Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

to be fair the unemployment numbers have always had major problems.

And the CPI, for over a decade now, is an insult to statisticians and economists everywhere. There have been absolutely egregious policies for calculating the CPI, quite brazenly misleading: (completely unjustified hedonic adjustments, comparing chicken to meat, just because people can no longer afford beef, etc)

I think this article is mainly upset about the reduction in scientific funding.



Your comment sounds like there are problems everywhere and somehow destroying everything to create an information Wild West everywhere is justified.

The article is about the fact that data should be kept for historical purposes, even though better metrics should come into existence. The fact that public funding to research is being cut is a clear cut example of data erasure, mainly because modern science is data-driven.


That's because the author in question is the one who had their funding cut.

Their research revolves around "Critical Data Theory" which sounds very stemmy at first, but looking deeper it has nothing to do with stem and is in the sociology department that focuses on oppression. Based on critical theory (remember critical race theory?), they study oppression in how people archive historical records.

Another professor pretending to be of a technical nature, yet in reality is just writing op-eds. No different than a NYT hit piece.

Go look at their undergrad degree and google their field. It tries everything in its power to attempt to look like a technical field, while just being another DEI course.


There is nothing wrong with studying past oppression.

But of course some people love to make it hard to study it, because it is uncomfortable to hear about it on the emotional level


The question under consideration is whether we should be compelled under threat of violence to fund this speech.


My understanding is that it isn't about documenting oppression but rather how current methods of archiving can be oppressive and have "cultural bias".

I may be wrong on this, but this is generally what critical theory and its sub fields are all about.


Ah I always get triggered by "to be fair..."

This is like saying "instead of taking a fixable broken thing we've thrown it out" but there's no current intention to get/build a new one. In fact, the goal continuously has been for it to throw it out, often when you look a little close, by moneyed interests.

Trumps administration and the efforts behind the party has done amazing work pointing out each and every loophole politicians have, often purposefully, left in our attempt to create a governance that supports society. Its our job to close them.

A similar example would be "to be fair, our education system has always had problems" - yes. and its been a purposeful choice driven by moneyed interests to not have nationally funded egalitarian public schools cloaked in verbiage like "states rights"




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: