ScienceBlogs
scienceblogs.com · Group blog · on HN since 2007
A network of science bloggers, including Good Math, Bad Math and Pharyngula, covering math, biology, computing, and pseudoscience.
What HN saysHN links it for posts like the Ken Thompson compiler backdoor and TECO, and for PZ Myers' critiques of weak science.
533HN people shared it
290linked it in comments
653stories submitted
7.7Kstory points
1 year agolast shared
2007people per year2026
Most-shared posts
- 1Strange Loops: Ken Thompson and the Self-referencing C Compiler9 people · 97 points · first shared 2012 · 51 comments on HN
- 2Ray Kurzweil does not understand the brain5 people · 211 points · first shared 2010 · 221 comments on HN
- 3Trading Our Future for Fossil Fuels5 people · 4 points · first shared 2010 · discussion on HN
- 4Gap Buffers, Or, Don't Get Tied Up with Ropes? (2009)5 people · 1 points · first shared 2014 · discussion on HN
- 5Ken Thompson's theoretical C compiler backdoor4 people · 21 points · first shared 2007 · 6 comments on HN
- 6The E-Cat is back, and people are still falling for it4 people · 11 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 7Good Math, Bad Math4 people · 1 points · first shared 2007 · 1 comments on HN
- 8The tuesday birthday problem4 people · first shared 2014
- 9Why I won't be at my high school reunion3 people · 271 points · first shared 2009 · 262 comments on HN
- 10The Hidden Cost of Smart Drugs (2008)3 people · 84 points · first shared 2008 · 41 comments on HN
- 11What are worthwhile problems: Feynman's moving letter3 people · 75 points · first shared 2008 · 13 comments on HN
- 12Is 17 the most "random" number?3 people · 50 points · first shared 2009 · 29 comments on HN
- 13Dietary supplements: Scary substances manufactured under scary conditions3 people · 24 points · first shared 2012 · 44 comments on HN
- 14A critique of the Atlantic Magazine article, Does the Vaccine Matter?3 people · 18 points · first shared 2009 · 6 comments on HN
- 1599% Genetic? Individual Differences in Executive Function Are Almost Perfectly Heritable3 people · 13 points · first shared 2008 · 14 comments on HN
What HN people wrote when they linked it
morisy · 2010-10-05
As a journalist, I agree that many of the problems he points out are endemic, although I'd go farther to say they typify almost all news. I liked the approach that http://scienceblogs.com/, though apparently they've had some harsh times lately: Let the sources go direct, not in a one-off "news announcement" that is really an arbitrary point in a multi-year evolution of understanding, but rather as an ongoing conversation about what they're studying, what they're discovering, and what they think is worth sharing.
kbrkbr · 2022-12-27
> In the following, I briefly review three a priori arguments that purport to demonstrate that “computation” alone can never realize human-like understanding, and, a fortiori, no computational AI system will ever fully “grasp” human meaning.
So on the one side we have science and engineering, backed by lots and lots of working applications, saying „let’s try and find out“, „let’s see how far we come“.
And on the other side, we have philosophy, with a priori arguments which say this and that must or must not be so.
Clearly I’m on the side of a priori arguments, they have a history of working well. Remember when Kant proved that empirical space must be euclidean [1]? Or Hegel that there can only be seven planets [2]?
/s
[1] http://jur.byu.edu/?p=9200
[2] https://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2009/01/17/hegel-does-maths
WalterBright · 2020-11-13
No, I am not trolling you, this really is a TECO macro. For some background on TECO:
https://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2006/09/22/worlds-greatest-pathologi…
orwin · 2020-07-18
Luc Montagnier should not be taken seriously[0]. I'd say than every "theory" he follows make me distrust them.
I think he is even an antivaxx now[1].
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier#Research_on_electromagnet…
[1]https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/06/27/luc-montagnier-hits-a-ne…
emmelaich · 2019-10-05
PZ Myers criticized this here: https://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/07/02/the-mfap-hypothesis-for…
I still like to think that hybridization played a greater role in evolution than we now suppose.
The proponent (Eugene M McCarthy) has some amazing examples of cross-species fertilization but also some pretty crack-potty stuff. His website is http://www.macroevolution.net/
mundo · 2018-07-18
Correct, this only works if you can reverse the particle's spin without observing it. This is a descriptive example - the real experiment is slightly more complicated - but it was experimentally verified by Alain Aspect in 1982. If you want a more detailed explanation I recommend http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2007/02/22/spooky-action-at-a-dista…
moultano · 2017-06-01
I started following a bunch of paleo-artists on twitter and now I find it hard to look at kids' dinosaur stuff anymore.
http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2010/03/03/zombie-hands-to-bi…
colinbartlett · 2017-04-04
Nothing except their doctor recommending the more expensive name brand drug, which happens all the time. I'm sure there are many reasons why this happens including drug companies having cosy relationships with doctors and also consumer advertising causing patients to request specific drugs.
