#buzzword

diane_a@diasp.org

"Whenever you see the words “ads”, “cryptocurrency”, “blockchain”, “web 3”, or “AI”, just replace them with “farts” and you’ll know whether you want them or not.

“Can the fediverse survive without farts?”

Yes, perfectly well.

“Will farts replace people?”

I hope not.

“The European Commission embraces farts.”

That’s unfortunate.

“This new startup wants to improve your life with farts.”

I’m good, thanks.

#SiliconValley #BigTech #farts #buzzword #bullshit #ads #adtech #blockchain #ai #web3"

https://mastodon.sdf.org/@aral@mastodon.ar.al

I'd replace"farts" with "hot steaming pigshit"

"Can I replace static text web pages with JavaScript (hot steaming pigshit)?
No. Just no.

drnoam@diasp.org

#Bullshit in the #Sustainability and #Transitions #Literature: a #Provocation

by Julian #Kirchherr

#Research on sustainability and transitions is burgeoning. Some of this research is helping to solve humankind’s most pressing problems. However, as this provocation argues, up to 50% of the articles that are now being published in many interdisciplinary sustainability and transitions journals may be categorized as “scholarly bullshit.” These are articles that typically engage with the latest sustainability and transitions #buzzword (e.g., circular economy), while contributing little to none to the scholarly body of knowledge on the topic. A typology of “scholarly bullshit” is proposed which includes the following archetypes: boring question scholarship, literature review of literature reviews, recycled research, master thesis madness, and activist rants. Since “scholarly bullshit” articles engage with the latest academic buzzwords, they also tend to accumulate significant citations and are thus welcomed by many journal editors. Citations matter most in the metric-driven logic of the academic system, and this type of scholarship, sadly, is thus unlikely to decrease in the coming years.

#ShitAcademicsSay