, and engaging in it is grounds for the termination of a variety of spiritual privileges, depending on the judgement of a local church leader. The legal freedom to live by that belief makes it a cultural right afforded to any practicing LDS person in the US. A scientist could perform research investigating the impact of those teachings. They might find that it…

> could take those findings and use them to justify a new policy that all LDS children No, they couldn't. Your proposed scenario here is insane. This would be blatantly unconstitutional.

[deleted]

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#483
post #427

Reading the 395 comments so far, I see a lot of reference to the history of church censorship, but surprisingly, nothing at all about culture under the communist regimes of the 20th century, which I think is a much closer analogy. I spent a lot of time on the history of intellectual culture in the USSR back when it was a hot issue. The academic environment in the West today is giving me intense deja vu. Scholars are…

I unironically believe that the emergence of "political correctness" in America in the 1960s-1980s and it's disappearance as a political force in 1991 and its reemergence as "social justice" in 2012 both stem from "active measures" originating with the KGB/FSB.

See this interview from 1998 ( https://web.archive.org/web/20070627183623/http://www3.cnn.c... ):

"On the other hand -- and this is the other side of the Soviet intelligence, very important: perhaps I would describe it as the heart and soul of the Soviet intelligence -- was subversion. Not intelligence collection, but subversion: active measures to weaken the West, to drive wedges in the Western community alliances of all sorts, particularly NATO, to sow discord among allies, to weaken the United States in the eyes of the people of Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America, and thus to prepare ground in case the war really occurs. To make America more vulnerable to the anger and distrust of other peoples.

"In that sense, the Soviet intelligence [was] really unparalleled. ... The [KGB] programs -- which would run all sorts of congresses, peace congresses, youth congresses, festivals, women's movements, trade union movements, campaigns against U.S. missiles in Europe, campaigns against neutron weapons, allegations that AIDS ... was invented by the CIA ... all sorts of forgeries and faked material -- [were] targeted at politicians, the academic community, at [the] public at large. ...

"It was really a worldwide campaign, often not only sponsored and funded, but conducted and manipulated by the KGB. And this was again part and parcel of this campaign to weaken [the] military, economic and psychological climate in the West."

The description of movements funded basically fit the entirety of the New Left coalition of the 60s-80s and the current politics of the Extremely Online set typically found on places like reddit, tumblr, 4chan, and twitter.

Given what's been released of the Mitrokhin archive ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrokhin_Archive ), the Mueller report re: "Russian troll farms" (e.g. the Internet Research Agency), social media disinformation campaigns (e.g. https://help.tumblr.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002280214 ) and pre-Putin-takeover transparency of ex-KGB officers, I don't think it's farfetched to say that Russia and the FSB currently have the means, methods, and motivation to inject any and all corrosive ideologies and misinformation possible in order to paralyze and disintegrate American society.

The Mitrokhin archive (allegedly) and other extant primary aources contains blueprints for these kinds of active measures, including inciting a race war in the US by blowing up a historically Black college and blaming it on right wing militias (Operation PANDORA) and using Soviet media fronts to claim AIDs was made in American-funded biolabs (INFEKTION or VÖRWARTS II):

"We are conducting a series of [active] measures in connection with the appearance in recent years in the USA of a new and dangerous disease, "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome – AIDS"…, and its subsequent, large-scale spread to other countries, including those in Western Europe. The goal of these measures is to create a favorable opinion for us abroad that this disease is the result of secret experiments with a new type of biological weapon by the secret services of the USA and the Pentagon that spun out of control."

This isn't to say that it's impossible that the last decade in America has all been the fruits of American miseducation and inherent civil contradictions coming home to roost, but Occam's Razor and available evidence suggest otherwise--that the Russians currently and historically fund, sow, and amplify any division whatsoever in America that leads to disintegrating social fabric and institutional decline.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#484
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there is no universal "good" otherwise wars would not occur. The American Civil War and WW2 are pretty classical examples of massive disagreements over the legitimacy of certain classes of humans. Had those wars not ended the way they did, black people would still be property, and Jews, Romani, and LGBT people would have been exterminated. There are still people who wish that we lived in that alternative history.…

> black people would still be property Not likely. Slavery had already disappeared in the Northern states due to its inefficiency and internal contradictions. Secession was an attempt to prop up slavery by isolating it economically. It was never going to work. Slavery as an institution disappeared in other countries around the same time. It was free markets that destroyed slavery, as slavery simply could not compete…

> slavery was incompatible with industrialization.

