Yep - automatic gearboxes are typically reserved for higher end models of car in the UK and are mainly for people who don't enjoy driving.
There are some exceptions to this, but generally performance cars with automatic gearboxes also have some element of manual gear changing as well - such as the flappy paddles on the steering wheel.
OK so I've read the IBM announcement and you're right that is what they're using blockchain for. However I don't see how this adds any value over and above the use of a standard relational database. To track the source of an offending item of produce, that item is going to need some kind of unique identifier - regardless of where the chain of custody data is held.
A unique identifier can be used to access the relevant information in a database. How does blockchain improve on that?
That's interesting - I started using it to communicate internationally with friends in the Netherlands, when they told me about it. I know virtually nobody in the UK that uses it, most people that bother at all with an app for communicating (that isn't Facebook) use Viber. I also use that but only to communicate with friends in ROI.
I'm an older user user though and it could well be that the kids are all on WhatsApp or Viber or something else like that for all I know.
I don't disagree with either hubie or the gnat that we need quality control in scientific publishing and that peer review, if correctly implemented would be the best way to go about this. My point (and I don't believe that either of you are disagreeing with me) is that it currently doesn't work. Based on that I think it isn't all that surprising that people look for alternative ways of getting their ideas out there.
In an ideal world, peer review is definitely the best way to maintain the quality of publication, but I come back to my original statement - that system is broken.
The peer review system for scientific journals is broken. It was supposed to ensure that only valid research which takes a field forward would actually get published. Techniques such as blind and double blind reviewing were supposed to help in ensuring that there was no bias towards specific researchers such as those who were considered to be leaders in the field. However what happens in practice is usually a long way from that ideal, vested interests and group think often result in new, fresh ideas not being published (older academics pulling up the ladder) and mutual back scratching is very common. Reviewing is rarely blind let alone double blind and so all the abuses those are supposed to prevent can (and do) take place.
New approaches to publishing ideas and possibly even research results should be encouraged. Blogs are also far from ideal, but if it helps get ideas out to a wider audience then they're a step in the right direction.
This is very true. I'm working in academia just now, I wanted to do something similar to the OP but found the only route open to me was to study for a PhD which I'm now doing. If you really want to go down that route you'll probably have to do something similar.
Not sure where the OP is based but this website might help if in the UK, I'm sure there are similar things around the world: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/
Slashdot Mirror
Is this the level of comments nowadays?
Sadly yes, the comments are barely worth reading any more
In Europe most car are sold with manual
Yep - automatic gearboxes are typically reserved for higher end models of car in the UK and are mainly for people who don't enjoy driving. There are some exceptions to this, but generally performance cars with automatic gearboxes also have some element of manual gear changing as well - such as the flappy paddles on the steering wheel.
OK so I've read the IBM announcement and you're right that is what they're using blockchain for. However I don't see how this adds any value over and above the use of a standard relational database. To track the source of an offending item of produce, that item is going to need some kind of unique identifier - regardless of where the chain of custody data is held. A unique identifier can be used to access the relevant information in a database. How does blockchain improve on that?
That's interesting - I started using it to communicate internationally with friends in the Netherlands, when they told me about it. I know virtually nobody in the UK that uses it, most people that bother at all with an app for communicating (that isn't Facebook) use Viber. I also use that but only to communicate with friends in ROI. I'm an older user user though and it could well be that the kids are all on WhatsApp or Viber or something else like that for all I know.
I don't disagree with either hubie or the gnat that we need quality control in scientific publishing and that peer review, if correctly implemented would be the best way to go about this. My point (and I don't believe that either of you are disagreeing with me) is that it currently doesn't work. Based on that I think it isn't all that surprising that people look for alternative ways of getting their ideas out there. In an ideal world, peer review is definitely the best way to maintain the quality of publication, but I come back to my original statement - that system is broken.
The peer review system for scientific journals is broken. It was supposed to ensure that only valid research which takes a field forward would actually get published. Techniques such as blind and double blind reviewing were supposed to help in ensuring that there was no bias towards specific researchers such as those who were considered to be leaders in the field. However what happens in practice is usually a long way from that ideal, vested interests and group think often result in new, fresh ideas not being published (older academics pulling up the ladder) and mutual back scratching is very common. Reviewing is rarely blind let alone double blind and so all the abuses those are supposed to prevent can (and do) take place. New approaches to publishing ideas and possibly even research results should be encouraged. Blogs are also far from ideal, but if it helps get ideas out to a wider audience then they're a step in the right direction.
This is very true. I'm working in academia just now, I wanted to do something similar to the OP but found the only route open to me was to study for a PhD which I'm now doing. If you really want to go down that route you'll probably have to do something similar. Not sure where the OP is based but this website might help if in the UK, I'm sure there are similar things around the world: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/