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

Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 551 posts

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#521

Post by Draiken »

golergka wrote: post #478
Draiken wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot see how that could be true. I don't know what world you live in if you deem our current society as a perfect place. Maybe you're a billionaire?

How many people you personally know have died of hunger? Have been killed in a robbery? How many of your brothers and sisters died before reaching the age of 10? How many of your own teeth did you have (or expect to have) at the age of 30? Have you been able to afford sugar more than 10 times in your life? How many times per year do you afford to wash yourself in hot water? How many people sleep in the same room in y…

I agree, but that's in no way, shape or form, an utopia.

It's better than before, sure. But an utopia? Not even close.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#522

Post by shuntress »

Arson9416 wrote: post #512
shuntress wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that this type of corruption is inevitable when the "invisible hand" is completely unrestrained.

Bribery is a corruption that happens in every single economic system, so it has nothing to do with the "invisible hand" of capitalism. In fact, arguments could be made as to why it happens less in free markets (where an economy flows more freely) than in non-free markets (where there are artificial barriers, making bribery more effective/needed).

> In fact, arguments could be made as to why it happens less in free markets

Arguments "can be made" for anything. That is the worst possible justification for any position.

Corruption cannot be stopped without effort. The rules and institutions that regulate and control the market are that "effort".

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#523

Post by Arson9416 »

shuntress wrote: post #522
Arson9416 wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bribery is a corruption that happens in every single economic system, so it has nothing to do with the "invisible hand" of capitalism. In fact, arguments could be made as to why it happens less in free markets (where an economy flows more freely) than in non-free markets (where there are artificial barriers, making bribery more effective/needed).

> In fact, arguments could be made as to why it happens less in free markets Arguments "can be made" for anything. That is the worst possible justification for any position. Corruption cannot be stopped without effort. The rules and institutions that regulate and control the market are that "effort".

Bribery is not connected to capitalism any more than it is connected to any other economic system, that's the point that you seem to be missing. People seem to want to dunk on capitalism, but it doesn't make any sense here.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#524

Post by r3trohack3r »

jurynulifcation wrote: post #447
r3trohack3r wrote: post #432

I'm hesitant to share this because it's completely unverifiable in any way I'd be comfortable documenting. Not my life, not my secrets to tell. I had a close friend who did undergraduate research in a fisheries department. They had been researching plant selection for aquaponics to increase the yield of tilapia. They had a filtration system that pushed tank water through a bed of plant roots. The plants would be harv…

Can you give any further details? This might be worth experimenting with, and I do already have an aquaculture setup.

Was a long time ago and not my research.

Superficially, focus on driving down net waste in the system.

Take the nutrient profile of tilapia waste. Compare that with the nutrient demands of plants to find candidates. Then look for plants where the majority of the biomass can be converted into food that the tilapia can digest (i.e. edible roots, stalks, leaves; the more the fish can eat the less energy you take out of the system).

IIRC at least one of the plant choices had a tuber.

IIRC there is also something about the efficiency of waste->biomass conversion for the plants at different stages of development; figuring out when the ideal time to harvest is to minimize energy loss.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#525

Post by [deleted] »

paxys wrote: post #508
r3trohack3r wrote: post #432

I'm hesitant to share this because it's completely unverifiable in any way I'd be comfortable documenting. Not my life, not my secrets to tell. I had a close friend who did undergraduate research in a fisheries department. They had been researching plant selection for aquaponics to increase the yield of tilapia. They had a filtration system that pushed tank water through a bed of plant roots. The plants would be harv…

On one hand I absolutely believe this does routinely happen. On the other every researcher/inventor out there with a project that went nowhere claims that they were on the cusp of a breakthrough and only silenced because of the government/corporations/illuminati. I'd wager the vast majority are in the second category.

[deleted]

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#526

Post by BowBun »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #81
BowBun wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loopholes will be found, wealth will be concentrated in new ways, and then the wealth will be used to revert laws to benefit the wealthy. The laws won't change in the first place since money has captured most political systems as well.

Yes, give up and don't try, on the scale of things you will be dead and forgotten anyways - a failure in every sense of the word regardless of what you do.

Even people famous in their time are forgotten in short order. A good lesson for those deluding themselves into thinking they'll be an exception. Better to be remembered as a decent human being to your loved ones.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#527

Post by [deleted] »

FoxBJK wrote: post #517
snowflakeandrey wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forgive me if I'm being dense, but why wouldn't the researchers just go off and sell this to the customers of the large agriculture business?

My guess is that the researchers don't "own" the research they're doing since it was being funded by the university. It's property of the university and if you take it and try to sell it now you're stealing IP.

[deleted]

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#528

Post by AlbertCory »

shkkmo wrote: post #518
nulbyte wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However it is not a public charity, which is a sub classification that comes with stricter rules and higher donation tax write-off limits. It sounds like you mean public charities have stricter rules. I find the opposite to be true. There are additional rules and reporting requirements that apply only to private foundations because of the limited funding and tight control of such organizations by a close-knit group…

Private foundation is the default status for a 501(c)(3), you have to do extra work to qualify as a public non-profit. > https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/eo-operational-req... The rules are different, so which you view as more restrictive dependa on your perspective. In this case, the context is discussion of this claim: > I thought the tax-benefits of a non-profit were supposed to be tied to some governance…

thanks. What are these "greater tax benefits of public charities"? They both qualify for deduction of contributions.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#530

Post by CodeWriter23 »

tuwtuwtuwtuw wrote: post #363
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for the OP but take into the current Media Matters "outing" of X over the ad placement next to anti-semitic content. Basically Media Matters juiced the X algorithm to give them less than 10 impressions of big ad spend clients ads next to anti-semitic comments they entered on their own sock puppet accounts (with few or little followers), then passed that contrivance off as truth, stating brand-destroying…

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. It seems quite US-Politics-centric and really doesn't answer the question I asked. If you're upset about things then that's fine but please try to stay on topic.

I am saying there is no "disinformation detection" industry, trade, field of study. It is a new name for "propaganda", and in this instance rather than simply telling lies, they are saying those telling the truth are lying, and doing so with a contrived color of authority. And it is a global problem.
Post reply on HN