apathy

13 ms·

61.
by apathy 8y ago
It wasn’t always that way. There were people (especially in operations) that used it as a guide for certain decisions. I was disappointed when the slogan was retired.
62.
by apathy 8y ago
I sometimes agree to review out of a sense of obligation, where I know damned well that the authors recommended me, but you’re right, that’s not networking per se. There’s no reasonable expectation of benefit and it would be unethical as he
63.
by apathy 8y ago
I claim that it’s better to request major revisions than recommend rejection, but that’s mostly due to my lack of faith in authors. Too many examples of “oh well, let’s try the next journal” and not enough of “gee maybe we should fix these
64.
by apathy 8y ago
Well, yeah, but learning to review is less difficult than learning how to communicate clearly, crisply, and forcefully. So in a well administered review, most benefits accrue to the authors even if the reviews are poorly done, so long as th
65.
by apathy 8y ago
Well, yeah, but without students & postdocs it is very difficult to make a material impact on your field of endeavor. There’s also an ulterior motive for some lines of work, where sending a paper to be critically reviewed by rivals is a
66.
by apathy 8y ago
Not really. If work is flawed, it will need to be fixed before recommending it to readers (which is now the only marginal value provided by editors). If it appears to be unfixable, the correct choice may be to recommend that it not be endor
67.
by apathy 8y ago
China and Nigeria are the types of state actors that might provide that sort of persistent abuse. Two billion people living in an autocracy ... if Google still believed in Don’t Be Evil, this would not be acceptable.
68.
by apathy 8y ago
Ugh, old Cisco trash Didn’t Pakistan advertise a /28 at one point that blackholed YouTube? Good times. (/s)
69.
by apathy 8y ago
Most of it is.
70.
by apathy 8y ago
Rare, for the individual. Common, for congress
71.
by apathy 8y ago
As my advisor used to say when I hit low motivation phases, “stupid people get PhDs all the time. What’s taking you 5 years?”
72.
by apathy 8y ago
You’ll never get anything done if you give in to this sort of analysis paralysis.
73.
by apathy 8y ago
Ironic for Theo to call someone else an asshole. Putting people on the defensive is a great way to not get what you want. https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20060930232710
74.
by apathy 8y ago
You have to pay a subscription for dark mode (“don’t hurt my eyes” mode)? No thank you
75.
by apathy 8y ago
I will join the chorus in saying thanks. It’s not perfect, and for me it was complementary to Mathematica, but I defended my dissertation in 2013 and need to revisit. It attacks a hard, hard problem and I’m super happy that it will eventual
76.
by apathy 8y ago
For profit is fine, although their APCs are much higher for OA. The trouble is that even if you do pay the APC, journals routinely screw around by delaying or "erroring" the open version to try and extort suckers. (And they wonder
77.
by apathy 8y ago
> I realize that it costs money to publish journals and papers Not that much. Nature sends me paper versions of most of their journals for free (so does Blood, so do some others) for (as far as I can tell) the sole purpose of getting me
78.
by apathy 8y ago
Automation will destroy certain jobs (as did cars for buggy whips). What pisses me off (and I believe ought to piss off others) is the monetizing of these types of works behind paywalls (as Nature and Science, the journals, are wont to do)
79.
by apathy 8y ago
Should Nature disclose negative societal consequences (real, and present, not predicted)? It’s not like CS researchers are the ones turning science into a dumpster fire to sustain 30% profit margins. Most of the more hysterical screeching
80.
by apathy 8y ago
Just FYI, as an author and reviewer for some of these journals, I would suggest that the value added by their news pieces can be compensated for (and not in a good way) by professional editors in pursuit of "impact". The review pr
81.
by apathy 8y ago
This paper is lovely (and the authors do not spare themselves criticism, which is admirable in itself). Mathiness is something that can usually be detected by reverse engineering the work and seeing if a derivation was important. Unfortunat
82.
by apathy 8y ago
If only NIH agreed. “You know what we need? More funding for shitty underpowered studies in immunocompromised mice, and less funding for analysis & methods work. Besides, if they’re any good, AmaGooFaceSoft will just steal them anyways.
83.
by apathy 8y ago
Having discussed lab budgets etc with an Indian colleague just recently, I no longer feel justified to bitch about funding... possibly forever. It was a necessary perspective check
84.
by apathy 8y ago
Alternately, there is some indication that little of value would be lost if the journals themselves disappeared. I hear there’s some sort of intertubes system to more efficiently disseminate papers for review & reading nowadays
85.
by apathy 8y ago
Why bother? The only time I have to email other PIs regarding their papers are when protocol steps are missing or when data has not been deposited. And in about half of those instances, it simply reminds me why I love not relying on the “go
86.
by apathy 8y ago
Fun: http://xcelab.net/rm/statistical-rethinking/ Rigor: Feller vol 1, Casella & Berger 2e
87.
by apathy 9y ago
You are proposing that a reduced dimensional projection of a large dataset cannot approach this limit? I.e. expose the underlying low rank of nearly any huge sparse data matrix with an SVD or NMF. Enable fast recovery with a shitty (CS-wise
88.
by apathy 9y ago
Just a thought: When Cover & Hart proved that the error for k-NN classification is no worse than twice the Bayes (optimal) error, "machine learning" as a phrase had not yet been observed in the wild. http://ieeexplo
89.
by apathy 9y ago
Serious question: does your company have a clause in the service contract that forbids disclosing, documenting, or photographing potentially catastrophic bugs in the software? Aka do you work for Epic
90.
by apathy 9y ago
More interesting would be if anyone can find a physician who actually "appreciates" EHRs. I watched a few with 50+ years in practice decide to retire upon Epic rollout. EHRs are a farce. They've made a few people very wealt

More ›