all 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 133 points 2 years ago (3 children)

They're banning the word gender?! That's an absolute fuckton of articles, most of which have nothing to do with trans people

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 128 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    this is probably as close to we're going to get to a literal recreation of the burning of the berlin clinic hirschfeld since it's 2025 and not 1925.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 66 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I hope you're right, but I fear you aren't. I think this will get worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 70 points 2 years ago

    oh yeah for sure, all i'm saying is that it's probably going to involve digitally accessible information and not attacks on centralized institutional keepers of this knowledge. mostly because that's just not how that's materially realized anymore. so if anyone is thinking to themselves "well i'm going to have to take this action when they burn the gender clinic," it's probably time to feel that kind of way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 113 points 2 years ago

    Every bureaucrat responsible should be included in a Nuremberg Trial.

  • source
  • [–] 97 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    While it feels like the last few years have been a car careening towards a cliff, it's beginning to seem like we are now mid-air

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 79 points 2 years ago
    • gender

    Oh we're doing gender abolition? anakin-padme-2

    anakin-padme-3

  • source
  • [–] 75 points 2 years ago

    Banning words in scientific research? I mean this is getting beyond even the stuff they pretend China is doing.

  • source
  • [–] 70 points 2 years ago

    Just to clarify, this is for pending CDC authored papers, not published papers or papers by non-CDC authors.

    Although I am very worried that something similar could happen to PubMed/the National Library of Medicine.

  • source
  • [–] 69 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    This is incredibly stupid, thankfully we have the arxive

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] [S] 41 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago

    the arxiv is good. treating every preprint you find, even one that is a preprint for an eventually published paper, as having the same rigor as peer-reviewed empirical studies is silly. mostly because there do end up being important and critical errors in arxiv submissions that for various reasons are not ever corrected except for the final journal version. arxiv papers should be relied on for something critically important without verifying. when you can, it's good to steal and horde the best, finalized version like sci-hub.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago

    Arxiv is for preprints, maybe they should be retracted or not but generally whats up there is from before they're reviewed. My paper is on there before we got published - that's right, I'm an author of a math paper~

    Probably they should still archive papers for sure aside from one place. That's part of how we protect this valuable data

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago*

    It would be good to have the pre-prints on arXiv labelled retracted if they actually are (I don't know for sure if they do or not), but it is for pre-prints and something anyone can upload to even if it hasn't been accepted by a journal yet. So it can be used responsibly as long as the person looking at the papers knows that there is no quality control, and people can upload anything. Since, usually only academics really go there much, and its original purpose was a loophole to get around paywalling of journals. And that same loophole can get uncensored versions of these articles out there for people to read.

    So, while it does have this opening for abuse, since mostly academics use it I wouldn't say that it is bad at the moment. So far it hasn't been a significant channel for much misinformation since most misinformation is through Youtube, Facebook, etc. posts rather than people citing bad pre-prints. And I am even saying this as a physicist which, maybe it is just the filter of my own experience, but I think is the field of science that has the most cranks publishing their own theories to arXiv, such as "the new theory of super-gravity that shows dark matter isn't real" or "why quantum mechanics proves conscious beings have souls".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 64 points 2 years ago

    absolutely subhuman country

  • source
  • [+] 60 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)
  • [–] 40 points 2 years ago (4 children)
  • [–] 60 points 2 years ago*

    Yes, the Supreme Court said the president can do whatever he wants. Which we all have to obey, because the Supreme Court gave the Supreme Court the power to decide on what the law is in "Marbury vs. Madison." The USA government is just one big ouroboros of liberal-bourgeois self-appointed authority.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 58 points 2 years ago

    Good thing this country is dying. Death to America

  • source
  • [–] 56 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Oh neat we're at the "destroying transgender research, setting back the world at least a century" stage agony-deep That's not goodagony-4horsemen

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 2 years ago

    Luv 2 b considered 'not a person' doomer

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They fucking banned the word gender?!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago

    I’ve heard apolitical people irl discussing politics

    Extremely sus to say the least. I might even say we are cooked and whatever plan you have to leave this country will only delay the inevitable

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I for one support the CDC in their attack on US scientific capabilities.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 37 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago

    Hard to say, but "in the next 6 weeks" is not out of the question, and "in the next 18 months" a distinct possibility even if AI crashes and burns. There's wonderful rumors coming out of China's electron beam lithography teams on multiple fronts, most notably that one of the labs may have a practical achromatic lens.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago
    [–] 29 points 2 years ago

    This is just slop for the hogs. The economy is about to get tanked and this is an attempt to keep the chuds somewhat appeased.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago

    I can absolutely get behind banning "biologically male/female" but damn is this just dystopian as fuck.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago
    [–] 25 points 2 years ago

    If we're getting USSR style academic censorship we should at least get a USSR social economy

  • source