Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24377
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Jennifer » 12 Jun 2019, 15:27

Seen via Popehat's Twitter feed: (lengthy excerpt, to get to the relevant mentions of Quillette)

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/quillette- ... mpaign.php
Right-wing publications launder an anti-journalist smear campaign

Last month, a number of media outlets ran stories touting claims from a study posted on Twitter that alleged nefarious connections between antifascist activists and national-level reporters who cover the far-right.

On May 15, Eoin Lenihan, a far-right social media user presented what he said were excerpts from a data set that proved prominent reporters who cover extremist movements were “closely associated” with antifascist activists. He identified himself as an online extremism researcher, despite having no association with any previously known organization that researches extremism. In reality, Lenihan was already an established right-wing troll, now blanket banned for “violating rules against managing multiple Twitter accounts for abusive purposes.”

Lenihan’s Twitter thread was met with enthusiasm on the right. His claims—among them that one writer is an “eco-extremist,” that a website that posts court documents is a “doxing site,” and that antifa is “often more violent” than right-wing fascist groups—were taken at face value by outlets including Breitbart, PJ Media, RedState, and Human Events, and RT.

It is the latest example of unreliable information circulating rapidly through an ecosystem of fringe outlets without even the appearance of due diligence, such as baseless reports that tech platforms discriminate against “conservatives” or that leftist agitators are trying to foment a new American civil war.

Quillette, a publication dedicated to “free thought,” gave Lenihan a bylined article on its site to share his claims, where Lenihan embedded posts from his Twitter thread, echoed his assertion that reporters were working to promote antifascist activists, and accused them of violating professional ethical standards. When CJR reached Quillette founding editor Claire Lehmann for comment via Twitter, she first inquired what issues CJR found with Linehan’s study. When CJR responded asking how Quillette determined Linehan’s allegations were legitimate, and whether Lenihan’s story underwent a fact-check or legal review prior to publication, she declined to comment....
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24708
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Mo » 12 Jun 2019, 16:45

You missed the Andy Ngo part:

“Quillette writer Andy Ngo, who called attention to Lenihan’s work on Twitter and whose work Lenihan cites in his article, insisted that the legitimacy of Lenihan’s findings was self-evident from Lenihan’s Twitter posts. “

Ah yes, the self evident methodology that you can fit in 280 characters.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24377
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Jennifer » 12 Jun 2019, 17:07

Mo wrote:
12 Jun 2019, 16:45
You missed the Andy Ngo part:

“Quillette writer Andy Ngo, who called attention to Lenihan’s work on Twitter and whose work Lenihan cites in his article, insisted that the legitimacy of Lenihan’s findings was self-evident from Lenihan’s Twitter posts. “

Ah yes, the self evident methodology that you can fit in 280 characters.
[Headsmack] Aargh, I cut off the cut-n-paste too early.

But, yeah: between that, and the other of Ngo's tweets I've seen (if all I knew about Muslims and Islam was what I read there, I'd be pants-shittingly terrified of them too) ... I feel pretty confident in saying he's a bigot who views the world through a distinctly bigoted lens.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 9763
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by nicole » 13 Jun 2019, 08:58

The CJR criticism acts like the point of the Quillette story was the quantitative data, which it wasn't. The Quillette story explicitly says that it doesn't mean anything that a journalist is connected to antifa on social media. He's merely using that list as a list of journalists who likely cover(ed) antifa, and the whole article is a qualitative analysis of their work.

I'm not saying that qualitative analysis is any good, but the CJR piece is also crap.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Sliced bagels aren't why trump won; it's why it doesn't matter who wins." -dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 13 Jun 2019, 11:51

This Quillette article is pretty data-rich and technical, which means it's hard for a non-expert to judge its reliability. That bothers me.

https://quillette.com/2019/06/12/the-re ... t-disease/
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 9763
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by nicole » 13 Jun 2019, 12:00

thoreau wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 11:51
This Quillette article is pretty data-rich and technical, which means it's hard for a non-expert to judge its reliability. That bothers me.

https://quillette.com/2019/06/12/the-re ... t-disease/
I saw the lede for that yesterday and I was just like...who thinks women are more at risk for heart disease?
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Sliced bagels aren't why trump won; it's why it doesn't matter who wins." -dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 13 Jun 2019, 13:06

nicole wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 12:00
who thinks women are more at risk for heart disease?
To be fair, some of the articles he links to try to imply that, or at least try to imply that women with heart disease receive worse care. I know that when my mother worked in the ER she talked a lot about how women present with different heart attack symptoms than men. This guy says that the non-traditional symptoms show up in 37% of women and 28% of men, a difference large enough to merit study but not large enough to justify different screening procedures, since both groups have large numbers of people with both types of heart attacks.

