Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
samir, talks too much's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
betalars :antifa:

@james yeah but the argument was about non pointless software development, not science in general.

And a lot of the software development that is not pointless happens in science.

19 June at 18:44 | Wall-to-wall | Open on chaos.social
5 comments
james

@betalars and I was wanting to talk about scientists doing software development, not scientists in general. I do not know how we can conclude that most scientists are acting good™️, so I am genuinely curious if we can and if so, how. I’ll edit my post as I did not make this clear, thank you.

19 June at 19:27 | Open on strangeobject.space
betalars :antifa:

@james ah okay.

In that sense: I think some scientists will probably claim moral neutrality and I would disagree with that.

Because while I think the scientific process can be described as morally neutral or positive depending on your world view, the question of what is being researched is a highly moral one.

Besides that there's without a doubt scientists acting in bad faith too ... although I feel like science is less lucrative and less vulnerable compared to other fields.

19 June at 22:46 | Open on chaos.social
up&

@betalars @james the problem isn't just bad faith research, it's also that science is an industry and research tends to happen because military or other unethical body wants it.

20 June at 5:33 | Open on babka.social
betalars :antifa:

@em
"the question of what is being researched is a highly moral one. "

That is what I was trying to say here.

20 June at 8:34 | Open on chaos.social
Steve

@betalars @james the funding mechanism and publication metric creates a great many perverse incentives in science. Scientists developing software in private sector have performance metrics layered on top. All of these are served first and anything else is a happy coincidence.

20 June at 7:16 | Open on fosstodon.org
Go Up