Usenet sci.phys. - can intelligence be obscene?

  • Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Intelligence
In summary, the conversation discusses the Usenet sci.phys. group and its members' use of profanity and knowledge of physics. John Baez is mentioned as an intelligent and respectful member, and it is noted that the only moderated groups in the sci.physics.* hierarchy are sci.physics.research and sci.physics.strings. The rest of the groups are described as full of arguments and unproductive discussions. The conversation ends with a mention of someone possibly being Ed Witten and a discussion on the need for moderation in these groups.
  • #1
Loren Booda
3,125
4
The Usenet sci.phys. (where people "use" each other). It is obvious these people know how to swear, but how well do they actually know their physics? I won't wade in their offal to find out. However, John Baez (the monitor?) seems intelligent and I've yet to see him use obscenities. Do they represent the physics community?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The only two groups of the sci.physics.* hierarchy that are moderated are sci.physics.research and sci.physics.strings, the two groups we carry here on physicsforums. The rest are basically chock-full of nuts and flame wars.

John Baez is a very accomplished professor at UCR -- you can definitely trust him.

- Warren
 
  • #3
Cool, I just sit back and tune into PF!
 
  • #4
The usenet groups are crap. To find anything worthwhile is quite an effort. Lots of idiots, lots of bad manners, not much else.
 
  • #5
I just saw a familiar name. Is that really Ed Witten posting at sci.physics.strings?
 
  • #6
If there is anyone here who thinks we shouldn't be moderating language or intervening as moderaters to keep people's attitudes in check needs only put on their highwaters and go wading over there to see why we do it.

I haven't even glanced at that place in over two years, and I don't miss it one bit.
 

1. What is Usenet sci.phys and why is it relevant to intelligence and obscenity?

Usenet sci.phys is a newsgroup that focuses on discussions and debates related to physics and science. The topic of intelligence and obscenity is relevant to this newsgroup because it often involves discussions about the ethical implications of scientific advancements and the potential misuse of intelligence.

2. Can intelligence be considered obscene?

This is a complex question that does not have a definitive answer. Some argue that intelligence can be used for obscene purposes, such as creating weapons of mass destruction, while others argue that intelligence in itself is not obscene but it is the actions of individuals that can be considered obscene.

3. Are there any laws or regulations in place to prevent the misuse of intelligence?

There are laws and regulations in place, such as international conventions and treaties, to prevent the misuse of intelligence in areas such as warfare and espionage. However, the effectiveness of these laws is debatable and there are often loopholes and ways to circumvent them.

4. How can we ensure that intelligence is used for the betterment of humanity rather than for obscene purposes?

There is no easy answer to this question. Some suggest implementing stricter regulations and oversight on scientific research and advancements, while others believe that promoting ethical principles and values within the scientific community is key. Ultimately, it requires a combination of efforts from individuals, institutions, and governments.

5. Are there any notable examples of intelligence being used obscenely in history?

There are many examples throughout history, such as the development and use of atomic bombs during World War II, the creation and use of chemical weapons, and the use of intelligence for political gain and manipulation. These examples serve as reminders of the potential dangers and consequences of using intelligence in an obscene manner.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
650
Replies
8
Views
906
  • Programming and Computer Science
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
79
Views
5K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
27
Views
4K
Back
Top