When I want to get something done, I pick up a language and make it happen. When I want to learn a language for no particular reason, I pick up a tutorial, poke around, and forget about it within a few days. My first language was POV-Ray. Computer graphics. Raytracing. Kinda outdated now, but at the time it was something interesting to focus my energy on. I like the idea of one of those BASIC Stamps or Lego MindStorms. I think the best approach it to choose a goal rather than a language.
Interesting. I've read plenty of sketchy papers, but didn't make it far enough that I was ever asked to peer-review. Without attempting to put any magnitude it, I'd agree that omission with just enough sloppiness for plausible deniability is a big problem. For me the fear of even approaching any sort of gray area was much stronger than the necessity to publish, and I like to imagine most people feel the same way.
On your main point, another commenter said, "Being a good researcher is about doing something no one else has done, no matter how small, and being rigorous about reporting the results," and I was inclined to agree, but this seems to be in conflict with your opinion that, "drive and hard work is mistaken for aptitude to do science." Maybe the distinction lies in the difference between good science and great science. I see good scientists around me succeeding because they work incredibly hard, many of them sacrificing health and relationships to get there. I've only known a few great scientists, and they worked very hard but also had great insight and, interestingly enough, led incredibly well-rounded lives. An accomplished pianist, a runner and devoted husband, etc. All delightful people I feel privileged to have met. I tried very hard to be the second type, and to make a long story short, I'm no longer a scientist at all. It's looking like web development with an option to pull a Chris McCandless and disappear entirely. I think I had a lot to offer and wish things had worked out differently. Always nice to know someone else is at least as bitter as I am though! Good luck to you!
I'm not sure I'd agree, but it could just reflect different experiences. I haven't personally seen pressure to produce results so great that people started lying or cheating out of fear just to get ahead. My experience—and I think I failed in grad school because I couldn't conform to this— is that the pressure to produce an acceptable quantity of publications results in a vast majority of poor-quality, insignificant papers. Not necessarily anything dishonest, just garbage. I think there will always be the possibility to succeed based on the merits of your work alone, but I'd agree that it becomes increasingly unlikely when the incentives pull you in completely different directions.
From what I've seen which is admittedly limited, it doesn't appear getting a PhD is about intelligence. Being a good researcher requires plenty of intelligence, but that's inevitable if you have the passion to study hard and the foresight to get yourself into a good environment.
It's only bad if you make it bad. I really like the Freakonomics take on it: Fail quickly! Once you're certain something's not going to pan out, fail and move on! The Upside of Quitting
Good God, that's pessimistic! Sorry for that. It's more of a warning than anything. It's really not all bad. There's lots of interesting research going on and lots of truly wonderful people in academia, but there are also a lot of dead ends that are only obvious in hindsight. Just be aware of what you're getting into and it could save you a lot of grief.
I think there's some irony there, but he's not too far off. Appears there's a place for physics/engineers in the financial sector. Not sure how big the market is, but the student whose fluid dynamics code we used went to work on Wall Street. Your mileage may vary, but it also looks to me like there are more satisfying lives than the life of an academic.
Crap. Here we go...
So I spent the last five years in two different grad programs and will soon be leaving with... an M.S... They were decent/very good programs and I was plenty smart, but spent most of ages 22-27 almost completely miserable for it. In short, I went because I was smart, capable, and loved the material, and I payed a pretty big price for it. It's a great thing if you can find a field that piques your curiosity like that, but I'd call it a necessary rather than sufficient condition for success in grad school. I like to get lost in equations and algorithms, and it just didn't dawn on me that I'd have to make such a desperate attempt to flaunt it and establish a name for myself. I don't have a big enough ego to think that the world revolves around my research topic much less me, and as silly as it sounds, I found myself sitting through presentations much more interested in the personality of the presenter than the content. Grown men (yes, usually men) spending their whole lives analyzing a particular wave mode? Are they passionate about it because it's interesting or because they're desperately clinging to something they can get funding for? It's a mind trip if you really sit there and analyze it. And the isolation. Hell. When I was most productive, it wasn't at all unusual for me to go three or four days without speaking to anyone. Probably wouldn't be so bad if you're of the female type. In the end, I decided that although nothing would technically prevent me from being a scientist and a good person, as stressed out, overworked, and miserable as I already was, and with no end in sight, the risk was just too great.
