605

(Yikes) (mander.xyz)

submitted 4 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] MBM@lemmings.world 146 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

A paper citing T. J. Kaczynski with the foot note "Better known for other work."
Edit: paper link

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 57 points 4 months ago

His other work was definitely more bombastic.

[-] nicknonya@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 4 months ago

he really blew up in popularity

[-] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 46 points 4 months ago

Shortcut for others like me who aren't familiar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski a.k.a the Unabomber.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 15 points 4 months ago

Is it for portraying Jim on The Office? That show was such a success that he really exploded onto the scene

[-] zaph@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 months ago

He really turned a pipe-dream into a reality.

[-] xantoxis@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

Probably his carpentry skills, man really knew how to build a cabin.

[-] godfilma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 4 months ago

PDF warning for those on smartphones

[-] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 53 points 4 months ago

"scandal noted"

[-] d00phy@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Came here for this.

[-] witty_username@feddit.nl 15 points 4 months ago

I'm out of the loop, what's the context?

[-] sundray@lemmus.org 33 points 4 months ago

From Urban Dictionary:

Created by Pete Holmes, comedian. While referencing a celebrity in a conversation for their popular unique quality, but not in relation to a current or past scandal, saying "scandal noted" acknowledges the issue, and avoids a tangent in the conversation.

[-] Console_Modder@sh.itjust.works 24 points 4 months ago

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago

On a somewhat related thought: There was a star trek voyager episode about using the findings of some war criminal to perform life-saving surgery.

The doctor ends up deleting the information in the end after the surgery and I always thought that was a seriously stupid take.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_Human

To me, even if information is obtained via awful means in the past, preserving knowledge is the far better choice in all circumstances, other than in the rare occasions where it will continue hurting others (not even sure when this would be the case).

And obviously upholding moral standards for research now and in the future.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Fruits of a poisonous tree: The idea is to not give these crimes justification and vindication. To prevent people from committing crimes in order to claim they did it for the greater good: some maniac could abduct and torture people and release the findings, accepting the consequences be it prison or death. But in their mind they are justified because their findings would help people eventually. If you don't accept the findings, then the criminal has no justification because no, there is no greater good. you just committed crimes.

similar to the right to privacy preventing police from using evidence from unlawful searches. you found a body, but you didn't have proper reasoning for the search so now the body doesn't exist as far as the courts are concerned. because otherwise the police would violate people's privacy all the time and eventually justify it by finding something.