I clicked thinking this article was going to be about diplomacy on behalf of science then got struck with science on behalf of diplomacy – it felt a bit conceited given the situation science currently finds itself in (see The Unmaking of the American University). Maybe these particular scientists are actually good at their field, but the article kinda reads like this is advocating for more technocrats with poorly tested theories.

I’m a career academic, so I’m hardly an anti-intellectual, but I think we need to be a little more reserved in our assertions about how much we know. Especially about social subjects which are inherently difficult to study.

Ain’t a democratic election unless there’s a lottery option on the ballot.

Nah, they’d all try to creep their prices up, but they already do that constantly. Public anger doesn’t keep them in check, competition does. Now I’m sure inflation would become a problem in the same way stimulus checks cause inflation, but that just requires increased taxes to balance – and that’s the real problem with UBI, congress would have to automate taxation to some extent and actually tax people.

I’m glad they mentioned big old fat fertile female fish (BOFFFFs). After learning about them, I’ve found fishermen holding up massive fish a tad upsetting. They’re basically natural immortals, which is an extremely useful resource if you’re interested in biological immortality. Doubly so for whales and other mammalian fishes.

If we’re gonna do entitlements, UBI is the way to do them. None of this transferring wealth from one generation to another with social security that won’t exist in twenty years. No need to worry about pensions or retirement. No need to worry about food stamps getting cut off by the next politician. Just straight wealth redistribution.

deleted by creator

“Took a sabbatical to learn [skill]”

I suppose, if they can survive that.

I can’t tell if this was a criticism of me or an agreement with me, lol. But, yeah, it’s a lot more important to know what’s physically going on and communicate on that level than to worry about subtle differences between definitions. What’s physically going on is the why.

Did you know it’s better for the environment to keep an old gas car running than to buy a new electric vehicle? It’s the same principle. One Polyester shirt that lasts 20 years is better than 20 cotton shirts degrading year after year.

This is entirely inconsistent with my experience, so I suspect there is no correlation. My polyester shirts are silky and breathable, and my cotton blankets are rough and scratchy. I’m sure you have your on experiences that seem to validate your view, so I suspect there is no correlation. Perhaps there is some other processing factor that determines how comfortable or breathable a fabric turns out to be.

Only difference I’ve reliably seen between cotton and polyester is that cotton degrades faster, which makes you buy clothes more often. If you throw clothes away a lot, cotton is better for the environment. If you wear clothes until they’re unusable, polyester is better for the environment.

Doesn’t matter what Americans want – America isn’t a democracy. America’s electoral oligarchy system is meant to placate the people without giving them any agency, power, or meaningful control over how the society they live in functions. They can protest all day every day, and it’ll only have an effect if they convince an oligarch.

I was under the impression AI has been doing this for math for quire a while? I’m told Mathematicians complain about the proves being inelegant, even if technically correct.

So… ICE will know both your location and face every time you get in your car? Yeah, I’m sure this won’t result in a genocide. ^/s

Yeah, on the last one of these I basically just said good for them. Even now, I’m more concerned with the US actively reducing science spending than with what’s going on in China. Frankly, China doesn’t matter to me one way or another since I can’t speak their language. I’m more interested in Europe since they might to put money into “defense” that actually funds research, and that might make for a good place to relocate to that speaks more English.

You know, when all this started I was telling people that it’s not as simple as out spending the US in science because most countries don’t have the infrastructure, but here we are in the second year of Trump’s second term with NIH research being strangled, and now I’m having to expand my post-doc search internationally because no one seems to have the money to hire me in the US. I don’t know what will happen the US science infrastructure if there’s no money to hire people to use it, but we’re quickly reaching a point where US researchers don’t have an option but to move overseas to anywhere with the infrastructure capacity to take us. That infrastructure doesn’t appear over night, so some of us may be out of luck, but we can share a lot of existing infrastructure and work in sub-par labs if other countries are willing to hire – and if they continue to expand their infrastructure in the long term I suspect many won’t return to the US even if it does restart science funding.

Also, have any other Americans stopped saying “we” in reference to America? Like it’s the place I started, but…

The politics isn’t a problem I can solve as an individual.

Welp, that settles it. I’ll just have to live forever.

For what it’s worth, a lot of synthetic biologists are looking into Carbon Concentrating Mechanisms (e.g. carboxysomes) so that we can improve carbon capture in native plants. Honestly, as a protein engineer / synthetic biologist myself there’s even odds I could end up working on it too; though, it’s not my first choice.

I’m pretty sure short-sightedness is more a result of patience and critical thinking, but outdoors might help near-sightedness.