By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates.

FIT_Gamer on 26 January 2017

SegataSanshiro said:

Not a religious person but  I actually hope for this. No joke.

Not religious either. I just had to put in a way I wouldn't get banned for lol. 

bunchanumbers said:

You mean you wouldn't mind if the "Dark Lord" "Needs a realtor" in the near future.

lol That's truer way of putting it. 



Around the Network
Scoobes on 26 January 2017
fatslob-:O said:
Scoobes said:

You really don't understand how state funded science works.

Unless it's DARPA or some other defense spending or a private entity owns the IP for the data, then you have every right to know (up to you if you're happy with giving up that right). Public research thrives on being an open platform and even private companies will present their findings at major conferences and spread the word on social media although not all the proprietary details (at least until a patent is filed). Having a robust social media policy is not the same as a complete gag order.

LOL, what right ? 

Does the constitution guarantee that the government have to share research results ? No 

Does any federal law exist that says that the government have to disclose any research results ? No 

Feelings don't help in this argument, only facts matter. 

should be =/= actual 

Only facts matter...  ironic statement considering we're talking about the Trump administration.

You may want to check your own public access policies. There are public policies in the US regarding access to federal funded research. NIH for instance makes all biomedical papers that have been funded either wholly or partially by them be deposited in Pubmed Central 6 months after publication so they can be freely viewed by anyone. 

You're also forgetting the Freedom of Information Act which would apply in many cases here.  

Those are the facts. 




Get your Portable ID!

Lawlight on 26 January 2017
konnichiwa said:
Lawlight said:
And for the record:

http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/obama-gag-order-on-federal-workers-like-those-under-bush.html

That's equally bad...why does stuff like this get accepted?

Because it wasn't done by Trump - that's why it's ok.

 

Also, people are ignoring this:

http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/25/trump-administration-reverses-course-says-epas-climate-page-will-remain/



Scoobes on 26 January 2017
DonFerrari said:
Scoobes said:

Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn etc. There are a lot of different people on these sites. 

They each have individuals and groups dedicated to the pursuit of science and discussion of different fields.

On facebook alone there are groups of scientists dedicated to Bioinformatics for Next Gen Sequencing, Biochemical Engineering, there's even a group dedicated to the CRISPR/Cas-9 enzyme. Some of the more popular or mainstream ones would include Brian Cox, Carin Bondar or I Fucking Love Science (IFLS). All the major companies involved in science research also have their own dedicated pages. 

On Twitter these sames scientists tweet about their work or comment on the latest advances. 

LinkedIn is a bit more obvious as it's a professional networking site but you get the idea. 

Those aren't sites... I though you were talking about something else. So you are basically saying some pages inside the social media, ok.

Have this decree ordered that they can't participate in discussion or that they can't release information by themselves? There is a big difference.

And the place for major scientific discussion are usually universities, companies, simposiuns, etc. Not twitter.

They can't post anything work related on social media, so those social media groups would count, effectively eliminating discussion on these sites. 

And science is a growingly collaborative endeavour. Social media sites are an instanteous way to bounce ideas off from scientists around the world. Of course that happens in the smaller groups within a university or company but it has far greater reach on social media. Conferences/sympossiums are also great but they take time to setup and are costly. 




Get your Portable ID!

Lawlight on 26 January 2017
Scoobes said:
DonFerrari said:

Those aren't sites... I though you were talking about something else. So you are basically saying some pages inside the social media, ok.

Have this decree ordered that they can't participate in discussion or that they can't release information by themselves? There is a big difference.

And the place for major scientific discussion are usually universities, companies, simposiuns, etc. Not twitter.

They can't post anything work related on social media, so those social media groups would count, effectively eliminating discussion on these sites. 

And science is a growingly collaborative endeavour. Social media sites are an instanteous way to bounce ideas off from scientists around the world. Of course that happens in the smaller groups within a university or company but it has far greater reach on social media. Conferences/sympossiums are also great but they take time to setup and are costly. 

But is there a ban on releasing the information? 



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 26 January 2017
Scoobes said:
DonFerrari said:

Those aren't sites... I though you were talking about something else. So you are basically saying some pages inside the social media, ok.

Have this decree ordered that they can't participate in discussion or that they can't release information by themselves? There is a big difference.

And the place for major scientific discussion are usually universities, companies, simposiuns, etc. Not twitter.

They can't post anything work related on social media, so those social media groups would count, effectively eliminating discussion on these sites. 

And science is a growingly collaborative endeavour. Social media sites are an instanteous way to bounce ideas off from scientists around the world. Of course that happens in the smaller groups within a university or company but it has far greater reach on social media. Conferences/sympossiums are also great but they take time to setup and are costly. 

I would bet most companies also ban communication of the work performed inside in any public outlet.

But wellcome to what several classic liberals would tell you. The more power the government have the more power it will use against you.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

UnderstatedCornHole on 26 January 2017

No government organisation in any country and more so private for there matter would tolerate this kind of partisan shit in the work place.

The republicans are in power. Deal with it or leave your post.



UnderstatedCornHole on 26 January 2017

This is gross miss conduct and I'd say the same whoever was at the top.
Can't believe the naivety of the usual suspects excusing this crap as good people doing their civic duty.
Completely unacceptable.



Scoobes on 26 January 2017
Lawlight said:
Scoobes said:

They can't post anything work related on social media, so those social media groups would count, effectively eliminating discussion on these sites. 

And science is a growingly collaborative endeavour. Social media sites are an instanteous way to bounce ideas off from scientists around the world. Of course that happens in the smaller groups within a university or company but it has far greater reach on social media. Conferences/sympossiums are also great but they take time to setup and are costly. 

But is there a ban on releasing the information? 

They can publish in Journals but that's hardly accessible to the wider public considering most people wouldn't know where to look to find these journals or the fact that many are still behind paywalls.

In the absence of a publicly open forum (social media in this case) for them to present their own research to the public (or correct misconceptions) they will be open to manipulation from the media and the administration to fit whatever narrative they wish with little to no chance of rebuttal from the scientist.

This sort of stuff is already happening and that's with scientists able to publicly complain of misrepresentaion let alone with a gagging order in place. 




Get your Portable ID!

DonFerrari on 26 January 2017
Scoobes said:
Lawlight said:

But is there a ban on releasing the information? 

They can publish in Journals but that's hardly accessible to the wider public considering most people wouldn't know where to look to find these journals or the fact that many are still behind paywalls.

In the absence of a publicly open forum (social media in this case) for them to present their own research to the public (or correct misconceptions) they will be open to manipulation from the media and the administration to fit whatever narrative they wish with little to no chance of rebuttal from the scientist.

This sort of stuff is already happening and that's with scientists able to publicly complain of misrepresentaion let alone with a gagging order in place. 

After published in any outlet anyone can repass that information as much as they want, so?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."