Scientific Progress

juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 26 11:24:55 PDT 2016


On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:14:51 +0200
Tom <tom at vondein.org> wrote:

> Hello Kevin,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:43:09PM -0400, Kevin Gallagher wrote:
> > I do not claim that science is the enemy. It is the opposite.
> 
> Ah, great. However, there are a couple of people on the list, who do.


	Who are they, Tom? 


> My mail was merely directed at them, not at you personally. Sorry if
> it sounded that way!
> 
> > The scientific curiosity has become about what will make money, not
> > what is true.
> 
> Well well well, but I'd like to disagree (a little) - yes, the economy
> and politics have corrupted how scientific institutions work (note
> that I don't say "science" here) and therefore many scientists work in
> environments where they look for profitable solutions instead of
> gaining general knowledge. But on the other hand, there are still
> many many scientists fighting their way through the system.


	And where's the 'scientific' evidence for your propaganda claim? 

	Because you know even two minutes research should inform you of
	what's going on. Unless you are a willfully ignorant, fully
	biased cheerleader for the 'scientific' establishment.



> 
> I think it's you cannot generalize it that way. 


	Oh but you can generalize the other, patently false, way.


> You see,
> there are even scientists in Mongolia and I think you'll agree that
> it's absolutely impossible they are working for the powers that be :)


	Dude, the 'international' 'scientific' 'community' uses FUCKING
	IMPERIAL ENGLISH, and the universtity parasities in mongolia
	working for mongolia's national universities are no different
	from the parasites at harvard university or berlin university.
	or any other place. 


> 
> In other words: I still have hope that not all is lost!

	The fuck has 'hope' to do with truth.


> 
> > Scientific research influences all of society, and should
> > therefore consider ethics before publication.
> 
> The problem is, that knowledge is neutral and ethics depends on the
> people's current views.

	What.


> Nuclear fission works the same wether you look
> at it from 1945 or 2017.
> 
> Yes, many scary things have been discovered and published so far. But
> if all those scary things haven't been published when they were
> scary, we might very well still use horse-drawn carriages for
> transportation.
> 
> Look at it from the security industry perspective: full disclosure of
> vulnerabilities in software is way better than keeping this knowledge
> secret. A few who know about it (the NSA) can abuse it to gain power
> over other people, while nobody else is able to defend themselfes. So,
> making vulnerabilities public might give the bad boys tools to attack
> people, but it also gives everyone else the possiblity for defense.

	
	What has that got to do wiht corruption among state parasites?
	Rhetorical question. Answer : very little.

> 
> I think it is the same with general science. Better everyone knows it
> than just a few.

	True. And the relationship of that truism to the nature of the
	'scientific' establishment? None.  


> 
> > Currently, however, the system has been corrupted by wealthy
> > players who abuse it for personal gain.
> 
> Indeed. But there are scientists who are fighting against this.
> 
> > If you have not read the paper I mentioned in my previous email, I
> > really do suggest giving it a read. Rogaway argues many different
> > points in the paper, many of which I haven't covered in my emails.
> 
> I will do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best,
> Tom
>  




More information about the cypherpunks mailing list