Oh great, now instead of merely shaking the earth as they drive by, cars with souped up stereo systems will be able to actually crack the pavement and lift small dogs several inches off the ground.
For the record, it wasn't my friend that made that error, it was someone at a conference he was at.
I agree that it's not fun to duplicate work.
Yeah, the peer review process isn't perfect; there's alot of politicking and back-biting that goes on within the scientific community. It's sad, but true. My own personal opinion is that when you have such pressure to publish, that sort of shit just happens.
I just have a problem with the way people get treated when this happens. Unless they're blatantly plagiarizing work, they should not be harangued for the failure of the peer reviewers.
If you are in academia, then you know that alot of these guys have extremely thin skins.
1. People who created, run and privately own Google think guns are bad. 2. Google won't advertise guns. 3. Outdoor shops who do a little gun-related bid'ness are enticed to get rid of it. 4. There is one less place to buy parts for things used to kill other people.
Yep, gotta get that blackmarket in small firearms flourishing.
Anyone who see how sme articles are written, knows perfectly that "bibliography" is usually created as a "necessary evil". Most scientific articles are done basically in the light of several "obligatory templates": abstraction, main article, citations, bibliography and notes.
I'll take this even further. If you are writing a paper on a particular topic and you fail to cite another researcher's paper(s) who has done similar work (but whose paper you have not read!), then you can run into some embarassing situations. I'll give an anecdote.
A fellow grad student was at a conference a couyple years ago. A research had just concluded giving a talk of his paper when a man sitting in the audience started asking question after question. This is normal, but the questions started taking on a more accusatory tone, "Didn't you know that this has already been done?" "Why didn't you cite XXXX?", etc. It turns out that this guy was either XXXX himself or his close friend. On the surface, it appears that the presenter should have been more thorough in finding papers and articles, but on the other hand, it's quite possible that he just took another path to developing his results.
There's a paranoia among researchers (and especially grad students) that if they don't cite every single work, no matter how minutely relevant, then this sort of thing will happen to them.
"My country, right or wrong," is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, "My mother, drunk or sober." ---
G. K. Chesterton
Nothing is wrong with true patriotism. True patriotism is not about the uncritical following and acceptance of whatever the government currently running the country is doing. Rather, it is a love for one's country that is somewhat akin to the love of a parent for a child. You nurture and support the child while attempting to give guidance so that one day it can be the kind of adult that will contribute positively to the world. In the same way, that is what true patriots do for their country.
Sometimes, you will hear the birth of the United States and its ideals described as a "great experiment" in the history of man kind. A place where people are truly free and equal. There is a small but significant mistake in this view. It supposes that the "experiment" is over with and in the past. The truth of the matter is, we have not and never have fully realized the ideal of the American dream. No country in the world has. A true patriot recognizes this fact and recognizes that there is still much work to be done in achieving the country and government that our culture and folklore declares is ours.
There are roughly three groups that people in the United States can be split into. There are those that would blindly follow this country and its government into the depths of hell and beyond without any sort of dissent; these people call themselves patriots. They do love America, but they do so with no brain. There are those that disdain all patriotic Americans and in fact revel in the thrashing and flogging of anything American. They would love to see the apparatus of our government fail and crumble. I despise both of those groups. The former, because they are responsible for allowing the many transgressions and missteps of our government to go forward unopposed. They do not truly understand nor appreciate the American dream. They believe we are already living it. The latter, because they deny that any good can come of this country, its government, and its people. They refuse to believe that there is any way of salvaging the American dream. Indeed, they scoff at the very notion of an American dream.