Sorry for the pessimism. I'll cut myself off there and refer you to a few sources I've found helpful:
worstprofessorever.com/ Former classics professor, now web developer/writer. Pretty awesome person. No longer an academic. You read that correctly. Not an academic. Awesome person. They're not incompatible, despite what some professors would like you to believe.
Demetri Martin On Puzzles And 'Important Things' Because who doesn't love Demetri Martin? He made it most of the way through law school before dropping out and doing something that made him happy. I like his explanation around 10 minutes in.
Amazon.com: Winning the Games Scientists Play I can't recommend this book enough. It's basically a book about how to advance your scientific career in the most efficient way possible. I picked it up randomly and got through half of it standing in the library stacks before I found myself too nauseous to continue. He starts off insisting he's only the messenger, but it's really pretty sickening that someone would attempt to codify and advocate everything that makes academia such a miserable place. Thing is, it's pretty much true. I love where he says that fake scientists with outside hobbies or interests that occupy too much of their minds should be identified and exposed with great pleasure. Wow.
Richard Hamming: You and Your Research Yes, Richard Hamming of the eponymous window function! Advice on how to be a good researcher. "I don't like to say it in front of my wife, but I did sort of neglect her sometimes; I needed to study. You have to neglect things if you intend to get what you want done. There's no question about this."
Anyway, after all this, I figure someone who's not deterred in the least might actually
Why in the name of all things holy does this link to pcmag? For godsake just go to nasa.gov. It doesn't make too much of a difference on this topic, but it's getting really bad. Just look at the Fukushima stories. I know it sounds silly to complain so much, but people seriously need to learn the difference—and more importantly how to find—primary sources. Intentional or not, there's a huge amount of misinformation out there and there's just no reason every article on/. needs to be routed through a blog post or two before you give up and go looking for the source material on your own./. is clearly not the place for me. Will paste unknown garbage into password field and block site shortly...
I'm only commenting to undo my accidental 'redundant' mod, but I couldn't agree with you more. I try to resist idolizing anyone, but Glenn Gould... is an exception.
Of course realizing something happened, computing predictions and distributing the information in a timely fashion is also non-trivial. I don't know exactly when they posted it, but there certainly wasn't much delay in getting predictions on the internet. The NOAA has some good information on their tsunami research program including information about today's event and a youtube video of the simulation
Agreed. Just got home from the funeral of one of the most well-rounded, energetic, and intelligent people I've been privileged to know. Cancer. I don't care if it's tethered to a Windows Phone as long as it helps.
It's probably a compromise on their part so no one can claim their website has been unfairly blocked. A user who has blocked the website has presumably been presented with search results, viewed the content, and has made a conscious decision to block it. Not that I disagree with you, of course. You're absolutely right.
Good point. You have to be logged in, so maybe there's enough information like login frequency, browsing habits, gmail usage, etc. that can be correlated with blacklisting to determine its value. A one-time account that blacklists a vast number of sites probably doesn't have much value.
If you really don't want to send traffic their way, you can add the site to/etc/hosts before visiting (at least on *nix). Click the link, get an error, hit back, and block. They really do need to fix that though.
BioCotton is the brand name of a new semi-manufactured finished product derived from organic cotton, which is obtained using bio-dynamic cultivation techniques. This form of cultivation substitutes chemical fertilizers and pesticides with certified natural fertilizers and with a programmed rotation of the cotton fields . Bio-dynamic cultivation takes into account the lunar phases best adapted for sowing. This is preceded by the introduction of homeopathic substances into the earth (such as mineral silicon) which reinforces soil structure. From this type of cultivation comes a high quality and easily worked product. The pure biological nature of the cotton makes this fiber both non-allergic and usable without warning indications even for people who are hypersensitive or affected with special skin pathologies (it doesn't alter neutral Ph), by breastfeeding or future mothers, by hospitals.
Slashdot Mirror
When I want to get something done, I pick up a language and make it happen. When I want to learn a language for no particular reason, I pick up a tutorial, poke around, and forget about it within a few days. My first language was POV-Ray. Computer graphics. Raytracing. Kinda outdated now, but at the time it was something interesting to focus my energy on. I like the idea of one of those BASIC Stamps or Lego MindStorms. I think the best approach it to choose a goal rather than a language.
