This is already something people brag about / look at as a measure of success. There are plenty of free websites to keep track but the most popular one is Google Scholar.
Perhaps competing labs could both receive citation credit if their results essentially showed the same thing.
When I find multiple good papers that have the information I need, I cite all of them, and even feel happy about it because citing a lot of papers can make your paper look like you put in more work.
If nobody could scoop anyone else's work, then cooperation may be encouraged over competition.
It’s a bit hard to completely do away with scooping. A possibly more practical way to increase cooperation would be to eliminate the idea of the “first author” getting the majority of the credit. It’s really annoying when like 5 people heavily contributed to the paper but whoever’s name is listed first ends up getting 90% of the credit because that’s what people look for.
The idea of doing things in a wiki format is interesting though.
That’s assuming the user knows that and didn’t just buy a prebuilt tower from Costco, and that it isn’t a laptop or something where changing the motherboard is much harder if not impossible.
Things like lectures I agree are actually better online than in person, but there’s a lot about university learning that can’t really be replicated online.
The most obvious thing being physical demonstrations and hands on projects, which I had in several physics and engineering classes.
Also I think in-person works better for discussion sections or office hours, where talking it out and writing it on a board is often easier to do in person than online (although there are tools for these things online).
Another big thing you’d miss out on by studying online is the whole social aspect of living away from your parents and with other people your age and making friends and going to parties and such.
Honestly I don’t really want a smart context-aware Siri, I just want something I can give simple, straightforward voice commands to, and get predictable, reliable results.
Honestly when I’m dubious of the quality of a product, I look for the negative reviews. If the only negative reviews are people clearly being dumb or really minor gripes, I take that as a good sign. If there are very few or no negative reviews, that’s a red flag that something fishy is going on.
If Hoyo signed the SAG agreement then they would have to either force the non-SAG actors to join SAG against their will or replace the non-SAG actors with a SAG actor
Yes, I think you’re right. Games perform better when they call Denuvo less frequently. Therefore, for optimal performance, games should call Denuvo 0 times.
There should be options avoiding AC depending on your scenario. Most laptops charge off of DC. Easiest way would be if all your things support USBC or similar.
A lot of this is kinda already happening.
This is already something people brag about / look at as a measure of success. There are plenty of free websites to keep track but the most popular one is Google Scholar.
When I find multiple good papers that have the information I need, I cite all of them, and even feel happy about it because citing a lot of papers can make your paper look like you put in more work.
It’s a bit hard to completely do away with scooping. A possibly more practical way to increase cooperation would be to eliminate the idea of the “first author” getting the majority of the credit. It’s really annoying when like 5 people heavily contributed to the paper but whoever’s name is listed first ends up getting 90% of the credit because that’s what people look for.
The idea of doing things in a wiki format is interesting though.