draq

"Certainly the increased use of computer models, such as GCMs, cries out for the separation of those who make the models from those who verify them. [...] an independent research institute [...] must fund more than one team to do research in a particular area, and the verification of results will be a foregone requirement: teams will know their results will be checked by other groups. In many cases, those who decide how to gather the data will not gather it, and those who gather the data will not analyze it."

Yes, we should take his opinion with a grain of salt, not because he is a science fiction author, but generally. I like to remind HN of the Royal Society's motto: Nullius in verba.

A more recent story concerning the resignation of a famous climate scientist, Lennart Bengtsson, former director of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, from a controversial lobby group due to what Crichton calls "consensus science": http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/climate-scientists...

"Quality software" can also contain fatal errors.

I don't know the title implies. Just because the production of something is expensive, doesn't mean that you have to charge money for its use (of course, it would be very legitimate to do so).

If it was hosted by the Royal Society, wouldn't it be on their website (https://royalsociety.org/events/?type=all&direction=past)?

I think this is another example of the QWERTY effect. Obviously, there are many pieces of word processing software that are superior, but he is so used to his system that, to him, the transaction cost outweighs the opportunity cost.

Your comment manages to be on top despite having little content. So?

EDIT: HN is not a journalistic site. So don't worry about the decline of journalism in this context.

Personally, I think it is very legitimate to appeal to sentiments, because of the three means of persuasion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric_%28Aristotle%29) pathos foremost agitates people to actions. And sometimes, it is necessary to act (and inform the public). That you disagree with others on this very issue is no reason for insult.

I thought the introductory statement is ironical, but, apparently, it is not. I don't think this article resounds well within the HN community since it is a "mainstream space" that is being criticized. However, despite its polemic nature, it is a worthwhile read, a representative neo-Marxist critique, that you won't often find on HN.

<irony>Infrastructure provided for free by MPS?</irony>

No, but again, sociopathy is currently more an insult than a clearly defined "disorder".

So data and information are irreversibly lost? In the Age of Internet?

Exposure to air. The higher, the windier, the farther the spores get.

Not necessarily, but maybe the employer is subtly implying: "Old people don't need apply."

But if the employer wrote the job description with the intention of causing potential sexual arousal (e.g. if that perk is amongst free beers, chocolate and "frothy milk"), you are definitely objectified.

Your title is extremely misleading. I cannot possibly think why giving the students a third option is indentured servitude. If anything, it liberates the students from the servitude of their student loans.

I think it's alien.