Interesting. I've read plenty of sketchy papers, but didn't make it far enough that I was ever asked to peer-review. Without attempting to put any magnitude it, I'd agree that omission with just enough sloppiness for plausible deniability is a big problem. For me the fear of even approaching any sort of gray area was much stronger than the necessity to publish, and I like to imagine most people feel the same way.
On your main point, another commenter said, "Being a good researcher is about doing something no one else has done, no matter how small, and being rigorous about reporting the results," and I was inclined to agree, but this seems to be in conflict with your opinion that, "drive and hard work is mistaken for aptitude to do science." Maybe the distinction lies in the difference between good science and great science. I see good scientists around me succeeding because they work incredibly hard, many of them sacrificing health and relationships to get there. I've only known a few great scientists, and they worked very hard but also had great insight and, interestingly enough, led incredibly well-rounded lives. An accomplished pianist, a runner and devoted husband, etc. All delightful people I feel privileged to have met. I tried very hard to be the second type, and to make a long story short, I'm no longer a scientist at all. It's looking like web development with an option to pull a Chris McCandless and disappear entirely. I think I had a lot to offer and wish things had worked out differently. Always nice to know someone else is at least as bitter as I am though! Good luck to you!
Being a good researcher is about doing something no one else has done, no matter how small, and being rigorous about reporting the results.
Well said.
I'm not sure I'd agree, but it could just reflect different experiences. I haven't personally seen pressure to produce results so great that people started lying or cheating out of fear just to get ahead. My experience—and I think I failed in grad school because I couldn't conform to this— is that the pressure to produce an acceptable quantity of publications results in a vast majority of poor-quality, insignificant papers. Not necessarily anything dishonest, just garbage. I think there will always be the possibility to succeed based on the merits of your work alone, but I'd agree that it becomes increasingly unlikely when the incentives pull you in completely different directions.
I have also observed a massive preference of quantity over quality.
How Science Publishing Works
I laugh, but it pretty much matches my experience.
From what I've seen which is admittedly limited, it doesn't appear getting a PhD is about intelligence. Being a good researcher requires plenty of intelligence, but that's inevitable if you have the passion to study hard and the foresight to get yourself into a good environment.
It's only bad if you make it bad. I really like the Freakonomics take on it: Fail quickly! Once you're certain something's not going to pan out, fail and move on! The Upside of Quitting
Good God, that's pessimistic! Sorry for that. It's more of a warning than anything. It's really not all bad. There's lots of interesting research going on and lots of truly wonderful people in academia, but there are also a lot of dead ends that are only obvious in hindsight. Just be aware of what you're getting into and it could save you a lot of grief.
I think there's some irony there, but he's not too far off. Appears there's a place for physics/engineers in the financial sector. Not sure how big the market is, but the student whose fluid dynamics code we used went to work on Wall Street. Your mileage may vary, but it also looks to me like there are more satisfying lives than the life of an academic.
Crap. Here we go...
So I spent the last five years in two different grad programs and will soon be leaving with... an M.S... They were decent/very good programs and I was plenty smart, but spent most of ages 22-27 almost completely miserable for it. In short, I went because I was smart, capable, and loved the material, and I payed a pretty big price for it. It's a great thing if you can find a field that piques your curiosity like that, but I'd call it a necessary rather than sufficient condition for success in grad school. I like to get lost in equations and algorithms, and it just didn't dawn on me that I'd have to make such a desperate attempt to flaunt it and establish a name for myself. I don't have a big enough ego to think that the world revolves around my research topic much less me, and as silly as it sounds, I found myself sitting through presentations much more interested in the personality of the presenter than the content. Grown men (yes, usually men) spending their whole lives analyzing a particular wave mode? Are they passionate about it because it's interesting or because they're desperately clinging to something they can get funding for? It's a mind trip if you really sit there and analyze it. And the isolation. Hell. When I was most productive, it wasn't at all unusual for me to go three or four days without speaking to anyone. Probably wouldn't be so bad if you're of the female type. In the end, I decided that although nothing would technically prevent me from being a scientist and a good person, as stressed out, overworked, and miserable as I already was, and with no end in sight, the risk was just too great.
Sorry for the pessimism. I'll cut myself off there and refer you to a few sources I've found helpful:
worstprofessorever.com/
Former classics professor, now web developer/writer. Pretty awesome person. No longer an academic. You read that correctly. Not an academic. Awesome person. They're not incompatible, despite what some professors would like you to believe.
Demetri Martin On Puzzles And 'Important Things'
Because who doesn't love Demetri Martin? He made it most of the way through law school before dropping out and doing something that made him happy. I like his explanation around 10 minutes in.
Amazon.com: Winning the Games Scientists Play
I can't recommend this book enough. It's basically a book about how to advance your scientific career in the most efficient way possible. I picked it up randomly and got through half of it standing in the library stacks before I found myself too nauseous to continue. He starts off insisting he's only the messenger, but it's really pretty sickening that someone would attempt to codify and advocate everything that makes academia such a miserable place. Thing is, it's pretty much true. I love where he says that fake scientists with outside hobbies or interests that occupy too much of their minds should be identified and exposed with great pleasure. Wow.
Richard Hamming: You and Your Research
Yes, Richard Hamming of the eponymous window function! Advice on how to be a good researcher. "I don't like to say it in front of my wife, but I did sort of neglect her sometimes; I needed to study. You have to neglect things if you intend to get what you want done. There's no question about this."
Anyway, after all this, I figure someone who's not deterred in the least might actually
Why in the name of all things holy does this link to pcmag? For godsake just go to nasa.gov. It doesn't make too much of a difference on this topic, but it's getting really bad. Just look at the Fukushima stories. I know it sounds silly to complain so much, but people seriously need to learn the difference—and more importantly how to find—primary sources. Intentional or not, there's a huge amount of misinformation out there and there's just no reason every article on /. needs to be routed through a blog post or two before you give up and go looking for the source material on your own. /. is clearly not the place for me. Will paste unknown garbage into password field and block site shortly...
I'm only commenting to undo my accidental 'redundant' mod, but I couldn't agree with you more. I try to resist idolizing anyone, but Glenn Gould... is an exception.
Actually, I think the problem is that the people here aren't the ones creating them...
Of course realizing something happened, computing predictions and distributing the information in a timely fashion is also non-trivial. I don't know exactly when they posted it, but there certainly wasn't much delay in getting predictions on the internet. The NOAA has some good information on their tsunami research program including information about today's event and a youtube video of the simulation
Agreed. Just got home from the funeral of one of the most well-rounded, energetic, and intelligent people I've been privileged to know. Cancer. I don't care if it's tethered to a Windows Phone as long as it helps.
It's probably a compromise on their part so no one can claim their website has been unfairly blocked. A user who has blocked the website has presumably been presented with search results, viewed the content, and has made a conscious decision to block it. Not that I disagree with you, of course. You're absolutely right.
Good point. You have to be logged in, so maybe there's enough information like login frequency, browsing habits, gmail usage, etc. that can be correlated with blacklisting to determine its value. A one-time account that blacklists a vast number of sites probably doesn't have much value.
Why I'd ban their results from Google ... are a mystery to me.
How about avoiding ad revenue for a misleading site?
If you really don't want to send traffic their way, you can add the site to /etc/hosts before visiting (at least on *nix). Click the link, get an error, hit back, and block. They really do need to fix that though.
Whoosh!
5. No notes would be necessary at all if the composition were specified as log_PI(PI)-1.
Ohmygod. SETI, eh? Intelligent extraterrestrial beings have been sending us the digits of pi this whole time!
I hate to tell you,
but haiku have a fixed form:
five, seven, and five.
And e day, the 71st of February!
The electron is never going to have a positive charge, and pi is never going to equal 1/2*tau. What a silly thing to worry about.
Lots 'o rocks though.
'Bio-cotton?'
Biocotton(?):
BioCotton is the brand name of a new semi-manufactured finished product derived from organic cotton, which is obtained using bio-dynamic cultivation techniques. This form of cultivation substitutes chemical fertilizers and pesticides with certified natural fertilizers and with a programmed rotation of the cotton fields . Bio-dynamic cultivation takes into account the lunar phases best adapted for sowing. This is preceded by the introduction of homeopathic substances into the earth (such as mineral silicon) which reinforces soil structure. From this type of cultivation comes a high quality and easily worked product. The pure biological nature of the cotton makes this fiber both non-allergic and usable without warning indications even for people who are hypersensitive or affected with special skin pathologies (it doesn't alter neutral Ph), by breastfeeding or future mothers, by hospitals.
P.S. I'm just the messenger. Don't shoot.