You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
I haven’t heard about that (with LIGO)! Can you say more?
This post was good on it iirc https://stuver.blogspot.com/2011/03/big-dog-in-envelope.html?spref=tw …
Both of these are really interesting. Reminded again of the insight that experimental big physics is basically all calibration.
I've got a cold and am too dumb to even read 16 tweets in a row, so no opinions on the relation to your Sokal thing though :)
Sorry to hear!
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
This proposal is not nice. Unfortunately, it is too late for nice. Many-to-most academic fields run on a go-along-to-get-along basis, and now have large negative net value as a result.
Some fields should simply end. I suggested that for nutrition:
A tension here: academia is increasingly awful as a career. That drives away many of the best researchers. Reforms that add to the suffering risk making a bad situation even worse.
Currently, reviewing papers is unpaid scut-work. Not surprising not everyone does it well.
… and the total number of papers published might drop precipitously if reviewers were more reluctant to recommend publication.
That would be good. Everyone agrees there’s WAY too much stuff published under the current system. A 90% reduction would be great.
I’d suggest that every PhD student be required to perform at least one attempt at Sokaling as a graduation requirement.
Learning what should count as unacceptably bad research is a critical part of learning how to do it well. And of spotting the difference in the lit.
Initially, everyone would go for low-hanging fruit in Sokaling attempts: the easiest ways to get nonsense past reviewers.
Reviewers would quickly catch on to the simplest tricks… then subtler errors.
And I hope this would lead to a virtuous upward spiral of quality.
Three questions:
𝔸) Would this make academia more adversarial, and thereby even more awful?
𝔹) Can a system develop that is adequately resistant to gaming (Goodhart’s Law)?
ℂ) Is it realistic to imagine something like this could actually happen?
I’d love to hear your opinions about 𝔸 & 𝔹 !
As for ℂ — the crisis in academia is now obvious to all. Things cannot go on as they are. Unusual action becomes possible in extremis.
Recent dramatic process reforms in social psychology are startling, and inspiring.