From what I understand, early industrialization gave a temporary boost to slavery. The cotton gin and textile factories greatly increased demand for cotton at a time when industrialization had not yet addressed the harvesting of cotton in the fields.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#485
This is in Nature Human Behavior. This is a social science/psychology journal, a field which is suffering from the reproducibility crisis, perhaps worse than any other field. So, any result in this field should be viewed with significant skepticism. This is true for research into population group differences, and extremely true for IQ research into race, which is almost hopelessly noisy and confounded. It is a simple and obvious fact that population group differences in intelligence are noisy and confounded. In fact it is far stronger a fact than any of the actual results from this research.

Second, research results in population group differences are social poison. They are memetic viruses that fuel violent extremism. The murderer of 10 people in Buffalo directly cited human behavior research in his manifesto. Extremist racist groups regularly discuss this research. This is a fact.

So we have a dangerous combination: weak research that destroys societal bonds. This should be handled with care, and extra consideration should be given to whether the tenuous, fallible results from this research will result in violence.

This isn't fucking Orwell, its people trying to make sure that dogshit research in their journal doesnt get cited by mass shooters.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the people behind statments like these are coming to it with extremly unintelligent and bad faith definitions and intentions, but the actual words are actually correct. If you had the option to delay humanity's discovery of atomic bombs to late 20th century or after, and therefore delay any substantial deep understanding of the atomic physics beneath, you would probably do it. If you had the atomic bomb, you p…

> If you had the option to delay humanity's discovery of atomic bombs to late 20th century or after, and therefore delay any substantial deep understanding of the atomic physics beneath, you would probably do it. The alternative was 20-30 million more dead people via conventional means. There were many teams around the world working to build the bomb. One always wonders about the German team and why they were not fir…

> One always wonders about the German team and why they were not first - and I"m glad they were not.

In regards to this, I believe they were on the right path but they were split in to three groups across Germany. They shared the radioactive material and because of this weren't able to achieve fission (?) due to not having enough material in one spot. Thank $diety for that.

More info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapons_progr...

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#487
post #6

Yet, people can be harmed indirectly. For example, research may — inadvertently — stigmatize individuals or human groups. It may be discriminatory, racist, sexist, ableist or homophobic. It may provide justification for undermining the human rights of specific groups, simply because of their social characteristics. [..] Advancing knowledge and understanding is a fundamental public good. In some cases, however, potent…

This reminds me of the short story in “I, Robot” (Asimov) about the robot who could read people’s minds. The robots in that world were hard-coded to be incapable of injury humans, and the mind-reading robot considered emotional damage “injury”. Of course the robot got into a paradox where it had to hurt someone’s feelings, so it just…died.

Perhaps it's wise for everyone to carefully distinguish physical injury versus emotional damage. Perhaps it is true that we can tie ourselves into knots if we treat emotional damage as completely equivalent to physical injury. And, perhaps also, notorious serial sexual harassers groping apparently hundreds of women (such as our man Asimov) have something of a vested interested in teaching us all that emotional damage in important ways doesn't count.

What's interesting to me, revisiting Asimov after medical school, is that we are unable to create a workable definition of pain that is absent an emotional component. This is of course not to claim there are no important ways that physical violence and non-physical emotional harm differ.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Q: What happens when we stop agreeing on what the “good” is? A. I am right and you are evil. Age old conflict resolution method.

A sword fight doesn’t determine who’s right, just who’s left.

"Stop quoting laws, we carry swords" - Pompey

(Who was later stabbed to death.)

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> black people would still be property Not likely. Slavery had already disappeared in the Northern states due to its inefficiency and internal contradictions. Secession was an attempt to prop up slavery by isolating it economically. It was never going to work. Slavery as an institution disappeared in other countries around the same time. It was free markets that destroyed slavery, as slavery simply could not compete…

> slavery was incompatible with industrialization. From what I understand, early industrialization gave a temporary boost to slavery. The cotton gin and textile factories greatly increased demand for cotton at a time when industrialization had not yet addressed the harvesting of cotton in the fields.

The cotton gin did indeed revive slave produced cotton when it came out. But it was hardly industrialization. It was a hand cranked box. But that was not enough by mid century, and the slave economy was foundering again.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ableist This seems like an implicit denial that people can have different abilities.

Yeah I never really got the whole "ableist" thing; for example, obviously someone who can't see is less capable of performing visual tasks than someone who can. Does that mean shipping a device with a screen is ableist because not everyone can take advantage of the fact that it has a screen?

Unfortunately that is really how some of these people (don't) think.

There's even dystopian sci-fi with that theme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

The worst part is that they've infected organisations who have huge amounts of power over the population.

Post reply on HN