Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Any good hard sci-fi RPGs?

Ol' Willy

Arcane
Zionist Agent Vatnik
Joined
May 3, 2020
Messages
24,569
Location
Reichskommissariat Russland ᛋᛋ
Just remember the next time you need a serious surgery done: the average black and hispanic medschool applicant in USA has an MCAT & GPA much lower than the average asian or white applicant. Don't be racist when you need that surgery.
As an Ami, tell me: how deep is that diversity bullshit rooted into the current American society? Hard to see the real picture from the Internet.
 

Silly Germans

Guest
I'm curious though, what current technology you think is indistinguishable from magic to those who understand how it works?

Lets start.

Quantum entanglement.
That is not a technology and the basics of entanglement aren't even difficult to understand. I think all that you need to do the math is a basic understanding how tensor product vector spaces work and some linear algebra, that's it.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
34
The time for 'nuanced argumentative reasoning' is long past flabby neckbeard. Hide in your basement and peck away some more on your keyboard far away from places where any of this matters. Everything is downstream from culture. Politics, education, literature, entertainment, etc. Here is a little undeserved assistance for you. (links below) Stop responding to me, I find your pseudo-intellectual m'lady posturing tiresome like so many of your ilk who fiddle while Rome has been burning for far too long. I've neither the time nor inclination to do the intellectual heavy-lifting for you when a simple web search would show you the dire situation. (first article from 2017, it is accelerating rapidly)

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/10...ach-seattle-kids-that-western-math-is-racist/
https://farleftfacts.org/white-people/math-yes-math-is-racist/

lol

one of us is definitely posturing for effect here but I think it's pretty obvious it isn't me
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
2,095
Location
DFW, Texas
lol

one of us is definitely posturing for effect here but I think it's pretty obvious it isn't me
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360
National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track
Wendy M. Williams and Stephen J. Ceci
PNAS April 28, 2015 112 (17) 5360-5365; first published April 13, 2015 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418878112

  1. Edited* by Richard E. Nisbett, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, and approved March 5, 2015 (received for review September 30, 2014)
Significance
The underrepresentation of women in academic science is typically attributed, both in scientific literature and in the media, to sexist hiring. Here we report five hiring experiments in which faculty evaluated hypothetical female and male applicants, using systematically varied profiles disguising identical scholarship, for assistant professorships in biology, engineering, economics, and psychology. Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced), with the exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference. Comparing different lifestyles revealed that women preferred divorced mothers to married fathers and that men preferred mothers who took parental leaves to mothers who did not. Our findings, supported by real-world academic hiring data, suggest advantages for women launching academic science careers.

Abstract
National randomized experiments and validation studies were conducted on 873 tenure-track faculty (439 male, 434 female) from biology, engineering, economics, and psychology at 371 universities/colleges from 50 US states and the District of Columbia. In the main experiment, 363 faculty members evaluated narrative summaries describing hypothetical female and male applicants for tenure-track assistant professorships who shared the same lifestyle (e.g., single without children, married with children). Applicants' profiles were systematically varied to disguise identically rated scholarship; profiles were counterbalanced by gender across faculty to enable between-faculty comparisons of hiring preferences for identically qualified women versus men. Results revealed a 2:1 preference for women by faculty of both genders across both math-intensive and non–math-intensive fields, with the single exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference. Results were replicated using weighted analyses to control for national sample characteristics. In follow-up experiments, 144 faculty evaluated competing applicants with differing lifestyles (e.g., divorced mother vs. married father), and 204 faculty compared same-gender candidates with children, but differing in whether they took 1-y-parental leaves in graduate school. Women preferred divorced mothers to married fathers; men preferred mothers who took leaves to mothers who did not. In two validation studies, 35 engineering faculty provided rankings using full curricula vitae instead of narratives, and 127 faculty rated one applicant rather than choosing from a mixed-gender group; the same preference for women was shown by faculty of both genders. These results suggest it is a propitious time for women launching careers in academic science. Messages to the contrary may discourage women from applying for STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) tenure-track assistant professorships.

[...]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ro-stumia-large-hadron-collider-a8564366.html
Cern physicist suspended over 'highly offensive' presentation on sexism in science

Professor Alessandro Strumia claims men in physics are discriminated against

A senior scientist at Cern has been suspended over a "highly offensive" presentation in which he claimed physics was "built by men".

During a seminar on gender issues in physics, and in front of a mostly female audience, professor Alessandro Strumia claimed men in the field were being discriminated against.

