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

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

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 883 posts

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

#721

Post by refurb »

mike00632 wrote: post #714
refurb wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What alternative are you suggesting? That the public be lied to? Misled? "Despite report, this disease is not primarily spread by red hair people"?. Then what happens when the truth does get out? Who do you think the public believes then? It was pretty clear this approach was used during Covid. "You don't need to wear a mask", "Covid vaccines prevent infection" are just a couple claims that were made "for the public'…

To be clear, vaccines do provide a degree of protection from infection. They also reduce the severity and likelyhood of transmission of diseases.

The two major vaccines - Pfizer and Moderna, never tested for infection prevention. There was literally no data to even say if they did or didn't prevent infection.

You can look up the clinical trial endpoints. Patients were only tested for infections if they experienced symptoms. I believe it was only AZ or J&J that regularly tested to capture any effect on infection rate.

But it was stated several times "The vaccine will stop you from getting Covid". Why? Because if you tell people "Well, the vaccine won't stop you from getting it, but it will make it less likely you'll get really sick", they thought people wouldn't take it.

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

#722

Post by mike00632 »

Banana699 wrote: post #514
devindotcom wrote: post #315

Quoted post unavailable.

>disingenuous and ill-informed vitriol in this thread. "Why are people mad when I want to censor science and make it worship my false idol ?? it's so unfair" >These guidelines are very like existing ethics guidelines found at universities and research institutions around the world Show me a respectable university that tells scientists to "Consult with advocacy groups" before they publish any results, and I will show…

So you would greenlight a study on the connection between head shape and intelligence? What about other well-trodden racist inquiries? Do you see how if you place such importance on studying racial superiority then you've already introduced bias into the information which will be used to further the existing cultural bias that contributes to violence? This type of censorship doesn't seek to reduce the total amount of information as much as increase the quality and relevance of the studies.

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

#723

Post by trasz »

FabHK wrote: post #639
raxxorraxor wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IQ tests are also unreliable by design. They might work once, but you get different results depending on the test subject was challenged by questions and problems of similar design. Highlighting that fact would be helpful and expose such tests as nothing but maybe a rough estimate. Your education is probably more important for that than your capacity to solve problems. Additionally those that focus on these numbers s…

> IQ tests are also unreliable by design. I doubt that they are specifically designed to be unreliable.

They aren’t; it’s just that we don’t even know what IQ is, so measuring it is naturally questionable.

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

#724

Post by blueflow »

EntropyIsAHoax wrote: post #715
blueflow wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next transgenderism dogma: Socially transitioning being a thing. I don't believe that wearing specific clothes and demanding she/her pronouns from other people makes me less male than i happened to be. Or more female. Nor do i believe this applies for other people or sex swapped. > just not in a typical way We are in a post-enlightenment democracy. You can just do atypical things. And it doesn't make you more or less…

> You can just do atypical things. And it doesn't make you more or less female or male or transitioning or anything like that. ...yes That's why I said cis tomboys are still girls and cis femboys are still boys (not sure what the enlightenment or democracy have to do with this discussion) > I don't believe that wearing specific clothes and demanding she/her pronouns from other people makes me less male than i happene…

> Pick a side

I edited the post to show "sex" instead of "gender", assuming that confused you.

Feel free to insist on performing, neither of us two has to play by the rules of the other.

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

#725

Post by mike00632 »

refurb wrote: post #721
mike00632 wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, vaccines do provide a degree of protection from infection. They also reduce the severity and likelyhood of transmission of diseases.

The two major vaccines - Pfizer and Moderna, never tested for infection prevention . There was literally no data to even say if they did or didn't prevent infection. You can look up the clinical trial endpoints. Patients were only tested for infections if they experienced symptoms. I believe it was only AZ or J&J that regularly tested to capture any effect on infection rate. But it was stated several times "The vacci…

I didn't mention COVID. You're focusing on COVID vaccines because that is the anti-vax cause at the moment.

It's the case with ALL vaccines that they don't provide 100% protection. They are still incredibly useful for preventing infection, reducing the severity of disease and preventing further transmission.

Btw, vaccines work by clearing infection quickly, not preventing infection. The virus infects you and begins to multiply. Whether your body has the antibodies to recognize the virus determines whether you will suffer from illness or be well.

