New images could change cancer diagnostics, but ICE detained the Harvard scientist who analyzes them
New images could change cancer diagnostics, but ICE detained the Harvard scientist who analyzes them
I love the headline. That's how you report on these issues: still clickbaity but focusing on the perps and the effects of their actions.
I don't really like it, makes it sound as if her rights are only important because she is useful.
While I agree with your concern, I think it does help highlight how bad these policies are because it is impacting more than just "useless
<insert hated group here>
" or something like that. I agree that rights should still matter regardless, but focusing on the impacts helps signal to broader audiences.It's important because the rhetoric of "we only want useful people" isn't true. It's not just about her, it's also about false rhetoric.
I see where you're coming from and agree from that perspective, on the other hand, I feel like it highlights and billboards the stupidity of this regime extremely well.
Like: "Hey we could have a cure for cancer any minute now but no, these dumbnuts are too busy scaring and/or extrajudicially kidnapping people who would better humanity."
Hopefully she gets deported to a good country. We're evil now. Like Google turned evil.
If she's being moved against her will, then it's safe to assume she's being moved someplace worse.
She would be deported to Russia. So no, she will not be deported to a good country.
They're already off the cliff, they just haven't looked down yet.
Isn't this the main complaint about China and the communists from the West in terms of actions, not the half baked oversimplified idealist nonsense; anti academic injustices due to populist stupidity in politics that lead to mass murder and loss of human progress?
Yes, and I personally feel that until January 2025 it was still a valid claim for an american to make. Not anymore.
I hear there is no shortage of countries willing to take American scientists. I don't think she'll have a problem finding a better (safer) place.
Operation: Return Paperclip
Why on earth would she have any interest in helping the company retain knowledge when the country that company is in has treated her so poorly? Move on and it's their loss.
I hope she's not sent to a death camp before a court have a chance to say anything, because that's also a thing that can happen.
Last thing I'd do is give anyone a way to do my work without me present
the reason she was detained was that she was analyzing images that'd cure cancer. you underestimated big pharma
Somewhere in here is a perfect counter balance to right wing speak.
"A scientist who was about to publish a cancer curd has been arrest by border agents with Trump's authority. Trump received billions big pharm funding."
The trick with the right is it doesn't need to be entity true. It just need to tick ther correct set of emotions.
Okay RFK.
Why would the greedy fuccbois at the top of these pharmacy companies want to cure cancer? Aside from the clout theyll make billions more off inflated treatments that may or may not work
Each cancer is almost a disease in itself, due to its own individual nature, for an effective treatment the ideal would be to use personalized medicine, which will always give a lot of money to big pharmaceutical companies, there is no need for them to delay or harm research into cancer treatment.
“Could” in this context usually means it doesn’t.
ICE detained
thea Harvard scientist who analyzes them
Oooffff... Full support to this person but scientism is part of the problem.
How so?
I'm confused by this. Can you explain?
Yeah made up stories by dusty old men are much better for understanding the truth of the world
It's always satisfying when someone I have tagged later confirms that tag.
If and when we find a better method than the scientific method, I'll start getting concerned with "Scientism." Until then, I'll keep on cheering on our best and greatest doing the hard work of making new medicine and technology for the public.
I find Scientism concerning because I am a scientist who is quite concerned by the gap between actual science, and how people use science-shaped rhetoric. An example of this is how in the UK, during COVID, the government repeatedly claimed they were "following the science", despite many of their policies being completely contrary to what the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) had recommended.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of the scientific method — I wouldn't be a scientist otherwise. But writing news headlines about the achievements of scientists exists beyond science. Being opposed to Scientism isn't being opposed to the scientific method. Rather, it's more like acknowledging that science isn't a universal tool for solving all ills. Personally, being against Scientism also means being against the weird way we put science, and scientists on a pedestal. I understand the sentiment (and hell, I'm probably a scientist in part because a younger me was chasing that pedestal), but I think it's probably harmful long term — both to society and to science
Edit: fixed grammar
Yo I think I found Ted Kaczynski’s account
Thanks for making me aware of scientism. I am a little unsure how it applies here through.
A facet of Scientism, as I understand it, is a sort of hero worship of "Great" scientists. Part of this is because it's easier for us to build a narrative of history if we focus on key figure, but that's antithetical to how science actually works. It neglects the importance of the wider scientific "ecosystem", which includes mechanisms of peer review, academic teaching and learning etc.
I've known people who were pretty prominent academics, who got some of their best ideas from random places, like hanging out in a bar with academics from outside their field. But a good idea on its own matters very little: science, in practice, works on a foundation of trust and community, and basically any research has an entire team of people behind it.
I have no doubt that the scientist mentioned in the headline is exceptional at her job, but by presenting her as the scientist who is working on this presents an inaccurate perspective of how these things actually work. I see why the headline chose to present her as more essential than she likely is, but as it seems to for the person you're replying to, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
The main reason she is detained is probably that she is a russian who opposes the Ukraine war.
Do you have a source handy? With ICE backed by this administration, I wouldn't imagine Russians with bad takes on Ukraine would be targets.
Edit: I misread the original comment and now understand why a Russian opposing the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a target.
I'd imagine Russians opposing the Ukraine war would especially be targets, maybe you misread the comment and the "bad take"? Trump would be eager to get rid of pro-Ukraine speakers for Putin.
(A source would be nice too)