On Monday, officials at Cern, the world's largest particle accelerator, announced the suspension of the Italian scientist with "immediate effect", pending an investigation.

No, men are not the real victims of discrimination in physics
The Geneva-based centre, where the subatomic particle known as the Higgs boson was confirmed in 2013, said it had no prior knowledge of the content of Mr Strumia's presentation on "High Energy Theory and Gender".


A statement cited "attacks on individuals" as "unacceptable in any professional context".

Mr Strumia, of Pisa University, told the audience that female scientists in Italy tended to benefit from "free or cheaper university" education, and that Oxford University extends exam times "for women's benefit".

A spokesperson for Cern confirmed there was a slide presentation on Mr Strumia's talk online, but said a recording was not immediately available. The slides were later removed from the Geneva-based centre's website.
"I did a check to see if this was true ... and the result was, that was not true. There is a political group that wants women, and other people, to believe that they are victims."

Noting the suspension, Mr Strumia lashed out at the Geneva centre, but expressed hope that it would come around to his way of thinking.


"I believe Cern is making a mistake," he said. "They suspended me because it's true ... and it's contrary to the political line. And I hope Cern will at some point understand. I hope this is just the first self-preservation instinct.

"Somebody had to speak."

Laura Covi, who studies cosmology at Georg-August University in Goettingen, Germany, and was at the Friday seminar, said Mr Strumia's comments did not go down well.

"He was claiming that some of the positions women were getting, they're getting positions with fewer (journal) citations than men," she said. "I'm not so sure his thesis was supported by the data."

She acknowledged that some of the world's most eminent physicists have been men, but said that was "mostly a historical bias" since men have been able to study physics longer than women.

She also disputed that citations are an indicator of quality and said it was not her experience that female physicists landed jobs with fewer journal publications than men.

Ms Covi said Mr Strumia has frequently made provocative comments in the past and said after his presentation that he was challenged by many at the seminar – so much so that the chair had to abruptly end the session when it ran over.

"People were upset by what he was saying. And then he later started to make statements that were completely unscientific," she said.

"I don't think he represents the majority view. There were a few men who were there but they didn't support his view."

Dr Julie Moote of University College London, who had spoken earlier in the seminar, said it was a "shame" Mr Strumia "did not engage" with evidence from other presenters – including her research with more than 40,000 young people in England and interviews over time with youths aged 10 to 18.

"Findings show that young women do experience sexism in physics – from being told by a teacher that 'you need a boy brain to do physics', to survey data showing that boys feel they are encouraged more by their physics teachers than girls – which leads to a situation where even some of the highest attaining young women were doubting that they were 'clever enough' to do physics," Dr Moote said.

Cern is currently headed by a woman, Italian particle physicist Fabiola Gianotti.

Additional reporting by AP

Well that's strange. How could someone get fired from a big, international science institution for presenting scientific evidence? It's truly a mystery.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
34
I really don't have a dog in this fight since I find both sides almost equally distasteful, I wasn't trying to argue any particular stance and I don't understand what that has to do with what I posted. I intentionally kept to the most neutral terms possible. Seems to me some of you are just leaping at any potential chance to spout on about whatever political viewpoint you style yourself a champion of.



It appears to me like you are both attempting to use these citations to paint the opposite side as unreasonable, which seems unreasonable in and of itself to me since both sides are guilty of encompassing stupid shit like extremist ideologues completely ignoring scientific fact.

I apologize if I gave you the indication that I cared about or wished to debate whatever you're so passionate and fired up over, I assure you that is not the case.
 

MF

The Boar Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Messages
892
Location
Amsterdam
Lets start.

Quantum entanglement.

I see where you're going, but quantum entanglement is not technology, it's a concept used to describe an observed phenomenon.

A quantum computer would be the relevant technology, and that technology is in its infancy right now. If the most prevalent model for quantum entanglement still has to explain away what appears to be faster-than-light information transfer, that doesn't mean applying the concept is like magic. It means there is a knowledge gap regarding the theories that underlie the technology. The technology itself, in this case quantum computers, will not be considered magic.

It's within these knowledge gaps that we can speculate on science, which is what we were talking about in the first place. Maybe that's what Ranarama meant.

Which reminds me, here is a disclaimer: My academic background is in computer science and I'm not a physicist, so keep in mind my view on this subject is limited and biased. I know how qubits work and I know we might be on the verge of a cryptography crisis because of what quantum computers can theoretically do in terms of making the Rijndael block ciphers we currently use obsolete. I've been told getting a quantum computer to work is just an engineering problem at this point, but I couldn't tell you if that is true or not. The theory seems sound, but I'm not qualified to poke any holes in it if it weren't and I try not to talk out of my ass too much.


As for the other discussion going on in this thread: It's a minefield.

If six years of working in academia taught me anything, it's that politics sometimes get prioritized over research. STEM is resilient in that regard, but it is not immune. Academia is full of people sucking up to other people, quietly waiting for them to retire or die so they can get their chair. Not toeing the line can get you kicked off the precious tenure track. Irrelevant personal attributes also factor into it. Sometimes explicitly so. I'll quote from the Dutch NWO selection committee page: "NWO actively seeks to appoint more women to selection committees and juries". The outcome of that may be good, it may be bad, but on principle it doesn't sit right with me. The most bizarre thing is that under Dutch law, a statement like that is discriminatory and borderline illegal. Yet it is there. In plain sight. I wish it were based on merit alone, but it's not. Anyway, an equality of outcome debate belongs in GD, so I'll leave it at that.

Back to work so we can add one to the list.

On topic: Apparently the PnP I mentioned earlier already exists. The Expanse RPG.
 

Daedalos

Arcane
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
5,559
Location
Denmark
There's very few hard sci-fi rpgs, because they are fucking boring.

Add some fictional and fantastical elements, and you got yourself a gud setting
 

Deleted member 28561

Guest
Add some fictional and fantastical elements, and you got yourself a gud setting
Hard science fiction does not mean that there is nothing fictional or fantastical, only that what is there obeys the rules of our world. No magic, no impossible conveniences.
 

Silly Germans

Guest
Lets start.

Quantum entanglement.

I see where you're going, but quantum entanglement is not technology, it's a concept used to describe an observed phenomenon.

A quantum computer would be the relevant technology, and that technology is in its infancy right now. If the most prevalent model for quantum entanglement still has to explain away what appears to be faster-than-light information transfer, that doesn't mean applying the concept is like magic. It means there is a knowledge gap regarding the theories that underlie the technology. The technology itself, in this case quantum computers, will not be considered magic.

It's within these knowledge gaps that we can speculate on science, which is what we were talking about in the first place. Maybe that's what Ranarama meant.

Which reminds me, here is a disclaimer: My academic background is in computer science and I'm not a physicist, so keep in mind my view on this subject is limited and biased. I know how qubits work and I know we might be on the verge of a cryptography crisis because of what quantum computers can theoretically do in terms of making the Rijndael block ciphers we currently use obsolete. I've been told getting a quantum computer to work is just an engineering problem at this point, but I couldn't tell you if that is true or not. The theory seems sound, but I'm not qualified to poke any holes in it if it weren't and I try not to talk out of my ass too much.


As for the other discussion going on in this thread: It's a minefield.

If six years of working in academia taught me anything, it's that politics sometimes get prioritized over research. STEM is resilient in that regard, but it is not immune. Academia is full of people sucking up to other people, quietly waiting for them to retire or die so they can get their chair. Not toeing the line can get you kicked off the precious tenure track. Irrelevant personal attributes also factor into it. Sometimes explicitly so. I'll quote from the Dutch NWO selection committee page: "NWO actively seeks to appoint more women to selection committees and juries". The outcome of that may be good, it may be bad, but on principle it doesn't sit right with me. The most bizarre thing is that under Dutch law, a statement like that is discriminatory and borderline illegal. Yet it is there. In plain sight. I wish it were based on merit alone, but it's not. Anyway, an equality of outcome debate belongs in GD, so I'll leave it at that.

Back to work so we can add one to the list.

On topic: Apparently the PnP I mentioned earlier already exists. The Expanse RPG.

Afaik the main problem is the stability of the quantum superposition states on a macroscopic scale. It is possible to trap a single atom in a liquid-helium cooled matrix and use its spin states as qubits, but that's just one atom. You would need a large amount of them and the technical ability to prepare their these states reliably without destroying the superposition state of the whole ensemble to realize a useful quantum computer. On a large scale, you also have many interactions with the environment which causes decoherence of your pure quantum state, leading to a mixed state which means a loss of information. Overall I think quantum computers are on a similar level as fusion reactors. The physics is clear but the technical realization is a very large problem by itself which will take a long time to be solved and also is hindered by economical aspects. The initial investments are probably enormous and don't work well with our current economical system.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom