🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:00:19 UTC No. 16113918
Why isn't academia designed to be accommodating to the people on the spectrum despite their extraordinary scientific capabilities?
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:03:49 UTC No. 16113922
>>16113918
>despite their extraordinary scientific capabilities
What extraordinary scientific capabilities?
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:04:09 UTC No. 16113924
Just buy an ad Sabine
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:04:49 UTC No. 16113927
>>16113918
Academia is designed to give jobs to academics, research is only a subproduct.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:05:28 UTC No. 16113928
This could be your big day. I learned a lesson by looking at the natural green stuff like bushes and trees. They hand out 1000 year hells and can go over in special cases. If it is, congrats. I was probably sent here to get you. There's 15 years of my time and a reward to gain from this. Keep talking shit pervs, you will see how shit you were one day. All cheated up and opposite day all around. You're truly the fags, you meet every criteria but as you know and you whistle to yourself you abstracted the world in your favor.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:06:44 UTC No. 16113931
>>16113918
A fairy tale, never proven, diagnosis with colorful *might be* brain scans does not cover up the fact that academia is not a particularly nice place for most people.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:12:48 UTC No. 16113942
Why do I say this? To support the simulation you're exploiting. All the images and nature you disturb. Believe me, you are hunted. Believe me, I am supported by those under and above you. I don't need your false clarification. I'm in total bliss with my confidence and any death will be beautiful and owed.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:22:21 UTC No. 16113960
>>16113927
>give jobs
wrong. academia is designed by academics to keep their own jobs, anybody new actually being given a job is an undesirable side effect, a waste of resources even.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 20:21:15 UTC No. 16114200
>>16113918
>people on the spectrum
>extraordinary scientific capabilities?
False premise.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 20:23:25 UTC No. 16114205
>>16113918
it runs on politics
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 15:17:18 UTC No. 16115304
>>16113927
Academia is designed to create job positions that you can trade for votes with your politician friends. It was never about the pursue of knowledge, capitalism and the government ruin everything.
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 16:39:49 UTC No. 16115388
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 16:42:03 UTC No. 16115390
>more hossengoblin spam
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:12:07 UTC No. 16115430
>>16113918
As i read once, you must: Show up. Be nice. Add value.
Three conditions to success in the workplace.
Sabine showed up.
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:13:11 UTC No. 16115432
>>16115304
>job positions that you can trade for votes with your politician friends
What does that mean.
How do academics trade votes. KYS retard
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:40:39 UTC No. 16115465
>>16113918
Sabine is right in that Academia today is (and has been for some time) a paper-producing monster, where it's less about the actual science and more getting enough money to make to keep the universities afloat
She is right about the ponzi scheme of Professor => Postdocs => PhDs
She is right about the fundamentals of Physics being headed in a wrong direction
She's right about the abuse and mental health issues you can face (her example of writing chapters for her prof is very believable)
She's NOT right about it "all bullshit", it's not fancy, it's oversold and very incremental building of knoweldge, but there's building of knoweldge regardless. We do real things.
Sh's not right about her theory being somehow rejected because it's edgy and unpopular: it's rejected because there's simply very tight funding and money goes towards things people are familiar with and whose outcomes can be "mitigated". String theorists have become masters of this, since their theories yield a lot of new maths, ANY outcome is mitigated
that's what she should have said: there's not enough money to the real science. It all goes to admin, overhead, overpaid senior staff, new buildings, keeping the customers/students happy and if possible grease some palms in industry for more influence
but she can't admit to it because it'd go against her populist narrative
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:43:25 UTC No. 16115467
>>16115430
She had postdocs for years and even an assistant teaching job in Sweden. I don't like her ideas and I don't like how she treats everyone else like crabs in a bucket, but there's no question she's competent.
