TisButMe

6 ms·

1. 31.▲
   by TisButMe 11y ago

   I absolutely agree that sometimes, you need to redo an experiment for good reasons. In most cases I've seen, people do not know why they redo the experiment, though. They know it hasn't produced the data they expected, so they red
2. 32.▲
   by TisButMe 11y ago

   Yeah, I've seen this xkcd. It's on point as usual, but it doesn't show the frightening thing: it's the scientists who are going "Whoa" and believing in the results they've produced...
3. 33.▲
   by TisButMe 11y ago

   This is the same behaviour I've seen time and time again in biology labs. People there are re-doing the same experiment over and over until it gives them the result they want, and then they publish that. It's the only field where
4. 34.▲
   Show HN: A Graph Music Discovery Tool Using Spotify API(bandmap.me)

   1 points by TisButMe 11y ago|0 comments
5. 35.▲
   by TisButMe 11y ago

   I'm not sure. The stream of bubbles could have been the remaining dry ice sublimating, couldn't it ?
6. 36.▲
   by TisButMe 12y ago

   I'm French, I think I can speak/write English reasonably well, but I still have to correct myself sometimes over punctuations rules, yes. The rule I was taught is "every punctuation character that has a part over the writing
7. 37.▲
   by TisButMe 12y ago

   While I absolutely agree with the need for cheaper way to obtain data, I don't think this is the major problem we're going to face. We now have ways of obtaining mountains of data (RNA-chIP comes to mind, but high-speed sequencing