this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
571 points (97.5% liked)

Science Memes

10340 readers
836 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Ergo

Concordantly

Vis-Γ -vis

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I get a full on boner whenever someone uses "thusly" in a sentence. Such a great word.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago (2 children)

what are your thoughts on β€œwhence”?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

It's a big w for hence

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If you suffix it with "forth" I'm in, you son of a bitch

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

I misread that as prefix and, honestly, forthwhence doesn't sound half bad.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

that’s an extremely rare sighting but it’s so satisfying to read

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Does it have to be used correctly? If not, i could thusly use it incorrectly, possibly?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

πŸ˜°πŸ˜°πŸ˜°πŸ˜°πŸ˜°πŸ˜–πŸ˜–πŸ’¦πŸ’¦πŸ’¦πŸ’¦πŸ’¦πŸ’¦

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I fucking love "thereto" and "therein", alwo "which" and "whence" and things like that, such simple words that make sentences less awkward

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

a stunning %0.1 improvement in prediction accuracy

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

I'd like to see someone hand an LLM as many abstract sections as they can possibly find, and then have it generate the most generic, meaningless, fluff piece abstract/grant proposal/possibly silicon valley startup loan application, the world has ever seen.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Comprehensive...

Real-world applications...

Promising...

Sometime I feel that research is just a bunch of guys trying to sell useless stuff (myself included).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Depends. What's your field?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This one comment of 4 words triggers me so hard that it momentarily stumped me

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

How about this one: 'Useless doesn't mean valueless'

Thoughts?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Condensed matter - basic research. No actual real world applications, independently of what the abstracts/introductions may claim.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Awesome! Two questions: 1. Could you pitch some of your material as having a possible future application of radically increasing packing efficiency for airline bound luggage? And, 2. What's your favorite kind of nuclear pasta?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A bit of a more serious comment on that: knowledge is never useless. Many, maybe most, researchers agree with that. It's why we do what we do. Publishers and sources of funding (be they third party or governmental), however, disagree. So we have to sell them on the importance of our research this way.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

"Knowledge is never useless"

Going on a tangent here: While I fully agree with the above, there is an amount of knowledge after which fact checking becomes bothersome, and some people just skip fact checking overall. One could argue that, while knowledge is never useless, unchecked knowledge might become bothersome or dangerous.

See flatearthers, scientology, etc. for extreme examples.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Me: Polish my abstract:

"The development of ..."

ChatGPT: "Wypoleruj moje streszczenie...”

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

#shittyskynet

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago

you can't just say perchance

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I have a visceral reaction to words like elucidate, and other fluff. My writing has to be very to the point, and technically accurate. Because of this, I carve up drafts from juniors like a Thanksgiving turkey.

[–] rustydrd 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Doing the Lord's work. The longer I work in academia, the more radical I become about keeping it simple.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It's heartening to see comments like this. Busybody buzzwords and marketing maneuvering infiltrating real scientific study has been a hallmark of the de-intellectualisation of society for a long time, in my mind.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Your writing could use a little polishing.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Most "professional" writing is just a bunch of phrases interspersed with a few chunks of information.

I'm involved with bidding and grant proposal stuff for software and it's 90% empty words. I draw two diagrams and a page of text, sales deletes 60% of the text, misinterprets the rest and then puffs it up to 30 pages.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

They let the ad guys write grants and then wonder why they don't end up getting them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It doesn't have to be like that. Sure, context is important, but parroting phrases or other crap that the client has in the RFP is bullshit. They don't want you blowing smoke up their ass, they want a technically sound product that addresses the exact issues they asked you to address. They also want you to show them how you're going to get there, and achieve the objectives they set out.

I realize you're on the tech side; I'm just venting my frustrations with the corporate/PM spheres.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I thankfully don't have to deal with RFPs anymore, but when I did, I'd either go line-by-line or ignore the prospect's text entirely. There is an in-between, but it's wishy-washy crowd-pleasing nonsense, and even the people entrenched in those bureaucracies see straight through it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

That, and parroting makes it sound like you don't know what they want, or that you're stupid, and the best that you could come up with is their own text with slight variation

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I work in IT, and by now, every single 3-letter-abbreviation makes my eyelid twitch.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

My industry is three-letter-acronym (TLA) heavy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Well, actually you're kind of wrong, at least in some contexts.

So I'm not sure, how that works in other countries, but here in Germany, a large bid for some public contact has to parrot the requirements. The process includes a bloke essentially ticking all of the boxes in their request, and if you say (just for example) "we will deploy that in our k8s cluster" but they require a cloud ready solution, the bloke will not tick the box. Yes, that's incredibly stupid.

Apart from that, who reads the bid texts? Not technical people, but bean counters and MBAs. The technical people on the other side are only asked for comment, they have no say.

I wish you would be right, but in a world full of people desperately trying to justify their existence, fluff is essential.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

You guys are allowed to say novel?!