Take Nexium.[1] I'm no expert, but I understand Nexium to be esomeprazole, the s-isomer of omeprazole which is to say it's a mirror image chemically. Yet it's the second most prescribed drug in America.
1. http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2012/01/09/why-no-one-should-take-ne…
donjigweed · 2017-03-16
Worth linking to PZ Meyers takedown of Kurzweil's ignorance of biology. [1]
[1] http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/21/kurzweil-still-doesnt-un…
edmccard · 2017-01-30
>I don't think primitive data structures like a gap buffer are useful anymore.
Emacs seems to do just fine with gap buffers. And thinking about algorithms with greater complexity as being less primitive can obscure the fact that the complexity isn't always worth the tradeoff; see "Gap Buffers, or, Don't Get Tied Up With Ropes"[1]
[1] http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/02/18/gap-buffers-or-why-bother-…
jessriedel · 2016-01-22
As paraphrased in the article, Davies's claims appear either misleading or lacking substantive content. (When he says "activating ancient genes" does this just mean "activating genes that are inactive in some cell types but have been strongly preserved because they are used in other cell types"? If so, how is this different than the mainstream understanding of cancer?) However, the best criticism I've been able to find keeps getting bogged down in disputes over terminology, e.g., http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/11/20/aaargh-physicists-again/ .
pessimizer · 2015-10-07
There is evidence from fMRI for every single thing that a researcher wanted to see.
https://blogs.plos.org/neuro/2015/01/28/fmri-under-the-microscope-an-i…
http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/06/27/must-read-paper-on-fmr…
davidgerard · 2015-02-07
It is worth noting that the E-Cat is the sort of thing that is not just unlikely, but blatantly fraudulent. It's claimed to work by adding hydrogen to nickel to make copper, a reaction so ridiculously unfeasible it doesn't even happen in supernova explosions.
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/12/05/the-nuclear-physics…
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer
lutusp · 2014-09-05
These quotes fail to notice that, notwithstanding all the non-repeatable results in physics that come and go, physicists eventually settle on a few extremely reliable theoretical precepts, precepts that lead to new technology. A classic example is quantum physics, the most successful and reliable scientific theory we have, a theory that makes numerical predictions about nature that prove accurate to better than ten decimal places:
http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2011/05/05/the-most-precisely-teste…
Psychologists have many non-repeatable results but don't shape reliable theories about their subject. Physicists have many non-repeatable results but do shape reliable theories about their subject. The computer I'm sitting at is proof of that.
pdkl95 · 2014-03-10
> they discussed the issues in dramatically different ways.
http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2007/05/31/more-than-just-resistance-of-…
While this article is about creationism (it was written as part of the "intelligent design" drama), it is still the best discussion of the key difference between (USA-style) left/right politics.
The key insight, summarized: while many people respond to logic and reasoning, others respond primarily to the phatic language of the speaker. This means that trying to convince someone who is strongly "conservative" of something, the usual approach of arguing facts and logic doesn't work. You have to break the language barrier first.
hawkharris · 2013-09-18
I love the sentiment that Bezos expressed through this quote, and I sincerely hope to apply his advice to my career.
Having said that, this long-term way of thinking about happiness and regrets may conflict with human nature. The vast majority of us are incapable of predicting what will - or will not - make us happy:
http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/04/22/happiness-prediction-a…
quinnchr · 2013-08-12
Here's a fantastic article on the variability hypothesis: http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2009/06/01/gender-gap-in-math…
Men having a higher variance in intelligence pretty much only holds for white americans. The opposite is true in other cultures, which to me, seems to indicate it's a cultural issue, not in innate biological difference.
You are right some feminists would argue that women are harmed by the "patriarchy" but they would also argue that the patriarchy hurts men too. Beyond that there are a plethora of widely varying feminist schools of thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_movements_and_ideologies
daeken · 2013-06-03
Here's a great breakdown of why this paper is junk science: http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/05/21/the-e-cat-is-back-a…
Simply put, they didn't actually exclude external sources of power, nor did they properly measure before and after fusion. The test also happened only when the device was on. This isn't an independent review; it's equivalent to me looking at it and saying "wow, that box is pretty!"
robbiep · 2012-12-11
I agree that it is extremely silly, however what you suggest about the genes being all mixed up in the same chromosomes as disproving it I don't buy..