When I am abroad, I always make it a rule never to criticize or attack the government of my own country. I make up for lost time when I come home. ---
Sir Winston Churchill
The final group is obvious. It is comprised of True Patriots. We are a group of people that does not agree on the best government solution, if any, for every problem that our country faces. However, we do agree on one key goal; we wish to see this country and its government become what we were taught that it was. We truly love this country with every fiber of our being. We love it because in our youth we were instilled with the values that our country is supposed to represent. In our young adulthood, the pain and trauma of realizing that our government is not an accurate manifestation of these values spurs us to work to bring it closer. We regret some of the ugliness that our government has caused to be brought upon people all over the world, but we do not deny it. We wince at our government lies, and we yell loudly when there are injustices to be righted. We do so, not because we wish to see American government fail, but because we want it to grow up to be the best possible realization of what this country can be. And because we can not see any future worth living in without this growth.
I loved that stuff. I used to combine it with my construx, lego, and erector sets. My brother and I used to build cars and mini-mechs and have battles with them. You could run those things into walls and they would still be alright. Sit a transformer (the ones made out of metal, not the cheap plastic shit of today) in one of them and you had a spaceship. When my mom sold the house, I think we had like 4 or 5 good sized boxes of the stuff that we gave away.:-(
Ahhh, nostalgia. I think it's time to get a mindstorms set and build some robots.:-)
Without the ammeneties though, say it's just a movie theater converted to an arena for gaming, and all they do for you is give you a terminal and some time. That will fail. There has to be a draw.
Exactly. If there isn't, how is it any different than going to a local game-cafe (generally dark, smoke filled rooms with dozens of networked computers) and paying a few bucks for a couple hours of fragging?
Yep. I always said, "I'm not giving you that information." The result was always an awkward moment of silence until they realized that I wasn't going to cave, looked down nervously, and rang up the order anyway.
Yep, I'm not buying stuff from those retailers again. Just think, if enough people do this, and hurt revenues, then corporations will recognize the stupidity of the DMCA and pressure congress to nullify it.
More to the point, how would a village with such limited income be able to keep powering that thing?
Re:[OT] Oh my gosh! A female!
on
ALICE vs. ALICE
·
· Score: 2
now maybe it's just me, but as I read that it registered as too outrageous to be true (I mean, c'mon, no sensible/sane person actually things all females are degenerates)
There are millions of people with neight sense nor sanity. Seriously, that argument is a cop out. You could argue the same thing for people who believe all Blacks or Asians are inferior to White people. I.E. "No sensible sane person could possibly believe that all Asians are good at math, rich, and know kung fu."
Re:[OT] Oh my gosh! A female!
on
ALICE vs. ALICE
·
· Score: 2
If you think a comment like the one in the parret post (buried deep in the obscure comments) is offensive - sue him! He/she has a freedom of speech that also makes him responsible to a court of law. Let the courts determine what they deem acceptable speech. Me personally, I can probably not be offended by a joke. I can be disgusted by it, certainly, but not offended. Is that wrong as well? So sue me.
Just as you have the right to make crass remarks, the female who was offended has a right to point out that she finds such remarks offensive. For her pointing that out, she has been ridiculed and mocked; thus proving the immaturity of a large segment of the geek population. Jokes are fine when they are understood to be made in jest. What made the original post so offensive was that the poster appeared serious in his belief that females are intellectually inferior to males.
They are being asked to work more hours on that salary pay, do more things than they ever did before.
I seem to remember that during the current financial problems, workers were already logging really high hours. Maybe I remember incorrectly.
Re:The solution to problems like this...
on
HomeSec In the News
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well, I disagree with you on that crucial point; you think it's as damaging to be able to remove specific portions of a bill as it is to put stuff in. And I disagree, so let me try and get you to see how I view it. If there are a bunch of riders on a bill that is sent up to the president, conceivably they could be sent up in individual bills, one for each rider, that the president could veto or sign into law individually. However, because of the way the current situation is, the president is forced to accept all-or-nothing when it shouldn't have to be that way. That's why I don't view the ability to reject certain items in a bill as being constitutionally damaging. Now, if the president were to be able to propose and insert legislation, then that would bother me, because then the president effectively becomes a one man legislator/executive. Or a dictator.
