And yet, although there are many studies that show that eating lots of fruits full of vitamin C &c is good for you, when they've tried done studies that aimed to show that taking vitamin supplements is good for you, they've found no such thing. Some in fact have found that vitamin supplements appear to be bad for you. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325934.000-can-vitamin-supplements-do-more-harm-than-good.html
My user is probably closer to that of an average person than most slashdotters. I watch a few TV episodes online per month, download about 30 hours of podcasts per months, do some general surfing, youtube and email, and from time to time upload or download 1Gb data files for work. I'm part of a 2-person household.
I work in in academic environment where it's pretty much essential that many users have admin privileges. We do a lot of high-end scientific computing, so hardware and software requirements vary a great deal from one user to the next. Still, most of the hardware procurement is done through the IT department, and they do a good job. Software, on the other hand, would be a nightmare if it were done that way. The IT staff manage the security software and policies centrally, but individuals needs to be able to install whatever software we need, including many programs that we write ourselves in a variety of languages for our own needs as the need arises.
For day-to-day IT problems in this environment, it also smooths things along a great deal that we all have admin access. face it, the IT helpdesk is a bunch of newly minted, underpaid graduates. Many of the rest of us have been programming for decades, and while that doesn't make us IT or security experts, it does mean that we've picked up at least as many of the basics as the helpdesk staff have.
It occasionally takes that long for items to get through the post to Australia from the US. Usually, it's quicker, but I can't blame the seller if it isn't.
To me, that rather misses the point. There is existing technology (photosynth) that can construct highly accurate models of specific monuments given photos with location information. This is something new and different: it can be used to construct a model of any widely photographed site or monument at short notice from existing photo collections available for free on the web, with no need to gather or commission additional data. Even if the results are not picture-perfect, to me, this is much more exciting.
What constitutes a good rate of publication varies enormously from one field to another. In biotechnology, one paper might describe one simple, week-long laboratory experiment. In aquatic chemistry, one paper is more likely to describe a two-year field program with associated lab analyses and interpretation.
A lot of them are written to meet the acceptance bar for the conference.
For conference papers, sure. Most conference papers are never read anyway. They exist merely to fill in some of the details that a speaker won't have time to cover in a 15-minute seminar at the conference. Good journals have a much higher bar, so I stick with journal papers.
When giving seminars, researchers explain things simply, but leave out important details and much of the discussion, either because there simply isn't time or because they know they have to struggle to hold a live audience's attention.
As a scientist, I can't see myself using it much, if at all. It's so much quicker to read an abstract. I read 50-100 abstracts each week to keep up with my field. If each video was 5 minutes, it'd take 8 hours a week to get the same information. And that would be 8 hours a week of my own time, because although I'm expected to keep up with the literature, it's not something I can log my time against.
I agree. Look for a job now. If by the end of the academic year you don't find one you're happy with, re-enrol for next year, but spend the summer job-hunting. If you get a job, withdraw your enrolment and graduate. Unless you're applying through recruiting agencies, it won't matter whether you have the bit of paper yet, since you'll have qualified to graduate and most employers will be happy with that.
Bear in mind that grades only matter for your first job. After that, most potential employers will only be looking at your experience and references.
From his website, "Neil Gaiman is the winner of 3 Hugos, 2 Nebulas, 1 World Fantasy Award, 4 Bram Stoker Awards, 6 Locus Awards, 2 British SF Awards, 1 British Fantasy Award, 3 Geffens, 1 International Horror Guild Award and 1 Mythopoeic."
It matters because, although "knowledge candidate" may be unlikely to match the score of "double knowledge candidate", he has a good chance of beating the score of "110% knowledge candidate" purely through random chance. The test may still distinguish between extremes, but it doesn't do so well at sorting closer candidates.
You're missing the point. Counting only correct answers on a multi-choice test doesn't measure what you know, or whether you have the necessary minimum knowledge.
With 4 choices for each question on a 100 question test, the average student (student A) who knows 50% of the answers will get at least 62 correct if they guess entirely at random when they don't know the answer (50 plus 50/4 correct guesses). The average student who knows only 25% of the material (student B) will get at least 44 correct using the same approach (25 plus 75/4). Although A knows twice as much as B, A's score is only 40% better (not 100%).
