Is it possible they're doing a research lab "socialism style" and everyone gets equal credit for just being a part of the lab, regardless of actual input into the specific papers? If they're innovating in computer, maybe they're not so afraid of innovating in social/academic structures as well?
Sorry, didn't mean it like "yelling", I'm quite a fan of socialism and don't see it as any negative. I didn't think anything in my comment was negative.
It's negative in the sense it suggest some authors didn't contribute (or contribute little0 to the research, and were perhaps just warm bodies that happened to be present at a certain location
I don't see my comment suggesting that at all? Personally I like the approach, and felt it was a positive approach when I made my comment, apparently it reads very differently than that.
I understand your objection, and would like to retract my reading of your comment, it was sloppy.
This doesn't mean anything partisan to me, but I mentally auto-classified what you said as a partisan argument, and reacted in a knee-jerk way. I'm happy that the comment you are responding to still made a best-faith argument to explore possible implications of what I said, and what you said.
But I want to draw a sharp line of what I want to discuss here, and failed at doing that. Open discussion of economy and politics is interesting to me. I don't consider myself a communist or socialist, neither a fierce "anti-leftist".
But my comment did invite exactly this polarization, and I'm thankful that despite of it, there was still a constructive follow-up comment.
Sorry for the blunder on my part: I simply skimmed your comment while distracted, instead of reading it, then reacted reflexively.
I'd myself be confused by the accusation I made ("yelling about socialism") would it have been thrown at me when simply discussing some geopolitical/economy topic.
I am author in two author papers, but also in 200 author papers. Nothing wrong with it. In our field they are studies among a dozen centers, where each center has to do something and the results are pooled to some central hub. If I do a relatively easy data prep before sending to the hub, I go among the authors, it is just the way it works. A huge work that is spreaded thinly, or else can't be done unless you ask people to work without attributio. That might work once or twice, but not more, if you are the person who ask for favours but returns nothing.
It's not socialism to recognize the people who actually did the work. I realize it may seem to be capitalist to actually believe that managers or ceos are actually building products at all. But anyone who has worked an engineering role is well aware that's not how it goes and it's not capitalism to do that it's just crappy human behavior. Yea like how Elon musk is actually building those rockets while designing AI systems and new cars or huang is out there giving tips to the people designing the chips ...
A nice work perk is recognizing your teams accomplishments publicly. Give it a try. I hear even capitalists like to be treated as if they are human. Some dude named deming used to talk about workers pride. Sort of a smart guy I guess...
Again, not sure what makes people believe I don't like the approach or disagree with it, I was just replying what the reason could be to parent commentator. My previous comment has no negativity or anything, and you're barking up the wrong tree here.
The thing that makes people think you are against socialism is, this very website, which means towards American exceptionalism rather hard and socialism is the antithesis to that so it's often criticized here and by other right wing places
yipinwong · · focus · HN ↗
embedding-shape · · focus · HN ↗
tonmoy · · focus · HN ↗
moritzwarhier · · focus · HN ↗
embedding-shape · · focus · HN ↗
nextaccountic · · focus · HN ↗
embedding-shape · · focus · HN ↗
moritzwarhier · · focus · HN ↗
This doesn't mean anything partisan to me, but I mentally auto-classified what you said as a partisan argument, and reacted in a knee-jerk way. I'm happy that the comment you are responding to still made a best-faith argument to explore possible implications of what I said, and what you said.
But I want to draw a sharp line of what I want to discuss here, and failed at doing that. Open discussion of economy and politics is interesting to me. I don't consider myself a communist or socialist, neither a fierce "anti-leftist".
But my comment did invite exactly this polarization, and I'm thankful that despite of it, there was still a constructive follow-up comment.
Sorry for the blunder on my part: I simply skimmed your comment while distracted, instead of reading it, then reacted reflexively.
I'd myself be confused by the accusation I made ("yelling about socialism") would it have been thrown at me when simply discussing some geopolitical/economy topic.
alightsoul · · focus · HN ↗
otherme123 · · focus · HN ↗
antonvs · · focus · HN ↗
thatsabadlook · · focus · HN ↗
A nice work perk is recognizing your teams accomplishments publicly. Give it a try. I hear even capitalists like to be treated as if they are human. Some dude named deming used to talk about workers pride. Sort of a smart guy I guess...
embedding-shape · · focus · HN ↗
alightsoul · · focus · HN ↗