What I don't know is to what extent the cardiology research community is trying to stir up controversy ("Women have it worse...even though they have the same health outcomes. But it's your implicit bias!") and to what extent they're just studying what's there. It may be that 28% vs 37% is not enough to change screening protocols, but it's certainly interesting enough to motivate research on why sex matters for heart disease. It's pointing to something fascinating about human biology, and whether the fruits of that research help men or women or both or neither, they'll at least expand what we know about how biology works. And that's something.

And the job of researchers is not to only study the problems for which substantial disparities exist, it's to study whatever problems they think they can solve. If tomorrow a researcher finds a treatment that improves heart disease outcomes in women because of some female-specific biological factor, why should we care that women have a lower risk of heart disease? They found something that can help someone, so they should do it.
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 9763
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by nicole » 13 Jun 2019, 13:35

thoreau wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 13:06
nicole wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 12:00
who thinks women are more at risk for heart disease?
To be fair, some of the articles he links to try to imply that, or at least try to imply that women with heart disease receive worse care. I know that when my mother worked in the ER she talked a lot about how women present with different heart attack symptoms than men. This guy says that the non-traditional symptoms show up in 37% of women and 28% of men, a difference large enough to merit study but not large enough to justify different screening procedures, since both groups have large numbers of people with both types of heart attacks.

What I don't know is to what extent the cardiology research community is trying to stir up controversy ("Women have it worse...even though they have the same health outcomes. But it's your implicit bias!") and to what extent they're just studying what's there. It may be that 28% vs 37% is not enough to change screening protocols, but it's certainly interesting enough to motivate research on why sex matters for heart disease. It's pointing to something fascinating about human biology, and whether the fruits of that research help men or women or both or neither, they'll at least expand what we know about how biology works. And that's something.

And the job of researchers is not to only study the problems for which substantial disparities exist, it's to study whatever problems they think they can solve. If tomorrow a researcher finds a treatment that improves heart disease outcomes in women because of some female-specific biological factor, why should we care that women have a lower risk of heart disease? They found something that can help someone, so they should do it.
I mean, I've definitely heard the "women have different symptoms so it's important to know that otherwise women's heart attacks might not be caught"/worse care story but I haven't heard any kind of "actually women have more heart disease" type chatter. It just seemed weird that his family was up on that.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Sliced bagels aren't why trump won; it's why it doesn't matter who wins." -dhex

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24708
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Mo » 13 Jun 2019, 15:01

nicole wrote:
thoreau wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 13:06
nicole wrote:
13 Jun 2019, 12:00
who thinks women are more at risk for heart disease?
To be fair, some of the articles he links to try to imply that, or at least try to imply that women with heart disease receive worse care. I know that when my mother worked in the ER she talked a lot about how women present with different heart attack symptoms than men. This guy says that the non-traditional symptoms show up in 37% of women and 28% of men, a difference large enough to merit study but not large enough to justify different screening procedures, since both groups have large numbers of people with both types of heart attacks.

What I don't know is to what extent the cardiology research community is trying to stir up controversy ("Women have it worse...even though they have the same health outcomes. But it's your implicit bias!") and to what extent they're just studying what's there. It may be that 28% vs 37% is not enough to change screening protocols, but it's certainly interesting enough to motivate research on why sex matters for heart disease. It's pointing to something fascinating about human biology, and whether the fruits of that research help men or women or both or neither, they'll at least expand what we know about how biology works. And that's something.

And the job of researchers is not to only study the problems for which substantial disparities exist, it's to study whatever problems they think they can solve. If tomorrow a researcher finds a treatment that improves heart disease outcomes in women because of some female-specific biological factor, why should we care that women have a lower risk of heart disease? They found something that can help someone, so they should do it.
I mean, I've definitely heard the "women have different symptoms so it's important to know that otherwise women's heart attacks might not be caught"/worse care story but I haven't heard any kind of "actually women have more heart disease" type chatter. It just seemed weird that his family was up on that.
I always heard of heart disease as something that fells men more than women. I agree with the author that we should use hard, reliable data to understand what happens in the world. Which is probably why I avoid assuming family barbecues are dispositive of societal views.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 13 Jun 2019, 15:09

To be fair, he also cited some articles from the cardiology literature, arguing that they are focusing on problems that are not representative of the bigger picture. The family BBQ was just a segue into the topic.

