10 points

Never heard of any colleague who had issues publishing stuff relating to intelligence, which makes me suspect that the “free of prejudices against this kind of research” bit is maybe a lie. I mean this in the sense that it might be not prejudice but rather just plain old judice, i.e. peer review that prevents edgelords from publishing.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Which views exactly?

Ow you know the ones.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

The ones motivated by [Peter Sellers] bold curiosity for the adventure ahead! [/Sellers]?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

“In recent years, the journal has come under increasing attack for publishing research that some people consider racist” lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Ugh, still waking up so multiple comments.

Even the shittier variants of intelligence related research I know of has no big issues finding a journal. How bad must Intelligence be?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Was curious why you didn’t just link directly but then I saw the big Genetics/Human Biodiversity/Fertility Decline/Biotech block on Aporia’s front page. I guess at least they’re not hiding it.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

you know you’re on a fascist blog when you see so many AI illustrations

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

yeah, fuck these guys

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I am geniunely shocked that Elsevier had this journal under its imprint.

permalink
report
reply
5 points
3 points

On one hand giving these people the veneer of science is actively going to undermine public confidence in “science” as a whole and directly make the world a worse place.

On the other hand, money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Any content is good content as long as it creates payments in the paywall. And that must be what science is all about.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
permalink
report
reply
9 points

Ah yes, the journal of intelligence:

First, Kanazawa’s (2008) computations of geographic distance used Pythagoras’ theorem and so the paper assumed that the earth is flat (Gelade, 2008). Second, these computations imply that ancestors of indigenous populations of, say, South America traveled direct routes across the Atlantic rather than via Eurasia and the Bering Strait.

permalink
report
parent
reply

SneerClub

!sneerclub@awful.systems

Create post

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

[Especially don’t debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

Community stats

  • 379

    Monthly active users

  • 199

    Posts

  • 2.3K

    Comments