I'm not sure if you've ever seen chromosome maps showing gene locations on chromosomes between different species but this is instructive in this matter: between species and thus, as numbers of chromosomes flux up and downwards, the genes which may have started in one chromosome end up spread throughout many-
I am sure you will find the following links interesting
Background: on chromosome rearrangement:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/21/basics-how-can-chromosom…
Synteny map - cool explination
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/06/08/pufferfish-and-ancestral…
mouse human synteny map
http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/MGA2-11-33smc.html
tantalor · 2012-11-18
An excellent long-form article about this type of algorithm in Go: http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/11/13/the-go-i-forgot-concurrenc…
akirn · 2012-09-06
Ecklund's claims are greatly exaggerated, if not blatantly false. See http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2010/05/20/scientists-and-religi… for the debunking and http://metamagician3000.blogspot.com/2010/06/sciencereligion-compatibi… for a more detailed examination of the compatibility of science and religion. Or go straight to the source and try to find an angle that supports your original statement, 'cause I can't: http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8594/ecklund2.jpg.
Thrymr · 2012-07-29
As a followup, a nice blog essay on the theme of intellectual contempt for math and science:
http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2008/07/26/the-innumeracy-of-intell…
I often wanted to call bullshit on those people too, and reply with something like "I always hated reading" or "What use is Shakespeare, anyway?" Of course, I never did, out of both social politeness and an actual respect for the humanities and what they bring to civilization.
rorrr · 2012-07-08
I love seeing work using evolutionary algorithms.
This is a cool project of evolving a simple, yet efficient antenna:
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/11/11/evolution-produces-better-…
zem · 2011-11-23
i think that's a pretty bad metric. there's absolutely no reason that working on the most important problems in your field won't end up being a complete waste of your time, because you are ill-equipped to make any real progress on them. i prefer feynman's philosophy, as expressed in a letter to a student who felt that the problem he was working on wasn't "worthwhile" enough:
The worthwhile problems are the ones you can really solve or help solve, the ones you can really contribute something to. ... No problem is too small or too trivial if we can really do something about it.
-- Richard Feynman
read the whole letter, it's very inspiring: http://scienceblogs.com/thescian/2008/03/what_are_worthwhile_problems_…
Umofomia · 2011-10-30
The author responds to this point in one of the comments; I quote:
this is -- and I make no pretensions otherwise -- theoretical physics. It's not airy-fairy pie-in-the-sky speculation, but it also isn't proven the way you would prove that a * b = b * a. You may want to read this recent guest essay (http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/10/guest_essay_you_are_a_… that does a wonderful job of explaining, with some brilliant metaphors, what this sort of theory is (and isn't).
pella · 2011-09-20
Placebo/Nocebo Genes ?
################
for example: http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs4570625
- placebo side: "rs4570625(G;G) homozygosity was a significant predictor of clinical placebo response, being associated with greater improvement in anxiety symptoms." [PMID 19052197]
- Nocebo side: "rs4570625 may have a gender-dependent effect on susceptibility to Panic Disorder." [PMID 19132526]
################
"rs4570625 GG makes me a believer ?"
http://genes2brains2mind2me.com/2008/12/06/rs4570625-gg-makes-me-a-bel…
critics: "Neuroskeptic savages the "placebo gene" http://scienceblogs.com/geneticfuture/2008/12/neuroskeptic_savages_the…
################
23AndMe service data ( if you have ): https://www.23andme.com/you/explorer/snp/?snp_name=rs4570625
ilamont · 2011-06-25
"Cafeteria fringe". I think a lot of us can identify.
But not everyone finds a friend or their own group (geeks, goths, whatever) and are pretty much completely alienated. Of course it leaves bitterness, as this story (I recall it was linked from HN some years ago) attests:
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/07/very_off_topic_why_i_wont_be_…
Also worth reading: pg's "Why Nerds Are Unpopular"
http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
atgm · 2011-01-29
Duck penises: http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2010/01/friday_weird_science_duck_d…
I'm not kidding, either. Read the article -- it's pretty amazing how both male and female ducks have evolved to accommodate/discourage each other.
JoachimSchipper · 2010-11-29
To everyone talking about "sentiment analysis": that's not easy. Sentences like "John has stupidly said foo[1], and even went so far as to say bar[2] (which was demolished by Jane[3] and Jan[4]); he's now capitulated[5]" would be quite difficult to parse. The following articles may also be instructive: all by the same author, all quite critical, but with links with quite different intentions.
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/05/dembski_responds.php
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/12/id_garbage_csi_as_non-computa…
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/08/quick_critique_dembski_and_ma…
hernan7 · 2010-09-13
Nature at the macroscopic scale may be red in tooth and claw, but at smaller scales it gets positively Lovecraftian. (See also: the cockroach brain parasite http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/02/02/the_wisdom_of_parasites.php )