Re:The solution to problems like this...
on
HomeSec In the News
·
· Score: 2
Because the president is still not able to add parts to the bill. I.E. he still can not propose new legislation. IMO, another solution to this is to restrict the use of riders. Either way, you'll have many people howling. Furthermore, who cares if the legislation was made during a republican controlled congress? (I'm assuming that's what you meant by "covered in... Republicanism") That's not relevant to the issue of whether or not the line-item veto is a good thing.
Re:The solution to problems like this...
on
HomeSec In the News
·
· Score: 2
A line item veto isn't "completely changing" legislation. It's an additional check on congress to keep those FUCKING riders off the bills they send up to the president.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh great, now instead of merely shaking the earth as they drive by, cars with souped up stereo systems will be able to actually crack the pavement and lift small dogs several inches off the ground.
Where's the eject button?
The lack of female gnomes in the Athena cluster are representative of the general student population. :-)
Just kidding...
For the record, it wasn't my friend that made that error, it was someone at a conference he was at.
I agree that it's not fun to duplicate work.
Yeah, the peer review process isn't perfect; there's alot of politicking and back-biting that goes on within the scientific community. It's sad, but true. My own personal opinion is that when you have such pressure to publish, that sort of shit just happens.
I just have a problem with the way people get treated when this happens. Unless they're blatantly plagiarizing work, they should not be harangued for the failure of the peer reviewers.
If you are in academia, then you know that alot of these guys have extremely thin skins.
1. People who created, run and privately own Google think guns are bad.
2. Google won't advertise guns.
3. Outdoor shops who do a little gun-related bid'ness are enticed to get rid of it.
4. There is one less place to buy parts for things used to kill other people.
Yep, gotta get that blackmarket in small firearms flourishing.
No, but typically, children in pornography are marketed towards pedophiles. :-/
I'll take this even further. If you are writing a paper on a particular topic and you fail to cite another researcher's paper(s) who has done similar work (but whose paper you have not read!), then you can run into some embarassing situations. I'll give an anecdote.
A fellow grad student was at a conference a couyple years ago. A research had just concluded giving a talk of his paper when a man sitting in the audience started asking question after question. This is normal, but the questions started taking on a more accusatory tone, "Didn't you know that this has already been done?" "Why didn't you cite XXXX?", etc. It turns out that this guy was either XXXX himself or his close friend. On the surface, it appears that the presenter should have been more thorough in finding papers and articles, but on the other hand, it's quite possible that he just took another path to developing his results.
There's a paranoia among researchers (and especially grad students) that if they don't cite every single work, no matter how minutely relevant, then this sort of thing will happen to them.
Hmm makes you wonder.
In Iraq they do this to you.
Sometimes, you will hear the birth of the United States and its ideals described as a "great experiment" in the history of man kind. A place where people are truly free and equal. There is a small but significant mistake in this view. It supposes that the "experiment" is over with and in the past. The truth of the matter is, we have not and never have fully realized the ideal of the American dream. No country in the world has. A true patriot recognizes this fact and recognizes that there is still much work to be done in achieving the country and government that our culture and folklore declares is ours.
There are roughly three groups that people in the United States can be split into. There are those that would blindly follow this country and its government into the depths of hell and beyond without any sort of dissent; these people call themselves patriots. They do love America, but they do so with no brain. There are those that disdain all patriotic Americans and in fact revel in the thrashing and flogging of anything American. They would love to see the apparatus of our government fail and crumble. I despise both of those groups. The former, because they are responsible for allowing the many transgressions and missteps of our government to go forward unopposed. They do not truly understand nor appreciate the American dream. They believe we are already living it. The latter, because they deny that any good can come of this country, its government, and its people. They refuse to believe that there is any way of salvaging the American dream. Indeed, they scoff at the very notion of an American dream.
