• Renya@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    1 minute ago

    N@zi published multiple scientific researches to justify their doings.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    1·
    5 minutes ago

    What you seem to be forgetting is that somebody would have to pay for that science … in that sense, “control over finance” does , in reality, refute science.

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    2·
    9 minutes ago

    “I did my own research”

    Oh, you did? You had a lab, and test subjects and ran double blind studies? Is it peer reviewed?

    “Oh, no I listened to Joe Rogan”

  • rmuk@feddit.ukEnglish
    16·
    8 hours ago

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

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      1·
      3 minutes ago

      well … not to be nitpicky, and i recognize this is a sensitive topic … but i have come to understand that the simpler model is to be preferred, if it is precise enough for the practical purpose. As such, since most people aren’t satellite engineers, they don’t need to know about earth’s curvature. Earth being flat is often the simpler model, of enough precision, to actually prefer it.

      Just saying.

  • Zerush@lemmy.mlEnglish
    26·
    4 hours ago

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

  • fsxylo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    34·
    15 hours ago

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

    • Mellibird@lemm.eeEnglish
      2·
      20 minutes ago

      Ahhhhh… Love that line. My brother and his fiance just had a baby and are debating on vaccines or not. They asked me, I said, it’s always better to get them and protect your child from as much as you possibly can. Like all of us here are vaccinated. I recommended that they follow what their doctor recommends. My dad chimes in with, “Doctors don’t know everything, they’re just trying to sell drugs for the pharmaceutical companies, that’s all they care about.” I looked at him and said, “As someone who studied biology in college, there’s a lot that a lot of us don’t know. But seeing as that doctor has had significantly more training than I’ve had, let alone you, I’m going to trust them more than some random article I’ve read online.” He stopped talking to me for a large portion of the day after that.

    • Shou@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      3 hours ago

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

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zipEnglish
    78·
    18 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.zoneEnglish
        6·
        5 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.cafeEnglish
        51·
        4 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.zipEnglish
        61·
        6 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

        • kitnaht@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          2 hours ago

          Literally you are better off with AI - it’s produced some of the most groundbreaking work in decades. You didn’t watch the video, did you? AI ended up being better than humans at tasks involving protein folding, so much so that they won a Nobel prize for its use. The breakthroughs of this AI have put us forward in medical research by an order of magnitude. Many orders of magnitude in fact.

          AI is more than just LLMs and Stable Diffusors. It’s being used in Science by people who aren’t reactionaries and anti-tech luddites to give people better vaccines faster, to discover new proteins for antivenom, to ensure a better future for people who need medical care.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pubEnglish
        193·
        16 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.orgEnglish
          1·
          4 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.worldEnglish
          101·
          16 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.