or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SamSpade

Oh, noez, stranger on the intewerbz calls me names
Meh --> putting a man on the moon amounts to little more than throwing a rock in space hard enough. There was tons of applied research involved to be sure, but nothing particularly groundbreaking. For parctical uses, the Russians had already figured out how to launch satelites before us - we could have just copied their technology Note how both the manhattane project and the space program were entirely motivated by military dominance, nothing else.You can't be serious...
Indeed. Have we had anything comparable since then? It wasn't even that expensive.
If we gonna do anecdotal evidence, here's some in the exact opposite direction: I started my program in Georgia Tech (one of the best engineering schools in the country btw.) in 2001, and finished in 2006. In just 5 years, I saw more cases than I can count of international students from departments such as Aerospace, Computers Science, Industrial engineering, who tried to find jobs here in the US with little success and ended up finding better opportunities back in their...
If science is simply nothing more than improved understanding of the world then it always == goodIf science is also an enabler of how to mess with the world - often with unpredicted harmful consequences - it is certainly not always good; You can't separate the implications of doing science from the pure pursuit of knowledge, and scientists have responsibility to be critical of what they are doing and why.the trouble is, scientists, and intellectual more broadly, for the...
Getting a decent tenure-track academic job in the US right now is virtually hopeless, regardless of genious level. Hence, the explosion of post-docs languishing for decades in labs around the country, for shit wages, with no clear career prospects.
Oh please. You know full well that there is no such thing as "federal R&D budget" that can be scrutinized and debated. You have a bunch of mission agencies that get R&D money as a part of their overall appropriation - determined mostly between the respective committees and lobbyists. Hence, the complete lack of transparency of whether actual meaningful science is being done, or stupid shit for the benefit of a few military contractors/pharma companies.
Well, the survey question asked is not "abstract" - it asks about perceived effects on society. Do you really think science has had no demonstrably terrible effects along the way?
What's guaranteed to make your children poorer is the continued destruction of the biosphere, and the squandering of physical resources.Try to eat the money you save from not addressing these problems once topsoil disapears, crops and biodiversity decline, and there is no energy left to artificially maintain yelds.
Maybe, but even so, I read widely, to a degree that far exceeds the average person's. If things are doing so well, it is still your duty as a scientist to inform me and share the appreciation of all the new discoveries, as well as to justify the continued taxpayer support of your an other scientists' privileged position in society.Moreover, I never said the public can or should do purely scientific decisions, e.g. what are the interesting basic science problems. But it can...
New Posts  All Forums: