I don't understand why when Hollywood movies try to portray geniuses, they make them say gobbledygook that any smart person can tell is very fake.
Their budgets are in the hundreds of millions, surely they can just hire a specialist consultant to not sound dumb?
(I don't think the bar is exceptionally high, I think most good science writers can meet the bar of being able to translate between specialists and Hollywood)
When I was a newbie on the internet, I apprenticed under a digital Machiavelli, a masterful troll of the highest order.
The Master once told me: "Anything is possible when you lie." And in that moment, I was enlightened.
Yeah it makes no sense. All neural networks are non-sequential unless I'm missing something. They're networks! If every neuron was sequential it'd look like a line. (in CS jargon, a linked list)
Yeah if I was the consultant they hired I'd frame it as Wakandan industry having better ability to do atomically precise manufacturing than Stark & Banner, or something like that. Less about specific ideas, more about their entire technological capacity.
Gender issues aside, it's utterly bizarre to me that plagiarism is considered vastly worse among academics than faking data. It's indicative pretty straightforwardly of rot imo, since it means the field as a whole cares more about credit attribution than about truth.
That's why we titled our blog post "The Journal of Scientific Integrity". Where is this journal? Why is it so taboo to face misconduct by a scientist? People are eager to pounce on women (e.g. Claudine Gay). But I don't expect Srinivasan to be featured in the @nytimes. 21/
I’m proud to announce the April 1 launch of my new startup, Open Asteroid Impact! We redirect asteroids towards Earth for the benefit of humanity. Our mission is to have as high an impact as possible. 🚀☄️🌎💸💸💸
More details in🧵:
It wasn't just like his influence was minor, or he was "just following orders"
He was literally defying orders from Rubio just to deny payments to AIDS clinics.
No Hell hot enough.