this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
1764 points (99.1% liked)

Science Memes

19690 readers
1325 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] lmmarsano@group.lt -1 points 1 month ago (15 children)

What part of science is guilt by association fallacy? Rash judgement is at odds with science. Did you know criminals can associate with noncriminals?

To flip this around, ostracizing others "out of safety" for associating with ex-convicts (who had been processed & released to society) is morally compromised & dishonest, ie, immoral. Talking to someone who did something wrong doesn't imply you did something wrong. Neither does taking their money. Indulging fallacies is not a hallmark of scientific thought & is more consistent with the repressive, medieval thought scientists fought very hard to overcome.

Sages of major religions famously associated with undesirables: outcasts, untouchables, murderers, dangerous felons, etc. By the "logic" of that announcement, communities should have banned Buddha & Jesus (also mentioned in the Epstein files). Those that didn't were "deplorable" for "not taking firm action to protect" members "in light of" blanket "allegations" that fail to specifically accuse them. If they were sanctimonious enough, they too could have done "more".

Post needs text alternative for image of text.Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:

  • usability
    • we can't quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
    • text search is unavailable
    • the system can't
      • reflow text to varied screen sizes
      • vary presentation (size, contrast)
      • vary modality (audio, braille)
  • accessibility
    • lacks semantic structure (tags for titles, heading levels, sections, paragraphs, lists, emphasis, code, links, accessibility features, etc)
    • some users can't read the image due to lack of alt text (markdown image description)
    • users can't adapt the text for dyslexia or vision impairments
    • systems can't read the text to them or send it to braille devices
  • web connectivity
    • we have to do failure-prone bullshit to find the original source
    • we can't explore wider context of the original message
  • authenticity: we don't know the image hasn't been tampered
  • searchability: the "text" isn't indexable by search engine in a meaningful way
  • fault tolerance: no text fallback if
    • image breaks
    • image host is geoblocked due to insane regulations.

Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images.

[โ€“] Natanael 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

At some point it comes down to incentives, to not shun such terrible people just helps increase their influence. Accepting their money makes it look like you think what they did isn't bad. Terms like greenwashing exists just highlight this problem, we have to make it clear it's unacceptable to behave like that and that you can not buy your way out of consequences.

It's basic risk assessment

Literally everything else you're talking about is solved by ensuring due process is followed

load more comments (14 replies)