Dogyote @ Dogyote @slrpnk.net

Posts

2

Comments

218

Joined

2 yr. ago

Ballpark of how much your process cost? I'm seeing two lawyers and now I'm wondering how much convenience I can afford. Nothing wrong with convenience either, I'm just poor.

https://www.surepetcare.com/en-US

My pet door just reads their microchips. You can get a collar tag if they're not chipped.

Are the checks really random? If not, what would trigger one?

Analysts read the decision as the US government sending a stern warning to counter the calls for independent nuclear armament that have recently been surfacing in South Korea.

Here's the real reason.

True, but I feel like abuse would be fairly obvious and grant panels would know if someone is gaming the system. The panels, at least in my former field, are composed mostly of people who know who's doing what in their field. If they saw a high citation count they would know if that was legitimate. If anything, faking citations would be shameful and embarrassing for most people.

Your peers would know and they'd think you're pathetic. There'd be nothing to gain.

And Wuhan actually has a lab that was studying the COVID virus.

Ya got a source for that one?

I think so. Journals are only in use today because that's how scientific reporting was done before the internet. They're still around because institutions and academics need some way of keeping score. What's the point of it all if you can't say you're better than someone else?

Journals could be replaced with something like Wikipedia, but more sophisticated and editing would be a highly controlled process that requires reproducible data and peer review.

Score could be kept with citations. You'd be required to list the work you built on, as we do today, and the authors would receive credit. No citation would be worth more than another. If you published something useful for a particular field or made a major discovery that opened a new field, then your citation count would reflect it.

Perhaps competing labs could both receive citation credit if their results essentially showed the same thing. If nobody could scoop anyone else's work, then cooperation may be encouraged over competition.

The entire wiki would be a public good, funded by governments across the world, free for all to read and for those with the relevant credentials to publicly comment on.

Negative results could also be published. "We had this hypothesis, we tried this, it didn't work out." It'd probably save time and these works could be cited as well. Imagine making a very important mistake that saves everyone time and effort and being rewarded for it.

I also feel like there is opportunity here to expand a particular field's community. Since the wiki would be more free and open, academic silos may have more metaphorical doors, allowing more cross-field dialog.

I could go on, but I think the tools we need already exist, but we're not using them because... tradition. It would be easier, more efficient, and flexible to use some kind of wiki structure than what's currently happening.

Edit: I thought of one more thing. Searching for information could be so easy. Instead of finding a dozen papers (some slightly off topic, some of questionable quality, some poorly written, some your institution isn't subscribed to, etc) and review articles, all of the information could be easily compiled into review wikis. The level of detail could be easily changed depending on what you want and it would all be right there.

But there are enough. If there aren't, then stores can put limits on how many you can buy.

Implement fucking price controls before you beg for European eggs ffs

What a dumb story, there's nothing of interest on the calendar.

In January, Sennott attended a 15-minute meeting on DOGE recruiting. Less than two weeks later, he attended a meeting instructing "special government employees" (Musk's official designation) about the federal ethics rules that applied to them.

That's it.

Meh, what's the big deal? Isn't it good there's an anti-US presence here? I like the intellectual diversity they bring, even if they're often insufferable jerks about it.

That's it? Asking for trade embargos to be lifted? Are you serious?

Any good places where one could stream this?

but they have a different goal: they want drivers to feel like they're making progress instead of actually improving things.

Sorry but I want a source for that claim.

Okay, how then would you generalize this trait? We would expect an intelligent species to be social to some degree? It's hard to imagine how a species could evolve the capacity to achieve technological advances without cooperation between individuals.

A beak falls under "some kind of appendage"

Yeah... no, I don't think that can evolve naturally

I understand the sentiment, but there must be some number of common attributes all advanced intelligent species across the universe have. Tool use, for example, would require that the organism have some kind of appendage that can manipulate things.