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

#726

Post by dymk »

aaplok wrote: post #674
yes_really wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IQ research is the one area in social sciences that does not suffer from reproducibility crisis. You're clearly not against it because of reproducibility; you are against it because it goes against your ideological worldview. > Second, research results in population group differences are social poison. They are memetic viruses that fuel violent extremism. We had a full summer of violent riots because of the "Black Li…

> You're clearly not against it because of reproducibility; you are against it because it goes against your ideological worldview. Please avoid ad hominem arguments like this. They are unlikely to convince anyone, and on a topic as sensitive as this might be interpreted as personal attacks. Your comment would have been more useful if you had restricted yourself to responding to GP's argument that the data is too nois…

That's not what an ad-hom attack is. An ad-hom would be insulting the poster they were replying to. This is at worst making an incorrect guess at their ideology, but more likely than not, it's a correct guess.

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

#727

Post by dymk »

mike00632 wrote: post #711
NotYourLawyer wrote: post #20

No, science must pursue the truth, no matter where it leads. There is no such thing as a hate fact.

Imagine if we devoted a tremendous amount of resources to studying whether being left or right handed increased your chances of transmitting COVID. Then millions of people online start citing scientific papers saying that right handed people spread COVID more often. Then some left handed people attack right handed people (similar to how Asian Americans are being brutalized in public during the pandemic). The point is…

That sounds like an unrealistically stretched hypothetical to justify not pursuing otherwise interesting scientific avenues.

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

#728

Post by n4r9 »

brushfoot wrote: post #687
n4r9 wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Opponents of the research might argue no, because it suggests trans people to be weak and self-pitying. That's not a reasonable argument, as suicidal ideation is just as likely influenced by external factors. Is your concern more about the editors abusing their own guidelines in an unreasonable way, rather than the guidelines themselves?

> Is your concern more about the editors abusing their own guidelines in an unreasonable way, rather than the guidelines themselves? My concern is the suppression of knowledge out of the fear of potential interpretations. That's the explicitly stated goal of the guidelines, and I see it as a bad, dangerous way of thinking about science.

One interesting thing I've noticed from this thread is that the objections often use phrasing like "science should be ...".

This of course raises the question why ought science be done in a certain way. The justification must ultimately be normative, e.g. "so we can reduce human suffering more effectively". I think some people have this idea that science can be cleanly divorced from values, but that doesn't make sense to me; the science that we choose to do and the way we choose to do it is subtly but definitely tethered to our values. Like Hume said, "reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passions". If the carrying out of science is justified normatively - and I accept that for some this is a big "if" - then it makes sense that sometimes those norms will be challenged. Sometimes it will be debatable whether publishing a piece of knowledge is for the human good.

I'm kind of spitballing and playing devil's advocate here as I don't know the answer and haven't been convinced by what anyone has said yet. It's starting to remind me of Yudkowsky banning discussion of Roko's Basilisk. That's someone who clearly values both knowledge and ethics, and was torn over a conflict between the two.

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

#729

Post by davidguetta »

geoduck14 wrote: post #695
davidguetta wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question why would you need "studies" or "research to know thr police is racist. That will just not help solving the problem

You mentioned your question is serious. I'm assuming you want a serious answer. For others reading this: please assume positive intent for OP and my self. There is no need for flame wars. Studies are important for police racism because: collecting data on who , when , and why can help us resolve the racism. To be specific, not all police are racist. A study could help identify who is more likely to be racist. Then we…

Thanks for actually taking me seriously but I think you missed my point.

I understand what's the point of a study. I'm just saying there's probably no real need for a "study" to know which departement or service is racist. It's more a will to act and how that's lacking, not one more study. It's also because acting is not easy : when money is low you get 'not the best people' and they still have to do a hard job against criminals, so there's is also sort of a need to protect them when they make mistakes or when you know they won't change who they are, to still have SOME job done in the meantime.

life and people management isn't easy and, i don't think, solved by 'studies'

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

#730

Post by dayaug »

mike00632 wrote: post #700
the_omegist wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then perhaps you should be a little less materialist? Psychological violence can be more terrible than physical violence. And ideologies caused more damages and deaths in history than any conventional "war".

Trans people are being systematically oppressed. New laws are being made to single them out and ban them from public life. Characterizing healthcare for trans people as "violence" is rather disgusting attempt to further marginalize them by denying them medical services. The Conservative push to make trans people the new Boogeyman is absolutely wretched.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN