obsoletehippo

Well, he describes some folks' work as "crackpot-level bullshit" and repeatedly states that other authors "have no idea what they're talking about". These seem to me to be personal critiques. Generally, I'm not sure the distinction you draw is quite so clear cut -- if I say somebody is great but all their work is hot garbage, that sounds fairly personal.

A real model of rigorous analytical thinking here: there are cases of fraud in academia, therefore all of academia is entirely fraudulent and should be dispensed with. Or it should take lessons from... the financial sector?!

Yes, there should be effort to address academic fraud. But no, we should not buy into conservative propaganda and torch our institutions of higher education.

You could use comments and track changes? It's really only techies who feel the need to turn writing text into a laborious version control problem.

I like how the Social Impact paragraph notes reduced labor costs, yay! Not e.g., reduced need for artists, so you're all out of a job.

Want to give any evidence of your Boogeyman Trudeau's efforts to punish the middle class?

Your solution to people messing up a McDonald's is to have them murdered by the government? Did I get that right?

I invite you to share your evidence that all private enterprises are strictly superior to any state owned enterprises, as that is clearly the stronger (and less likely to be valid) position.

So your faith in the competence of government oversight is what primarily prevents you from believing this piece of research is correct? That's an unusual stance for HN. :-) Both the companies and the government obviously have a financial/economic interest in not finding this out, if it's true. I find it pretty easy to believe, and I am a fairly pro-govt lefty type.

Take it easy; dude is just sharing his own personal opinions on life. YMMV. No need to get all exercised about it.