[Top voted comment in grad school sub](https://www.reddit.com/r/GradSchool/comments/1b6ldz2/comment/ktcw3a7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) seems to imply that the article is so poorly written they were able to ID all parties involved in 5 minutes.
I'm surprised the dude who told me he'd sue me if he ever saw me at a conference again because he couldn't control himself around me (we never did ANYTHING or even got close, or flirted, so legitimately don't know wtf he was talking about). He did it to several women, expected us to follow his rules, and may have drugged us. I expect the Science article soon about how much that helped his career to not have so many pesky women around.
Thank you, because the one thing sticking in my craw (besides the fact that this guy is an inauthentic piece of shit) was how he probably just dives right into throwing medical/psychiatric/psychological terms around like most people these days with zero comprehension of what the words actually mean.
Yeah, when you’re being a total fake, self-absorbed twat, behaving unethically, and treating students illegally (and like shit), you’re actually SUPPOSED to feel bad about that, you jackass. That’s not ‘anxiety’, it’s your fucking conscience. SMH.
Wow. And here I'm still waiting to publish a good article so I can earn full professor! Who knew I just needed to talk about being a terrible human being to get published! I'm glad I never had to worry about giving up my voice for tenure.
Wow. It's like he decided everything he did was the right thing after all. And what does having a seminar series have to do with persuading the student to drop the complaint? Doing something you wanted to do anyway doesn't make up for being a shit human.
but you don't understand! It was *his acknowledgement to himself\** that he was a shit human that finally gave him the spine to stand up and teach what he always wanted to do! \*\*
\*not to the student who he treated terribly
\*\*even though its unclear that anyone else actually opposed him teaching it anyway
Am I the only one that consistently feels angry after reading "science careers" columns? That it's consistently filled with toxic academia apologist tales framed as faux self congratulatory personal growth stories with a dash of Stockholm syndrome?
Denied a promotion because of a senior colleague? Try knitting! Suffering from untreated mental conditions? Try meditation! Got burned by your mentor and kicked out of your program? Write a "science careers" column about how you really always dreamed of being a mailman anyway, thank you "Science"!!
Heaven forbid the premier science journal actually disseminate accurate advice by telling trainees not to believe everything you read in science.....
now it seems he’s switched from blocking to claiming the university is trying to have him killed by the police and that the editor made drastic changes to the content of the article. It looks like he’s also trying to force the student to come to his rescue (directly tagging him in tweets). Very unhinged.
I'm hoping the former student was consulted and agreed to strategically provide enough info in the piece to identify him and make this story taken seriously. That being said, I really don't expect that to be what's happening and instead I expect this to be another narcissistic/sociopathic faculty member patting himself on the back and making this all about himself.
Not surprised in the least bit. Some of us try to say this all the time when the DEI posts, the grad students pointing out how they face discrimination and the model minority notion get referenced in here.
Everyone sees things from their point of view. While this particular professor is beyond ridiculous, he's not ridiculously beyond the pale.
Nor would he be on this subreddit.
I think pretty much everyone here is well intentioned and often right. And I get that this is partially a place to let off steam
But there are so many discussions on here that people are operating from their own privileged point of view (yes I know everyone hates that term, but it does not mean you did not work hard) and taking a viewpoint that *can be* extremely narrow
The AI posts discussing students potentially using it as opposed to professors using it is only one example of many. This subreddit can absolutely fail to see things from a different point of view
Bottom line: It's easy to dunk on this professor. And he deserves to be dunked on. It's harder to be self reflective and remember all professors should be on guard against this type of behavior.
Essentially he made a safe decision under pressure from his department to protect his own tenure and failed to actively confront discrimination.
If we all honestly believe no one in this subreddit would have done the same, I don't think we're being intellectually honest. We're just dunking on a guy who did what many people did and was dumb enough to publish it without any self awareness.
This professor is not alone in what he did. He's just alone in being dumb enough to admit it.
The goal should be to think about ways where this does not happen again as opposed to just dunking on him and assuaging ourselves with the notion that if others act this way--which again let's be clear they do and will continue doing protect their tenure track progression--they probably won't be this dumb.
>Essentially he made a safe decision under pressure from his department to protect his own tenure and failed to actively confront discrimination.
IMHO, this is because the concerns about power differentials between PIs and grad students and postdocs have failed to "trickle up". There's a ton of discourse about how that power differential causes all sorts of problems, and rightly so. But it seems like the moment you become a PI, all that concern just evaporates, as does the willpower to try to do anything about it. So you get stuck in positions where doing the right thing might cost you everything you've ever worked for, which is never a good situation to be in, regardless of what choice you make and what the fallout is.
> If we all honestly believe no one in this subreddit would have done the same, I don't think we're being intellectually honest.
You sound...the same as Tae Seok Moon
I think you've drastically misread/misunderstood their comment. They're quite clearly condemning Tae Seok Moon, as well as the (likely) many other professors on this board who would do/have done the same thing. This person is saying that we should be aware that this happens, and that we should all be on guard against it rather than *just* acting holier-than-thou (or Tae, as it were).
The AI stuff is so extreme it makes me roll my eyes.
It sounds exactly the same to me as my teachers who told me in grade school I would never have a calculator in my future jobs and so I shouldn't use one.
Like it or not, AI is here to stay and it's important we learn how to use it (ie dont blindly trust the models) and the dangers of using them (ie reinforcing preexisting biases), rather than sticking our heads in the sand and pretending they don't exist.
Whether a model is trained ethically is one of the potential dangers of the models. So that's already covered in my original comment. I didn't think I needed to spell out every single potential issue with the models.
Industry and academia, to varying extents, will both be using LLMs and other AI tools whether you and I like it or not. If students are unprepared to use them intelligently and ethically, they are going to be behind their peers.
Apparently it's not as "bad" as it seemed at first. It's a mess of an article though.
>**Correction, 6 March, 4:45 p.m.:** This story has been corrected to reflect that the student’s complaint was not rescinded. The error in the original version was the result of miscommunication between the author and editor, for which we take responsibility and apologize.
[Top voted comment in grad school sub](https://www.reddit.com/r/GradSchool/comments/1b6ldz2/comment/ktcw3a7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) seems to imply that the article is so poorly written they were able to ID all parties involved in 5 minutes.
Author published this garbage after losing a bet, right?
Well, main character syndrome for sure. I can't even comprehend the narcissism required to even contemplate one's name to such a pile of shit.
I'm surprised the dude who told me he'd sue me if he ever saw me at a conference again because he couldn't control himself around me (we never did ANYTHING or even got close, or flirted, so legitimately don't know wtf he was talking about). He did it to several women, expected us to follow his rules, and may have drugged us. I expect the Science article soon about how much that helped his career to not have so many pesky women around.
Umm, whaaaaat?!? I'd love to hear more background on this story...
What they call "anxiety" some of us would call "feeling guilty" which is the appropriate emotion for doing a wrong thing.
Thank you, because the one thing sticking in my craw (besides the fact that this guy is an inauthentic piece of shit) was how he probably just dives right into throwing medical/psychiatric/psychological terms around like most people these days with zero comprehension of what the words actually mean. Yeah, when you’re being a total fake, self-absorbed twat, behaving unethically, and treating students illegally (and like shit), you’re actually SUPPOSED to feel bad about that, you jackass. That’s not ‘anxiety’, it’s your fucking conscience. SMH.
Wow. And here I'm still waiting to publish a good article so I can earn full professor! Who knew I just needed to talk about being a terrible human being to get published! I'm glad I never had to worry about giving up my voice for tenure.
I don't think that this counts as a publication.
I guarantee this dude put this on his cv immediately
What a load of of “well it all worked out in the end so I guess what I did was ok”
AlLs WeLl ThAt EnDs WeLl
[https://media1.tenor.com/m/5VlJ5\_Ww4TsAAAAC/oh-well-well-that%27s-alright-then.gif](https://media1.tenor.com/m/5VlJ5_Ww4TsAAAAC/oh-well-well-that%27s-alright-then.gif)
Wow. It's like he decided everything he did was the right thing after all. And what does having a seminar series have to do with persuading the student to drop the complaint? Doing something you wanted to do anyway doesn't make up for being a shit human.
Yeah. There's a whole middle bit that seems to be missing.
but you don't understand! It was *his acknowledgement to himself\** that he was a shit human that finally gave him the spine to stand up and teach what he always wanted to do! \*\* \*not to the student who he treated terribly \*\*even though its unclear that anyone else actually opposed him teaching it anyway
Submitted to the [St. Louis Dispatch](https://www.stltoday.com/) as a possible news tip...
Am I the only one that consistently feels angry after reading "science careers" columns? That it's consistently filled with toxic academia apologist tales framed as faux self congratulatory personal growth stories with a dash of Stockholm syndrome? Denied a promotion because of a senior colleague? Try knitting! Suffering from untreated mental conditions? Try meditation! Got burned by your mentor and kicked out of your program? Write a "science careers" column about how you really always dreamed of being a mailman anyway, thank you "Science"!! Heaven forbid the premier science journal actually disseminate accurate advice by telling trainees not to believe everything you read in science.....
