Ashwin DixitMar 21
I unironically support Trump's gutting of all kinds of Science funding. We don't need to see fancy colorful pictures of distant space objects, galaxies, nebulae and shit. GIMME EAT!
I don't fuckin' care what eggheads masturbate themselves with. Just don't use public funds for your phallic rockets. Interested in the skies? Go buy a telescope. The homeless and hungry are done footing the bill for your fancy distractions, which don't bring them any tangible benefits. You could be making shit up!
Show threadLumiukkoMar 21
@purrperl I think you're barking at the wrong tree. Funding for research projects is really tiny compared to all the wealth those tech firms and adjacent people are currently hoarding, while doing nothing for the public. Research projects, esp. those applying for public funding, almost always have to argue their benefits, while nobody is questioning real estate projects or now them fancy AI tools. I understand this is complex and sounds like gibberish most of the time, but the information is transparent and out there. It just takes learning and time. Things that aren't easy exist.
Show threadAshwin Dixit

@lumiukko

Information is not transparent and out there. It's dense, a wall of Latin & Greek, in multiple silos, with nothing to comprehend and unify it.

We need a single, non-repudiable source of truth. A knowledge graph where each node is a factoid, and each edge is an implication.

factoid1 -> factoid2

factoid1 implies factoid2

Mar 21 at 2:02pmWeb
Show threadAshwin DixitMar 21

@lumiukko

Each factoid has supporting studies attached to it. Each study is transparent, down to each data point, and observation.

And each study has a money dimension, that tracks who funded the study, and where the money was spent, down to the last notepad and pencil.

So cigarette companies cannot fund 30 bogus studies to imply that cigarettes don't cause cancer, then hire doctors in white labcoats to advertise cigarettes on TV.

No more fake news.