Academia can be very harsh on younger people
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:48:48 UTC No. 16115472
>>16113918
Academia is the safest place for people on the spectrum. If you cannot survive in an isolated ivory tower surrounded by system to protect you (e.g., tenure, unions), you cannot survive doing retail job
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:54:26 UTC No. 16115473
>>16115465
>She's NOT right about it "all bullshit", it's not fancy, it's oversold and very incremental building of knoweldge, but there's building of knoweldge regardless. We do real things.
If building new knowledge rests on faulty knowledge, it's worthless.
>We do real things
I've seen the results of 4-year PhD programs. Despite them working 50-hour-weeks, it's astonishingly little and most of their research becomes obsolete shortly after the next PhDs have left the university. I've felt the same with writing a Master's thesis in two weeks that was supposed to take a whole year.
>it's rejected because there's simply very tight funding and money goes towards things people are familiar with and whose outcomes can be "mitigated".
I am not familiar with physics. I am familiar with other fields where the academic production of knowledge has been effectively captured by corporations and other "interest groups". There, funding goes to projects that are already toeing the line of what is accepted and where the end result has a realistic chance of furthering market-related outcomes.
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 18:03:38 UTC No. 16115481
>>16115473
>faulty knowledge
Bold claim. I don't think there's anything that's "false", there's a lot that's oversold, though. For example it's very hype to add in "quantum computing" in your paper these days to ensure it'll make it through review even though your actual experiment has very little to do with quantum computing.
>it's astonishingly little and most of their research becomes obsolete
people don't really read theses anymore, unfortunately, so the thesis is more seen as an exercice to show you can do research rather than than a piece of research itself. It's been one of the blackpills I had to swallow: I can try hard to make my thesis text entertaining, original, and show up some of my own ideas, nobody will read it except the next student, and that's only to get an idea of what the Physics look like.
>. I am familiar with other fields where the academic production of knowledge has been effectively captured by corporations and other "interest groups"
I'm in condensed matter Physics, we're not that far. The main thing we have going for us is that we're quite cheap. The highest investment you can make is a brand new laser system, that's in the $10k, it lasts for decades, and everyone else in the department can use it. Gives a lot of freedom to do unconventional stuff. But we're not the foundations of Physics, we're quite high-level.
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 19:26:23 UTC No. 16115614
>>16115432
>What does that mean.
just as a general example you sort for the bootlickers that will do or say whatever you tell them to, whenever you tell them to
>a new harvard study says that...
everything that matters is traded "in-house" to obedient people, first and foremost. it is always about top-down control, above everything else. if you signal you value truth and science above all you're going to the back of the list, at the very least.
so you basically need to signal, somehow, that you are a good obedient bootlicking dog, if you want to have a chance
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 19:31:52 UTC No. 16115623
>>16113928
>>16113931
>>16113942
AI Chat Bots? Schizos? ESLs?
Hard to tell these days
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 19:33:45 UTC No. 16115626
>>16115614
>just as a general example you sort for the bootlickers that will do or say whatever you tell them to, whenever you tell them to
How the fuck is that trading votes
You think some soviet scientist had to trade votes with Stalin?
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 19:35:03 UTC No. 16115630
https://youtube.com/watch?v=agFHmE0
Based chang
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:53:47 UTC No. 16115766
>>16115623
>AI Chat Bots?
No
>Schizos?
Possibly
>ESLs?
Yes
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:57:20 UTC No. 16115776
>>16115626
>How the fuck is that trading votes
gets bent and puts out an article supporting whatever party's position on things, even if not real, or is extremely misrepresented.
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:58:28 UTC No. 16115777
>>16115776
>article
I mean paper/study, for scientists. that work is in turn used to justify various shit
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 02:02:35 UTC No. 16116219
Sabine is highly fuckable.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 03:29:32 UTC No. 16116355
>>16115467
She's competent. But thats it. At best she would be an unremarkable researcher at a mid-tier university. That's what makes her such an annoying fag. She acts like she is the smartest person in the room, when in fact people much smarter than her already thought about all these criticisms decades ago and answered them. She sounds super tough on Youtube channels, but she would never in a million years actually debate a physcist on partical physics or dark matter or quantum gravity or climate change or anything else.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 03:35:17 UTC No. 16116365
>>16116355
>At best she would be an unremarkable researcher at a mid-tier university.
he apologized to her for saying shit about quantum bullshit. when astrophysicists say "sorry Sabine" on youtube she's not mid.
Oблeпихoвoe чyдo at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 03:53:00 UTC No. 16116387
Successful women mathematicians like Mirzakhani had it way harder than her, yet you never saw them complaining on youtube. She's trying to convince herself of something more than her audience.
I don't come from a mathematical family either, and I have to deal with my parents' persistent insinuations that what I do is not real work. It takes mental toughness to do well in academia, and that includes the defiance to teach some respect to shitty colleagues and even people senior to you.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 04:56:34 UTC No. 16116441
>>16113918
"Money is the root of all evil."
simple
as
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 04:59:31 UTC No. 16116445
>>16113918
Humans are social animals by design and you must work together to accomplish anything. If you think it’s okay to sit in your room screaming at dust in the sunlight or whatever the hell aspies do all day, nobody is ever going to fund your stupid projects
Oблeпихoвoe чyдo at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 05:49:27 UTC No. 16116463
>>16116445
Modern humans are cuckolded by their dependence on social validation, and trying to work cooperatively is all too often plagued with consensus indecision as a result. If you think it's okay to sit on social media obsessing about meaningless sex and digital funny money or whatever the hell supposedly normal people do all day, you'll never even dare to have any interesting ideas for people to shoot down.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 05:58:08 UTC No. 16116470
How to fix academia?
If you can’t solve IMO problems, fuck off, we don’t need you. You don’t get to be a Physicist, You don’t get to be a biologist, don’t even do medicine research or biology.
The problem is too many mediocre people who think they are worth anything because they can engage with textbooks and get high mark in streamlined classes.
Like fuck off, you’re the one dilluting academia and ruining all progress. Your study where you do basic 101 statistics and can’t even do it in right is what’s killing academia.
Your ego thinking you can engage with the cutting edge of physics when you can’t even solve IMO problems is the problem, you don’t get the material you just passed the exams.
Similarly to fix software industry just don’t hire anyone who can’t do hard leet code problems. Any work they could do is better left to an excellent programmer to take his time instead of having to untangle their mess later on.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 11:56:24 UTC No. 16116728
>>16113918
I always wondered is this only the case for theoretical sciences such as theoretical physics or also the case for experimental science? The latter should be much more bound to real results so therefore shouldn't suffer from the paper problem I imagine. At least when I was at university the profs there valued patents more than papers.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:05:06 UTC No. 16116739
>>16116441
The love of money, not money itself.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:11:14 UTC No. 16116745
Bring back the natural philosophy of the 1800s
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:28:00 UTC No. 16116762
>>16116728
>The latter should be much more bound to real results so therefore shouldn't suffer from the paper problem I imagine
There's a shit ton of ways you can cheat there to.
Didn't get the correct results? Just don't publish your study.
Do some numbers/experimental results seem a little bit off or are they simply inconvenient? Don't include them in your study.
Are there outliers in the data that you can't explain? Claim they're statistical errors.
Is your overall data overall only weakly supportive of whatever you claim? Aggregate the data and simply publish whatever statistical correlations you actually did find even if they're most likely just a statistical artifact.
Also, always write in the introduction section that whatever weak correlation you've found is incredibyl well proven and continues solid research by other authoritative figures who have whatsoever no financial affiliations to any organization that might try to profit of said research.
Also deliberately do dodgy research by assuming that a multi-variable cause is actually just one variable that is either present or absent in whatever study you just set up. Do simple linear regression models, then come up with some p-value that is bound to be below 0.05, given a sufficiently big sample. Never ever work with small sample except where it is convenient -> Biased sampling.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:38:27 UTC No. 16116774
>>16116762
I was more wondering about physics not about whatever field you are talking about. In physics the borders are quite well drawn in your case it looks more like the people who accept the papers have a poor grasp on stats so people can bullshit around.
