• rmuk@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Who has time for YouTube? I get my conspiracies and lies from millisecond-long TikToks.

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Science is important, it helps us solve many of the problems we do not have without science

  • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    12 hours ago

    But I said the phrase “scientists don’t know everything” so now you have to listen to my bullshit.

    • Shou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 minutes ago

      If they did, their job would no longer exist! This is proof they don’t know everything!

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    16 hours ago

    don’t worry, science as conclusions derived from research will soon be replaced by bullshit psuedo-research-AI-word-vomit derived from equally bullshit pre-determined conclusions

      • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        And some scientists!

        “If I repeat it in enough papers it’ll become true” seems to be the mantra of scientists with hard to defend theories they claim are fact.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Luddites’ main concern was the systemic redirection of revenue from them, the laborers, to the owners of the factories. They did not simply hate technology for technology’s sake.

        The fact that you ignore this basic historical fact betrays an embarrassing ignorance.

        I personally don’t give a shit if some AI is used in research. I think that’s awesome. But AI also actively and materially deprives laborers of compensation for their work, both before and after the model training process. And I fucking hate that.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        the problem is that AI can generate a million bogus “research papers” for every single legit paper. and for the general public (ie science writers, bloggers, news reporters, etc.) they are indistinguishable from each other. so unless you have literally done the research on a particular hypothesis yourself (good luck with that, with all the funding cuts), then everything is suspect

        so the question of “are we better off with AI?” as of right now, is absolutely fucking not

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        AI’s primary use case so far is to further concentrate wealth with the wealthy, and to replace employees. People who think AI is bad recognize that it is in the hands of the modern generation of robber barons, and serves their interests.

        Those who don’t recognize this are delusional.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          AI’s primary use case so far is to further concentrate wealth with the wealthy,

          Under capitalism, everything further concentrates wealth with the wealthy because the wealthy are best able to capitalize on anything. Wealth gives you the means to better pursue further wealth.

          and to replace employees.

          So what you’re saying is that we need to dismantle every piece of automation and go back to manufacturing everything by hand with the most basic hand tools possible? Because that will maximize the number of people needed to be employed to produce, well, anything. Anything else is using technology to replace employees.

          Or is it just that now we’re talking about people working office jobs they thought were automation-proof getting partially automated that’s made automation a bad thing?

        • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          AI as a tool can absolutely be a good thing, just like almost any tool. A tool on its own is neither good nor bad, it’s just a tool that can be used. The usage is what makes it good or bad.

          Yes, most of what AI is used for now is bad, but it can absolutely be a good thing in the right use cases.

  • shadow_wolf@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    That why its such a shame that big corporations can and do regularly buy scientists opinions in exchange for funding setting up a ill give $xxx.xxx for your environmental impact study to not blame my coal mine. Thus by negating the peer review process. science can sadly no longer be taken at face value with out knowing who funded it and why. i miss trusting scientists who are clearly smarter than me because they fell in to the capitalist greed trap RIP real science we should have treated you better and i am sorry.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      15 hours ago

      This is why you never trust a single source. For anything. Reputable news organizations have never trusted single sources, they always use multiple sources to verify information they are told. Science is not immune from this, and never has been. And even for those that you’ve followed in the past, times change, especially in a capitalist society with a massive oligarchy that owns the news companies, like modern western civilizations. Trust, but verify.

    • Mavvik@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      How often does this actually happen? The cases where this does occur stand out because they are rare. I really hate the implication that scientists are not trustworthy because some individuals acted in bad faith. Scientific fraud is real but it doesn’t mean you can’t trust science.

  • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Counterpoint: nuh-uh (They et. al., good ol’ days).

    Citations

    They et. al. (Good ol’ days). Trump proves that YouTube videos about The Creator that validate your feelings are equivalent to science. Many People Are Saying, 1(2), 10–20. Things I done heard. https://doi.org/I forget

    • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Aren’t those just from the gay space lasers and Jewish hurricanes? I feel like their resistance means we’re on the right path.