What I don't know is whether or not there's actually something wrong with the cardiology literature. People who study rare health problems are studying things that aren't representative of the bigger picture, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. OTOH, people who try to misrepresent the prevalence of a disease are indeed creating problems.

I don't know if the cardiology literature is replete with exaggerations, and I don't know that he made the case.
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
dhex
Posts: 16039
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by dhex » 13 Jun 2019, 15:38

sometimes a soft lede is too soft to lead.
"i ran over the cat and didnt stop just carried on with tears in my eyes joose driving my way to work." - God

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 14 Jun 2019, 12:40

Quillette has an article by a guy questioning claims of sexual harassment in physics:

https://quillette.com/2019/06/13/an-unh ... n-physics/

He has some plausible points, but I'm open to a critique that he goes too far the other way.

Naturally, world-class jerk Alessandro Strumia has shown up in the comments:

https://quillette.com/2019/06/13/an-unh ... ent-101980

And someone else demanded that white male physicists go Galt:

https://quillette.com/2019/06/13/an-unh ... ent-101918
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13686
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Eric the .5b » 14 Jun 2019, 21:37

(TIL medicine is not STEM. Biology is STEM, engineering is STEM, but medicine is not. That's a weird distinction. Is being a medical doctor just not academic-y enough?)
The bad news, of course, is that many students have experienced inappropriate treatment, and some people need to improve their behavior.
Considering that everything else he says is arguing that the study is useless for actually understanding anything, this seems like a very questionable stance to make, Comrade Thoreau! Perhaps he should have said something more like, "Some unmutual students claim treatment they receive is inappropriate and demand other people be forced to change their behavior"?

More seriously, eh. I get that there are some folks arguing that STEM is particularly sexist and others being super-defensive back, but not being in the Hot Zone, I see that as as kinda like the "OMG so many geeks are horrible sexists" scare of several years back, before #metoo and those disgruntled geeks realizing that the stuff they were angry about happens everywhere.

That's the extent of my critique.
Too bad we couldn’t have a sort of Atlas Shrugged strike by all real scientists and techs. All white, male heteros down tools.
I think the kids call that "saying the quiet parts out loud".
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12485
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Ellie » 14 Jun 2019, 21:52

I support a movement where all the men go down on tools!
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Number 6
Posts: 3087
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:41

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Number 6 » 14 Jun 2019, 23:08

Ellie wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 21:52
I support a movement where all the men go down on tools!
Team Ellie.
" i discovered you eat dog dicks out of a bowl marked "dog dicks" because you're too stupid to remember where you left your bowl of dog dicks."-dhex, of course.
"Come, let us go forth and not rape together"-Jadagul

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24377
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Jennifer » 14 Jun 2019, 23:58

Eric the .5b wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 21:37
(TIL medicine is not STEM. Biology is STEM, engineering is STEM, but medicine is not. That's a weird distinction.
It's especially weird when you consider that "medicine" is basically "the engineering part of human biology."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13686
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Eric the .5b » 15 Jun 2019, 04:21

Jennifer wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 23:58
Eric the .5b wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 21:37
(TIL medicine is not STEM. Biology is STEM, engineering is STEM, but medicine is not. That's a weird distinction.
It's especially weird when you consider that "medicine" is basically "the engineering part of human biology."
Exactly.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Number 6
Posts: 3087
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:41

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Number 6 » 15 Jun 2019, 07:03

Eric the .5b wrote:
15 Jun 2019, 04:21
Jennifer wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 23:58
Eric the .5b wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 21:37
(TIL medicine is not STEM. Biology is STEM, engineering is STEM, but medicine is not. That's a weird distinction.
It's especially weird when you consider that "medicine" is basically "the engineering part of human biology."
Exactly.
That does strike me as a weird, if not stupid distinction. But it makes me wonder: would the people pushing STEM uber alles consider other applied fields STEM? Are the kids at the vo-tech learning to fix cars part of the STEM world? It seems as though they should be, since mechanics are making use of the same sorts of deduction and problem solving skills as doctors and nurses, (the process of differential diagnosis used by medical people and mechanics is structurally the same.) just on a simpler system. But that system is very much a product of the application of science. Somehow, I doubt that those people would be willing to consider applied/technical fields like that STEM.
" i discovered you eat dog dicks out of a bowl marked "dog dicks" because you're too stupid to remember where you left your bowl of dog dicks."-dhex, of course.
"Come, let us go forth and not rape together"-Jadagul