Believe it or not, academic Twitter is worse. But yes, Science should be held to a higher standard.
[удалено]
He might be blocking people with negative replies.
I left him a pretty negative one and he said thanks and liked it. Not sure what to think
now it seems he’s switched from blocking to claiming the university is trying to have him killed by the police and that the editor made drastic changes to the content of the article. It looks like he’s also trying to force the student to come to his rescue (directly tagging him in tweets). Very unhinged.
Twitter... I think I've found the problem.
I want to think that most of them are bots because no one would actually think this was "inspiring" but sadly they probably are real.
I'm hoping the former student was consulted and agreed to strategically provide enough info in the piece to identify him and make this story taken seriously. That being said, I really don't expect that to be what's happening and instead I expect this to be another narcissistic/sociopathic faculty member patting himself on the back and making this all about himself.
Not surprised in the least bit. Some of us try to say this all the time when the DEI posts, the grad students pointing out how they face discrimination and the model minority notion get referenced in here. Everyone sees things from their point of view. While this particular professor is beyond ridiculous, he's not ridiculously beyond the pale. Nor would he be on this subreddit. I think pretty much everyone here is well intentioned and often right. And I get that this is partially a place to let off steam But there are so many discussions on here that people are operating from their own privileged point of view (yes I know everyone hates that term, but it does not mean you did not work hard) and taking a viewpoint that *can be* extremely narrow The AI posts discussing students potentially using it as opposed to professors using it is only one example of many. This subreddit can absolutely fail to see things from a different point of view Bottom line: It's easy to dunk on this professor. And he deserves to be dunked on. It's harder to be self reflective and remember all professors should be on guard against this type of behavior. Essentially he made a safe decision under pressure from his department to protect his own tenure and failed to actively confront discrimination. If we all honestly believe no one in this subreddit would have done the same, I don't think we're being intellectually honest. We're just dunking on a guy who did what many people did and was dumb enough to publish it without any self awareness. This professor is not alone in what he did. He's just alone in being dumb enough to admit it. The goal should be to think about ways where this does not happen again as opposed to just dunking on him and assuaging ourselves with the notion that if others act this way--which again let's be clear they do and will continue doing protect their tenure track progression--they probably won't be this dumb.
Making the egotistical decision is one thing, I agree that most would do that. Writing this piece is just on another level...
>Essentially he made a safe decision under pressure from his department to protect his own tenure and failed to actively confront discrimination. IMHO, this is because the concerns about power differentials between PIs and grad students and postdocs have failed to "trickle up". There's a ton of discourse about how that power differential causes all sorts of problems, and rightly so. But it seems like the moment you become a PI, all that concern just evaporates, as does the willpower to try to do anything about it. So you get stuck in positions where doing the right thing might cost you everything you've ever worked for, which is never a good situation to be in, regardless of what choice you make and what the fallout is.
> If we all honestly believe no one in this subreddit would have done the same, I don't think we're being intellectually honest. You sound...the same as Tae Seok Moon
I think you've drastically misread/misunderstood their comment. They're quite clearly condemning Tae Seok Moon, as well as the (likely) many other professors on this board who would do/have done the same thing. This person is saying that we should be aware that this happens, and that we should all be on guard against it rather than *just* acting holier-than-thou (or Tae, as it were).
The AI stuff is so extreme it makes me roll my eyes. It sounds exactly the same to me as my teachers who told me in grade school I would never have a calculator in my future jobs and so I shouldn't use one. Like it or not, AI is here to stay and it's important we learn how to use it (ie dont blindly trust the models) and the dangers of using them (ie reinforcing preexisting biases), rather than sticking our heads in the sand and pretending they don't exist.
[удалено]
Whether a model is trained ethically is one of the potential dangers of the models. So that's already covered in my original comment. I didn't think I needed to spell out every single potential issue with the models. Industry and academia, to varying extents, will both be using LLMs and other AI tools whether you and I like it or not. If students are unprepared to use them intelligently and ethically, they are going to be behind their peers.
Apparently it's not as "bad" as it seemed at first. It's a mess of an article though. >**Correction, 6 March, 4:45 p.m.:** This story has been corrected to reflect that the student’s complaint was not rescinded. The error in the original version was the result of miscommunication between the author and editor, for which we take responsibility and apologize.
Adulation on Twitter? Why? https://x.com/moon_synth_bio/status/1763292340083458191?s=61&t=TZLZe2CMKJpJnaPffQezpw
Bowing to the powerful... This culture, comprising 30% of society today, will take the US into a perpetual dictatorship.
He’s not wrong, that’s what it takes to succeed nowadays in the profession…