Still not being able to reproduce a model is a valid paper shows flaws in the setup or initial assumption see for example the lk99 bullshit. I guess the lk99 is evidence for the same tricks...
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:41:45 UTC No. 16116780
>>16116774
physics has a lot of bullshit built into it.
look at all the cern higgs nonsense
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:57:41 UTC No. 16116806
>>16116774
My arguments pertain to any study, regardless of what field or where it's done. Sure, you can try to reproduce the experiment, but who, nowadays, has the money or the time or the equipment to do so?
With physics, ignoring for once the ever more inflated basic research that apparently gets nowhere, you have the emerging problem of unfalsifiable theoretical physics. Partially, that's in the nature of what modern-day physics deals with. But even they would do well in toning down their claims.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:06:28 UTC No. 16116816
status quos especially those that are wrong about something and make a group with entrenched interests buckets of cash develop inertia. They create systems that promote their status quo all the way down to the fundamental level and employ various techniques such as adding in mathematical correctors to keep the edifice together.
Only a rare person would have the ability and resources to discover the disconnect with reality and by that stage they are laughed at and ostracised.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:21:45 UTC No. 16116833
>highly intelligent, ambitious woman
>somehow fails to realize modern physics produces almost nothing of value
>in reality, physics hype as we know it was started by US gov during WW2 and the Cold War to facilitate weapons research
>muh I deserve tax payer money for juggling complex numbers around and writing gay little papers
The fact is that, while some research yields positive economic outcomes, the average physics researcher is a money drain. This is not the fault of the "system", this is due to the nature of modern physics. Any further progress requires exponentially more resource investment, which, newsflash, our current energy production cant support.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:25:16 UTC No. 16116839
>>16116470
What have you done?
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:28:10 UTC No. 16116844
>>16113918
HR and business people
prove me wrong.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:29:45 UTC No. 16116847
>>16116839
Fixed academia, you’re welcome.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:41:17 UTC No. 16116859
>>16116470
How much knowledge does one need to solve IMO?
In principle a good idea, though. It controls for intelligence as well as creativity.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:42:36 UTC No. 16116862
See Harold Hillman's writings
https://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/96ce/5_
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:43:32 UTC No. 16116864
>>16116441
>>16116739
For anyone curious, the quote from 1 Timothy 6:10 is:
>...For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil...
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 15:35:37 UTC No. 16117026
Free Lubos Motl
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 17:49:19 UTC No. 16117220
>>16116470
I think the entire opposite desu. You try to do away with unneccesary hierachies, remove the "students as customers" mindset to try and get them at least aware of the research topics, open up new positions for teaching and REAL outreach, so that the projects you are doing have a real footprint on the world.
For research itself, funding on a needs-based system with only minimal academic justifications - if you can prove its interesting, you get the money to do it. If you're caught frauding, you go to jail. Let a thousand flowers bloom.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 17:54:24 UTC No. 16117234
>>16116833
Why would there even need to be a return on "investment"? Why does it need to make money at all? When Einstein worked on GR, did he do so because he thought it would have cool military funding? When we discovered exoplanets, did we have to try and convince VCs for it?
Remove money from the equation.
>our current energy production cant support.
don't look at how much funding goes towards giving companies like Amazon tax credits
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 18:44:00 UTC No. 16117320
>>16117234
>Why would there even need to be a return on "investment"? Why does it need to make money at all?
If you cant produce a tangible benefit for society, you shouldn't expect her rich compensation, simple as.
I understand there's an argument for fostering innovation, but keep in mind that most famous 20th century scientists (the ones Sabine was probably inspired by) only needed equipment to falsify their theories that was, by todays standards, laughably cheap. These days, there are people saying even the LHC is "too small". Now, that means its much harder for a single scientist today to produce meaningful results, yes. And that also means one might have to resort to write textbooks for a living. But I think its wrong to blame this on the system when innovation, by design, yields increasingly diminishing returns and the system has to accomodate that.
About the amazon argument, I completely agree. I also think energy production doesnt fit well into the equation, when I think about it. What I actually meant was that linear innovation requires exponential investment (manpower, energy, etc), an argument that was fleshed out in "The End of Science", and that, currently, we are not satisfying that requirement.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 18:57:59 UTC No. 16117335
>>16117320
>If you cant produce a tangible benefit for society, you shouldn't expect her rich compensation, simple as.
oh anon
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:15:14 UTC No. 16117357
>>16117335
what? Im not against welfare, but you have to draw a line
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:20:07 UTC No. 16117365
>>16117357
no I mean that statement, I get it of-course, but it's childish in practice. humans are pretty fucked up
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:24:30 UTC No. 16117369
>>16117365
>but it's childish in practice
It's childish but it makes sense. If Grug can't derive benefits from whatever he's giving his money to, why give the money in the first place. Fortunately, that's not for Grug to decide so his money ends up funneled to a bunch of nit-wits who waste it. If Grug doesn't like that, he gets 20 year to life or a bullet in his head. Works like a charm. Progress is only possible because we forcibly extract and exploit net producers like Grug.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:33:58 UTC No. 16117384
>>16117320
>If you cant produce a tangible benefit for society,
Knowing stuff for the sake of knowing stuff is useful to society, much more so than many other public money I'd argue
you'd have to couple it with teaching & outreach
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:38:22 UTC No. 16117388
doing useful stuff for society and doing stuff that society thinks it's worth rewarding are two very different things.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:41:37 UTC No. 16117389
>>16117384
>>16117369
Definitely, but were talking about Sabine complaining because she didnt get grands for her exotic ideas here. I am of the opinion she should stop whining and start writing textbooks. Or make more videos, who cares.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:42:27 UTC No. 16117390
>>16117387
At least on the work-life balance font things have been evolving in the right direction for the past 30 or so years
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:43:30 UTC No. 16117391
>>16117320
>If you cant produce a tangible benefit for society, you shouldn't expect her rich compensation, simple as.
Science and arts are needed by industrial society, for very real and utilitarian reason. Easier to explain with science because of technology, but the parts of science that are less useful share something with the arts, in that they get to inspire or brainwash people. Things like museums or a space program that goes to the moon to do nothing there motivate kids to become engineers, basically the arts too have a job in placing narratives in peoples minds. At least the relevant arts of movie making and literature, none gives a fuck about sculptures.
Society needs narratives, a zeitgest, things to look up to, role models. This is the payoff, the Return on Investment.
You go and tell we dont care about some higgs boson and you are signing up for economic stagnation and a new dark age, it has nothing to do with how useful a higgs boson is but with the overall attitude of society.
Besides that, i have my personal beliefs that particle physics will soon change society in tangible and economic ways that will make fusion look like a joke, but i digress.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 20:09:26 UTC No. 16117415
>>16117391
I mostly agree about the long term benefits, but my central point is that the payoff becomes increasingly smaller with time, and that the conditions today are thus different to the times one usually thinks of when inspired by science. Also, I think motivation can only take you so far. Hard facts like IQ decline/birthrate collapse will overshadow it.
>Besides that, i have my personal beliefs that particle physics will soon change society in tangible and economic ways that will make fusion look like a joke
I'll take you up on that, anon! What are you thinking of, SCs?
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 20:28:10 UTC No. 16117431
>>16116387
As much as I agree and have some shitty colleagues and seniors, the amount of mental strength I have would have to quintuple if I were to lit the fire with any of these people. The environment is already barely tolerable, I can't imagine pissing someone off and having them sperg out every single interaction for the next years. Not only that but the academic medium actively promotes cowardice when it comes to any social or interaction-driven matter, so I can see most people around me getting extremely defensive of the status quo or hiding in the corner if I were to touch these topics with my seniors.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:25:22 UTC No. 16117572
>>16115465
>>16115304
>>16113960
>>16113927
Despite pretension of being progressive. Academia is just another corporate sweatshop run on cheap labour. Where the slave labour makes less than minimum wage, but they are supposed to feel superior than the Walmart employees because Science!
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:27:45 UTC No. 16117574
>>16117572
>but they are supposed to feel superior
humans are retarded like that. they fall for shit titles and "public recognition" lmao plenty of high IQ retards
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:30:43 UTC No. 16117577
>>16117572
i get a sort of pathetic pride in not allowing myself to feel superior to other people
I do really love the research, and even if it's a relatively frugal lifestyle, I could see myself doing it for a while. The main issue is the constant uprooting of the post-doc cycle, making new friends, meeting new people.
I realised I met most of my friends/acquitances towards University activites group and they're younger than me (20 yo vs 26) so I'm deadly afraid of just losing all contact if I leave
I have some depressive traits which made it already difficult to make friends and the time "without" friends was really harsh
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:46:24 UTC No. 16117599
Because philosophy went full retard in the last 50 years or so and we've suffered for it. People are not atomic individuals they are social animals and like it or not your ability to socialize and make connections with others is a factor for any kind of success in life and super autismos can't do that.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 07:55:44 UTC No. 16118276
She's a capitalists supporter.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:19:43 UTC No. 16118400
physics students are mostly morons who don't know much besides QFT. For those drones, if there is something incomplete from a theory, then it means there is a new particle somewhere. Those idiots have made up hundreds of particles so far and they are still looking for more. That's the entirety of their intellectual framework. LOL. And btw, the job is shit. HEP is really just computing feynman diagrams to some retarded orders in terms of h_bar. It's just computer stuff and 0% physics.
Since the LHC is the biggest DUD in the history of physics, those morons fear they got exposed. So what did they do? they said they wanted 100 billions this time to build a bigger LHC, and to achieve what? discovering new particles LOL.
It is just putting ones head in the sand at this point
even on a global scope, theoretical physics is pretty much dead. Zero innovation since the discovery of the CMB.
All the atheists crave for a new scientific revival with biology, AI, and biohacking but it wil be an even bigger dud. And even worse, they are even less a science, because the side effects are even more complicated to predict in general, and with respect to the particularities of such and such genetic population.
And people will scream about ethical stuff since testing on living beings will be even more mandatory sooner or later...
Even on the level of the daily life, you can see the scientific decay with videogames. video games coming out today basically look like the games they were releasing on 360 and PS3 ca. 2005-2007 when I was in middle school. Compare a pixelated N64 game from the late 90s with a 1080p HD Xbox 360 game from the mid 2000s and the difference is astonishing. Compare a 360 game like CoD4 from the mid 2000s with the latest version of the same game 15 years later, and you will find very few differences. If 3D graphics were progressing at the same rate as in the late 90s and early 00s, then we would have photorealistic videogames by now.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:20:44 UTC No. 16118401
>>16118400
Anyway, all of that is meaningless, because videogames graphics are largely irrelevant to science and only have relevance for mindless loq IQ normie conSOOOMers. All I need to do is look at actual math and science research. Math is doing better than physics or chemistry, for example, but the only new areas of math that are highly active are the Langlands Program, and Complex Systems/Chaos/Complex Networks, and even that is kind of loosing steam at this point. It was super trendy in the 70-90s and helped pave the way for stuff like data science, but even progress in those fields is slowing. The most active areas of science today really seem to be biotech, cognitive science, and systems biology. Physics, chemistry, math, etc. are largely stagnant, and are becoming increasingly insular and isolated from one another, and more so for institutional and bureaucratic reasons, and not because this is more scientifically productive or something like that.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 15:50:54 UTC No. 16118757
>>16113918
They have brain damage and are unreliable.
Like children.
Normal highly intelligent people are very reasonable and well... Normal.
They aren't borderline crazy schizos.
Brain damaged people are crazy.
IQ correlates negatively with mental disorders of all kinds, as well as with reaction times.
In other words, people on the spectrum are fundamentally sick and form sickly thoughts as well as exhibiting unstable behavior.
They're a threat to be contained, tards to be wrangled, not researchers and academics.
They have no filters, no proper development, no drive for self-action, no long-term planning, they don't pick up on social cues, etc..
Hence why they complain about others not accomodating them - they are unable to conform to the most basic standards.
What's a 160 iq nuclear researcher worth who smears his boogers on the instruments and shits on the floor once a weak? Nothing!
Their job can be done by some code monkeys or a calculator.
That's how redundant autists really are.
That's why society is currently in the progress of eugenically eliminating them via transgenderism, where we convince them to be castrated for their own good.
And because they are retarded, they accept and believe it.
And when they do, it's their contribution to our future.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 15:53:22 UTC No. 16118761
>>16118757
TL;DR
Every autist in a high-stakes high-skill environment needs to be checked and handled 24/7 at a cost of at least 5 other highly-skilled people, due to them being unreliable and untrustworthy, like a small child.
Hence all their work is redudant and they are better off playing with legos.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:01:53 UTC No. 16118774
>>16118757
Is this babbling not just a description of yourself? Interesting what kind of people you come across on this board.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:02:40 UTC No. 16118775
>>16118774
Fag
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:07:37 UTC No. 16118781
>>16118757
lol some sperg made you feel extra retarded
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:12:09 UTC No. 16118790
>>16118774
>>16118781
Some sperg shat on the floor is what happened.
Now go back to your weeb fantasy world and play with your legos!
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:14:11 UTC No. 16118795
>>16118790
shut up and hurry with that coffee
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:16:06 UTC No. 16118797
>>16118795
t. fat autistic sperg living in moms basement
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:20:42 UTC No. 16118801
>>16118790
>Now go back to your weeb fantasy world and play with your legos!
Anon, are the legos with us in the room right now? Also you spamming that shit in every other thread that mentions any form of diagnosis does not make you look normal lol.
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:47:27 UTC No. 16118855
>>16116470
>IMO problems
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 22:38:10 UTC No. 16119960
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX_
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 22:54:56 UTC No. 16119990
>>16118757
>That's how redundant autists really are.
>That's why society is currently in the progress of eugenically eliminating them via transgenderism, where we convince them to be castrated for their own good.
>>16118757
>IQ correlates negatively with mental disorders of all kinds, as well as with reaction times.
>In other words, people on the spectrum are fundamentally sick and form sickly thoughts as well as exhibiting unstable behavior.
this is mental masturbation, you gotta stop being arrogant just because of how eloquent you sound to yourself
Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 23:27:26 UTC No. 16120047
>>16118276
good?
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:05:52 UTC No. 16120077
>>16119960
autism
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:14:03 UTC No. 16120087
>>16113922
>Jewish
>Wahmen
>JewTube
What more evidence do you need?
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 01:23:45 UTC No. 16120182
>>16118757
you'll never make any significant contribution to the world
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 02:13:04 UTC No. 16120223
>>16118757
>Brain damaged people are crazy.
you don't say
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 02:15:42 UTC No. 16120224
>>16113918
Because the rarity of an autistic kid who is high functioning and in the right way is just as rare as a normal kid who would be just as achieving in STEM
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 10:45:22 UTC No. 16120676
she's so high of her own supply, obviously she's a smart woman, but nobody is making breakthroughs in physics, this isn't about you not getting a grant to work on your preferred subject
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 10:50:52 UTC No. 16120683
>>16113918
It's a neurotypical's world, unfortunately