The final group is obvious. It is comprised of True Patriots. We are a group of people that does not agree on the best government solution, if any, for every problem that our country faces. However, we do agree on one key goal; we wish to see this country and its government become what we were taught that it was. We truly love this country with every fiber of our being. We love it because in our youth we were instilled with the values that our country is supposed to represent. In our young adulthood, the pain and trauma of realizing that our government is not an accurate manifestation of these values spurs us to work to bring it closer. We regret some of the ugliness that our government has caused to be brought upon people all over the world, but we do not deny it. We wince at our government lies, and we yell loudly when there are injustices to be righted. We do so, not because we wish to see American government fail, but because we want it to grow up to be the best possible realization of what this country can be. And because we can not see any future worth living in without this growth.Thank you, my apologies for the soapbox.
I loved that stuff. I used to combine it with my construx, lego, and erector sets. My brother and I used to build cars and mini-mechs and have battles with them. You could run those things into walls and they would still be alright. Sit a transformer (the ones made out of metal, not the cheap plastic shit of today) in one of them and you had a spaceship. When my mom sold the house, I think we had like 4 or 5 good sized boxes of the stuff that we gave away. :-(
:-)
Ahhh, nostalgia. I think it's time to get a mindstorms set and build some robots.
Exactly. If there isn't, how is it any different than going to a local game-cafe (generally dark, smoke filled rooms with dozens of networked computers) and paying a few bucks for a couple hours of fragging?
The Escalade must be hooked on phonics, because it loves to read.
The rest of the article was cool too. :-)
Exactly how long do you think you can keep your trolling expedition up? :-)
Yep. I always said, "I'm not giving you that information." The result was always an awkward moment of silence until they realized that I wasn't going to cave, looked down nervously, and rang up the order anyway.
Yeah, I know. That post was supposed to have little tags around it indicating "pipedream" but the < and > got swallowed when I posted. :-(
Yep, I'm not buying stuff from those retailers again. Just think, if enough people do this, and hurt revenues, then corporations will recognize the stupidity of the DMCA and pressure congress to nullify it.
More to the point, how would a village with such limited income be able to keep powering that thing?
There are millions of people with neight sense nor sanity. Seriously, that argument is a cop out. You could argue the same thing for people who believe all Blacks or Asians are inferior to White people. I.E. "No sensible sane person could possibly believe that all Asians are good at math, rich, and know kung fu."
Just as you have the right to make crass remarks, the female who was offended has a right to point out that she finds such remarks offensive. For her pointing that out, she has been ridiculed and mocked; thus proving the immaturity of a large segment of the geek population. Jokes are fine when they are understood to be made in jest. What made the original post so offensive was that the poster appeared serious in his belief that females are intellectually inferior to males.
I seem to remember that during the current financial problems, workers were already logging really high hours. Maybe I remember incorrectly.
Well, I disagree with you on that crucial point; you think it's as damaging to be able to remove specific portions of a bill as it is to put stuff in. And I disagree, so let me try and get you to see how I view it. If there are a bunch of riders on a bill that is sent up to the president, conceivably they could be sent up in individual bills, one for each rider, that the president could veto or sign into law individually. However, because of the way the current situation is, the president is forced to accept all-or-nothing when it shouldn't have to be that way. That's why I don't view the ability to reject certain items in a bill as being constitutionally damaging. Now, if the president were to be able to propose and insert legislation, then that would bother me, because then the president effectively becomes a one man legislator/executive. Or a dictator.
Because the president is still not able to add parts to the bill. I.E. he still can not propose new legislation. IMO, another solution to this is to restrict the use of riders. Either way, you'll have many people howling. Furthermore, who cares if the legislation was made during a republican controlled congress? (I'm assuming that's what you meant by "covered in ... Republicanism") That's not relevant to the issue of whether or not the line-item veto is a good thing.
A line item veto isn't "completely changing" legislation. It's an additional check on congress to keep those FUCKING riders off the bills they send up to the president.
And yet, sadly, this is not too far from the truth.
He was also probably higher than you. :-)