> Impact factor means less these days when we see how citation manipulation and stuffing skew things.
Academic publishing is a racket. So I don't much care. Lancet played politics to run cover for China who conducted US funded gain of function on coronaviruses in Wuhan because it supported their political narrative.
This is little different. All western institutions will fail because all western institutions are run by money grubbing cowards. The west will eventually die and we will be taken over by strongmen like Jinping or Putin. This brief liberal moment we had in an otherwise authoritarian history will be extinguished.
> This author appears to have an interesting way of seeing the world. Did you see their other publications?
No I did not, I am sure many fucked up people had "an interesting way of seeing the world".
Not sure who you represent (i.e. who "we" refers to in your message) but what you all do with your money is your choice, and I don't have any objections to whatever basis you all decide who you give your money to. But thanks for letting me know.
> “About half of prime age men who are not in the labor force may have a serious health condition that is a barrier to working,”
Not sure why what Alan Krueger thinks may or may not be the case it is relevant to this discussion. I may be sure I may be able to find many economist that may think many different things may be the case. But unfortunately for Alan Krueger here, opinions about what the data may or may not be is not the same as the actual data about what is, regardless of who's opinion it is. I would have hoped someone taught them that in highschool or university but I guess they must have not had time in their busy schedule of critical race theory.
> pain, high medication costs
Check and check, every moment I sit at a chair is just slightly less pain than every moment of standing, still manage to put in a day's work somehow.
> According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2017 impact factor of 0.538, ranking it 4th out of 12 journals in the category "Psychology, Psychoanalysis", and 130th out of 142 journals in the category "Psychiatry (SSCI)".[1]
> The idea that every able bodied person has to work is not supposed to be the way our society functions; at least not in the last 100,000 years.
So the fruit of who's labour exactly are they entitled to then? And can I also get in on that action? I would like to get something other people made without working any more. I don't see why I as a productive member of society should get less than someone who festers in their own bodily fluids.
> Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has—a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which “white” people have a particular susceptibility.
...
> There is not yet a permanent cure.
Not clear if the author has tried procedures where the skin of the "white" person was removed surgically, or maybe altered in appearance to be less "white", would be interesting to see follow up research on the matter. Hopefully they can get access to some funding to do further research on these important questions as part of the US infrastructure plan once the republicans stop being racist and finally pass it.
> I do think Go was far too adamant for far too long about not needing generics (also known as parametric polymorphism); seems sober minds clearly disagree about where to put the boundaries.
Adamant is rather generous. Golang maintainers are overly defensive about serious deficiencies in an otherwise mediocre programming language. It is the worst tool for the job in almost any situation.
At the moment it is easier to write correct software in Python than it is to do it in Golang and in almost all cases correctness is more important than performance.
> The bottom earners probably have zero excess earnings but somehow pay similar tax per dollar earned as the top 1% earners who have pretty much only excess earnings, even when not accounting for inflated lifestyle inefficiencies.
Again, this is in the source I linked, and if by similar you mean, differing by 14.4%, then sure.
> Usually caused by contact with animals, the outbreak in Lanzhou, the capital of Gansu province, was due to a leak at a vaccine plant, according to Lanzhou’s health commission. People are still being treated at hospitals even though the outbreak happened a year ago.
Correct. The thing is though, so was all the "news" that asserted that the lab leak theory is a conspiracy theory, or that the only possibility is a natural origin, or that we should ban everyone from the internet who suggests lab leak is possible.
Conjecture is conjecture, but "this is conjecture" is not a refutation of said conjecture. And banning all refutations of conjecture such as "this was definitely natural and any suggestion that it is not is a racist conspiracy theory" is also not refutation.
Well not always. For example not if you are a Uyghur muslim in china. Then you don't get anything while also getting sodomized with broom sticks. But hey you know, what shall we do, I guess lets just look the other way. Besides it's just cultural differences right?
Academic publishing is a racket. So I don't much care. Lancet played politics to run cover for China who conducted US funded gain of function on coronaviruses in Wuhan because it supported their political narrative.
This is little different. All western institutions will fail because all western institutions are run by money grubbing cowards. The west will eventually die and we will be taken over by strongmen like Jinping or Putin. This brief liberal moment we had in an otherwise authoritarian history will be extinguished.
> This author appears to have an interesting way of seeing the world. Did you see their other publications?
No I did not, I am sure many fucked up people had "an interesting way of seeing the world".