There were some obvious problems with the "Grievance Studies" effort, but a lot of the defensive reactions remind me of corporate PR flacks shrugging off and/or counterattacking freelance infosec reports.
-
Show this thread
-
eg: Complaints about wasting editors' and reviewers' time with "fraudulent" articles sound a lot like complaints that pentesters are wasting the valuable time of corporate security. No, they're showing that your security failed, which is important!
2 replies 3 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
I said this about the Sokal hoax years ago: It didn't show that X is worthless, it showed that X *practitioners* can't distinguish their work from nonsense. The _institutional process_ itself is worthless and should be dismantled.
4 replies 8 retweets 29 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @St_Rev
They had many different articles in an attempt to test different aspects of corruption and incompetence, much of it focused on the articles getting through by political considerations as opposed to merit.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.