There’s a narrative I find kind of troubling, but that unfortunately seems to be growing more common in science. The core idea is that the mere existence of perverse incentives is a valid and sufficient reason to knowingly behave in an antisocial way, just as long as one first acknowledges the existence of those perverse … Continue reading No, it’s not The Incentives—it’s you
A long, long time ago (in social media terms), I wrote a post defending Facebook against accusations of ethical misconduct related to a newly-published study in PNAS. I won’t rehash the study, or the accusations, or my comments in any detail here; for that, you can read the original post (I also recommend reading this … Continue reading In defense of In Defense of Facebook
[UPDATE July 1st: I’ve now posted some additional thoughts in a second post here.] It feels a bit strange to write this post’s title, because I don’t find myself defending Facebook very often. But there seems to be some discontent in the socialmediaverse at the moment over a new study in which Facebook data scientists … Continue reading In defense of Facebook
There’s a long tradition in the academic blogosphere (and the offlinesphere too, I presume) of complaining that academia is a pyramid scheme. In a strict sense, I guess you could liken academia to a pyramid scheme, inasmuch as there are fewer open positions at each ascending level, and supply generally exceeds demand. But as The … Continue reading not really a pyramid scheme; maybe a giant cesspool of little white lies?
That’s a terribly constructed title, I know, but bear with me. A couple of weeks ago I blogged about a courtroom case in Tennessee where the defense was trying to introduce fMRI to the courtroom as a way of proving the defendant’s innocence (his brain, apparently, showed no signs of guilt). The judge’s verdict is … Continue reading fMRI, not coming to a courtroom near you so soon after all