Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
1–10 of 248 posts
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#2Prediction: This article will get flagged off the front page.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#3[deleted]
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#4Direct arxiv link to the preprint in question: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04184
Kudos to the author for being brave enough to detail these events. Academia and the process of science has enough blind spots without needing activists in the mix to add their own.
>“Several colleagues,” she wrote, had warned her that publication would provoke “extremely strong reactions” and there existed a “very real possibility that the right-wing media may pick this up and hype it internationally.”
It's as if these people had never heard of the Streisand Effect. What would have been a stuffy publication of no interest beyond a small circle of curious researchers is now a public salacious affair.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#5Reminds me of https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/vl/notes/dijkstra.html
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#6The female body is our only means of citizen production. Genetic and resource input is all that's required of the male. As such, the female mind is wired to instinctually minimize risk, so as to set the stage for a healthy womb in the time leading up to conception and for the 9 months following.
That's my two cents. Otherwise, I'm concerned why people are apparently getting funded to research these sorts of things.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#7Wow, I didn't know that academia was getting this bad; what happened to letting the truth be debated a la the Socratic dialogue in the academia of all places!
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#8Direct arxiv link to the preprint in question: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04184 Kudos to the author for being brave enough to detail these events. Academia and the process of science has enough blind spots without needing activists in the mix to add their own. >“Several colleagues,” she wrote, had warned her that publication would provoke “extremely strong reactions” and there existed a “very real possibility that th…
It looks like a well written paper with some really cool ideas. Too bad about what happened to it
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#9Interesting. I strongly disagree with the author's attempt to connect his experience with the Damore fracas. Damore's "manuscript" comprised a number of weakly-justified claims on a variety of subjects in psychology and sociology, reaching far beyond the GMVH, and was furthermore directly critical both of the hiring policies of his employer (!!) and of inclusiveness initiatives in the technology industry more generally. By contrast, the paper by Hill et al provides a single argument about a specific topic and downplays the political implications (to the extent it mentions them at all).
The paper is not without at least one obvious mistake:
> If gender differences in selectivity have been decreasing and are now less significant in some species than they were in prehistoric times, then this theory could also predict that the gender difference in variability in those species has also been decreasing. One recent meta-analysis found empirical evidence of exactly that trend in humans, reporting “The gender difference in variability has reduced substantially over time within the United States
Gender variability over the 240 years of the existence of the United States is probably not a good proxy for gender variability over the 5000 years from the beginning of literate societies to the present.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#10Direct arxiv link to the preprint in question: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04184 Kudos to the author for being brave enough to detail these events. Academia and the process of science has enough blind spots without needing activists in the mix to add their own. >“Several colleagues,” she wrote, had warned her that publication would provoke “extremely strong reactions” and there existed a “very real possibility that th…
> It's as if these people had never heard of the Streisand Effect. What would have been a stuffy publication of no interest beyond a small circle of curious researchers is now a public salacious affair.
You're not reading about all the other times articles offensive to a certain point of view got memory holed successfully. Most of the time powerful assholes get away with their behaviour. Note that the only reason this article is even on the internet is that one of the original two co-authors is retired and beyond the reach of professional threats.