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13686
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Eric the .5b » 15 Jun 2019, 07:49

Number 6 wrote:
15 Jun 2019, 07:03
Eric the .5b wrote:
15 Jun 2019, 04:21
Jennifer wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 23:58
Eric the .5b wrote:
14 Jun 2019, 21:37
(TIL medicine is not STEM. Biology is STEM, engineering is STEM, but medicine is not. That's a weird distinction.
It's especially weird when you consider that "medicine" is basically "the engineering part of human biology."
Exactly.
That does strike me as a weird, if not stupid distinction. But it makes me wonder: would the people pushing STEM uber alles consider other applied fields STEM? Are the kids at the vo-tech learning to fix cars part of the STEM world? It seems as though they should be, since mechanics are making use of the same sorts of deduction and problem solving skills as doctors and nurses, (the process of differential diagnosis used by medical people and mechanics is structurally the same.) just on a simpler system. But that system is very much a product of the application of science. Somehow, I doubt that those people would be willing to consider applied/technical fields like that STEM.
Thoreau might have more precise information from the STEM pimps he deals with, but I suspect anything that isn't at least a four-year degree with massive, lingering debt isn't STEM.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 15 Jun 2019, 11:14

STEM is whatever a person needs it to be.

On a 4 year campus, auto repair is not STEM. At a community college it totally is...at least in certain parts of the campus.

Social scientists say that they are in STEM. Other STEM folks say that only the natural sciences are in STEM.

If people want to brag about success then STEM is defined broadly. If people want to alarm you by saying that too few kids are in STEM then it is defined narrowly. Or they define it broadly to say that X number of STEM jobs need filling and narrowly to say that Y<X kids are studying STEM.

As to medicine and other health fields, I think there is a good reason and a bad reason for not including them in STEM.

The good reason is that health professions have cultures and histories very different from the natural sciences and engineering. The training paths are different. The regulatory issues are different. Etc.

The bad reason is that if we included NIH funding as part of the government's STEM research spending then the number would be so huge that it would be much harder to argue for a crisis. STEM is largely an NSF obession. They have an educational mandate alongside a research mandate. And they have less money. NIH dwarfs NSF.

Interestingly, DoD also sponsors a ton of research but we academics hear less from them about STEM crises. Partly because they also have a very secure budget and partly because DoD has other ways to scare you.

Oh, and medicine is not part of STEM but is part of STEMM. And if you really want to jump down the rabbit hole, Google STEMM+HACD.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
dhex
Posts: 16039
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by dhex » 15 Jun 2019, 11:16

Don't forget STEAM and STREAM.
"i ran over the cat and didnt stop just carried on with tears in my eyes joose driving my way to work." - God

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28328
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by thoreau » 15 Jun 2019, 11:19

STEAM is big but STEMM+HACD is trying to supplant it.

I favor STEABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ.



Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 18838
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 15 Jun 2019, 15:13

JasonL wrote:
27 May 2019, 08:49
We all agree at least that the name is fucking terrible.
If only they'd called themselves "grylliade," no one would have ever heard of them.

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 18838
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 15 Jun 2019, 15:18

thoreau wrote:
15 Jun 2019, 11:19
STEAM is big but STEMM+HACD is trying to supplant it.

I favor STEABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ.
It's a malignant STEM cell.

User avatar
Kolohe
Posts: 14013
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:51

Re: Intellectualism: Dark and Webbed

Post by Kolohe » 15 Jun 2019, 19:39

dhex wrote:
15 Jun 2019, 11:16
Don't forget STEAM and STREAM.
My wife's school does STEAM. I hadn't heard of STREAM until just right now. Looked it up, and said 'really?'
when you wake up as the queen of the n=1 kingdom and mount your steed non sequiturius, do you look out upon all you survey and think “damn, it feels good to be a green idea sleeping furiously?" - dhex

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests