🧵 2024-Q1 in science
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:56:19 UTC No. 16194298
Let's discuss recent papers.
Which field of research do you think is most underrated/neglected?
(In terms of academics engagement, number/quality of studies, potential, funding, or media coverage.)
There's so many papers but most of them are about minor niche things while important subjects in need of data/findings with relevance to the real world right now often have barely any study or trial. Are there any projects about reorganizing research so it's more useful to society?
Why doesn't /sci/ debate recent actual studies/results with few exceptions? Those studies aren't big enough to have a whole thread about them and the studies that have threads here are either trash or just there due to controversy. What's your take on the featured ones?
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 16:24:32 UTC No. 16194332
>>16194298
>Why doesn't /sci/ debate recent actual studies/results with few exceptions? Those studies aren't big enough to have a whole thread about them and the studies that have threads here are either trash or just there due to controversy. What's your take on the featured ones?
Because the board is 95% midwits who cant understand the papers properly/dont care about them, and flerf-niggers/ragebaiters. Most people simply care more about emotionally upsetting stuff than science. Also, many studies and research findings are either uninteresting:
>Microplastics. We know its bad. Solutions would be more interesting than even more fearmongering, even if its justified
>Moon library
Neat trivia but who really cares
>Jazz neuroshit
Wow we knew that but know we know the same with fancier words
,or irrelevant:
>Algae farming
Interesting concept but is eat zhe bugs tier shit and will never be economically viable
>Fossil fuel degrees
makes money and is relevant so who cares
Only few are actually interesing, like the obelisk kinda stuff, but that is too complicated for most fags like us to properly discuss
Nice thread tho
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 16:39:16 UTC No. 16194352
There are only one or two good threads on /sci/ that still keep me engaged with this board. But I'm gradually losing interest and probably go elsewhere. Thanks for the attempt at making a good thread.
>Why doesn't /sci/ debate recent actual studies/results with few exceptions?
90% of the posters care only about climate, race and vaccines.
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:21:35 UTC No. 16194945
>>16194332
True, solutions would be more significant, that's one reason why it's just a short item and most aren't aware how much microplastic there is in plastic bottles nor was it well researched until recently.
It's not about jazz, it's just mentioned which creative task they investigated this with. May not be that well suited as a main item. We didn't know that.
Algae farming is interesting but this is about something else: global dimming scenarios. And it's already viable and should be scaled up more, for example for algae oil instead of fish oil.
Fossil fuels are not relevant in the future and there are lots of reasons to care about it.
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:34:58 UTC No. 16194966
>>16194298
A lot of it comes down to time commitment: The people most interested in discussing actual papers and research results are the people most busy teaching classes, engineering things, doing research, etc. etc. etc.
ex. I'd love nothing more than to have a recurring 'plasma physics general' thread and discuss constant new findings in fusion research and low temperature plasmas and so on... but I'm absolutely swamped six days out of the week and would never be able to meaningfully participate in it.
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:35:10 UTC No. 16194967
>>16194298
>I hate /sci/
so go somewhere else bitch.
you repost the same summary of wiki trash propaganda every month and nobody every replies to it because your "contributions" here are unwanted. you will come back to vainly self bump your unwanted trash thread half a dozen times before it finally 404s.
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 18:03:49 UTC No. 16196192
>>16194967
You don't own /sci/, poltard
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 18:45:09 UTC No. 16196271
>>16194967
This saddly. He keeps advertising his newsletter and it's annoying
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 06:29:45 UTC No. 16197204
Bump