Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
File: nsc_20170902.jpg (857KB, 1557x2048px) Image search:
[Google]
857KB, 1557x2048px
>open this week's issue of New Scientist
>first page is bawwwing about Zoe Quinn and GamerGate and how to stop "trolls"
Jesus christ, I'm nowhere near a pollack but this is just fucking abysmal reporting. More than that, they're openly taking the position of being against free speech and open exchange of dialogue and ideas. How did scientific reporting fall so low?
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23531413-600-victims-of-online-hate-must-speak-out-if-the-law-is-to-stop-the-mob/
>>
>>9147986
/sci/ is blind to the subversion because they are part of the problem. Academic science is not science. It's institutionalised political corruption.
>>
File: Sci Paper Searches.png (21KB, 947x451px) Image search:
[Google]
21KB, 947x451px
>>9147986
After being on the internet for over 20 years I have found one thing to be true. All those old book and magazine articles are nothing more than a bunch of blogs. When you go back and read stuff with that in mind, it makes a lot more sense and is a bit depressing. Of course pure fiction and things like encyclopedias and completely pure tech stuff doesn't fall into that problem, but literally everything else does.
Fast forward to today's books and magazines and it is far worse because they are competing with the internet and the people writing things either grew up with it or have been on it for so long it completely warps their mind towards it. The only good advice I can recommend you is to stop reading this shit. Only read the meat of things. Meaning read Nature only for knowing what is new then looking up the papers for that study. Don't read anyone's opinion on studies unless you know them in person. It isn't worth it otherwise.
>>9148127
Yeah, you even have to watch out for which papers are in the news because those are either specifically created to move a propaganda along or selected to do so.
>>
>>9148136
Yeah, I ain't buying this shit anymore. Its the same with the Economist. I just want summaries of papers and upcoming developments, not some retarded journo's hamfisted opinions. Waste of a fiver.
>>
It's print media breh. It's dying and trying to do anything to retain readership. The last episode of scientific american will probably be a 20 page advertisement for sex reassignment surgery clinics.
>>
>>9148146
I just read paper Abstracts now.
>>
>>9147986
>Reading Jew Scientist
Nice job outing yourself as a brainlet.
>>
>>9147986
>mathematical mind
>cover art depicts a woman
What did they mean by this?
>>
File: pol is satire.png (83KB, 905x624px) Image search:
[Google]
83KB, 905x624px
>>9147986
>contrarian shitposting is an "exchange of dialogue and ideas"
>>
>>9147986
>being against free speech and open exchange of dialogue and ideas.
how so?
>>
File: homer in glass.png (359KB, 720x528px) Image search:
[Google]
359KB, 720x528px
>underwater quantum cryptography
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4