Of course, it's even worse than this. First, because there is a large degree of scatter: a student choosing at random might do much better or much worse than this. Second, because multi-choice questions are often structured so that half of the possible answers are obviously incorrect, which changes the odds.
With only two plausible answers to choose between, A might get 75 correct and B might get 63: in this case A, who knows twice as much as B, gets a score only 19% better than B.
If points are subtracted for incorrect answers (say -1/4 pt to -1/2 for each one wrong), the effect of guesses can be taken out of the equation so that differences in scores actually reflect differences in knowledge. Or if the questions are easier, a smaller proportion of both students' answers will be guesses, so the effect should be smaller.
"Interested in and conversant with" doesn't make you a scientist (in my opinion as a research scientist). Nor does a science degree. Do be a scientist you have to do science (i.e. scientific research).
Definitely applies to me. I bought my XP machine mainly to support my iPod - otherwise, I'd have been content to stick with my clunky old machine for another few years. I went with Windows rather than a Mac because it was compatible with my machine at work and with the games I had, but my first criterion was iPod compatibility.
Not at all. CSIRO's research is not fully funded by the government and the organisation is obliged to seek around 30% of its funding from external sources such as royalties. CSIRO researchers are encouraged to patent commercially valuable work and the organisation's policy is to give staff bonuses if their patents earn the organisation royalties.
I've twice deposited more than I thought I had into an ATM and had the bank credit my account with the full amount (instead of the amount I entered) and write me a letter to let me know of my error. And yes, I know I'm not careful enough with money.
I'm at a leading research institute. Each publication takes only two lines to detail (full reference plus number of citations). My policy is to list the best or most recent 10 publications in detail, and otherwise list the total number. Other than that, a good CV needs a list of your previous jobs (2 lines per job) dates and places of educational qualifications, and details of awards received (at most one line per award and if they take too much room that way, you're probably listing trivial awards that will have no impact on your success). Referee's details can go on the CV or on your cover letter. The place to get locquatious is in addressing the selection criteria - but that's separate from your CV.
I got tenure with a two-page CV. And when I was on a selection panel for a postdoctoral reesearcher, the successful applicant had a two-page CV. The next best two applicants had 2-3 page CVs, and the least qualified had 8 pages of filler.
An academic resume shouldn't be much longer than a normal resume. If you've written 150 peer-reviewed journal articles, say so, and list only the top 10 in full. If you've only written ten papers, consider only listing the top 5 in full. If you've more than a handful of journal papers to your name, don't bothing detailing conference proceedings papers or contract reports. Don't list all your talks, just plenaries and keynotes (if any). If you've won 10 student prizes, 10 local awards, 5 national prizes and 2 international prizes, just list the national and international prizes. Your CV should give a good idea of what you've achieved, but it shouldn't be so long and detailed as to bore the selection panel.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet, although there are many studies that show that eating lots of fruits full of vitamin C &c is good for you, when they've tried done studies that aimed to show that taking vitamin supplements is good for you, they've found no such thing. Some in fact have found that vitamin supplements appear to be bad for you. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325934.000-can-vitamin-supplements-do-more-harm-than-good.html
My user is probably closer to that of an average person than most slashdotters. I watch a few TV episodes online per month, download about 30 hours of podcasts per months, do some general surfing, youtube and email, and from time to time upload or download 1Gb data files for work. I'm part of a 2-person household.
You could always embed a formula in a table in MO. At least, you have been able to at least since I did my Honours thesis, in 1994.
I work in in academic environment where it's pretty much essential that many users have admin privileges. We do a lot of high-end scientific computing, so hardware and software requirements vary a great deal from one user to the next. Still, most of the hardware procurement is done through the IT department, and they do a good job. Software, on the other hand, would be a nightmare if it were done that way. The IT staff manage the security software and policies centrally, but individuals needs to be able to install whatever software we need, including many programs that we write ourselves in a variety of languages for our own needs as the need arises.
For day-to-day IT problems in this environment, it also smooths things along a great deal that we all have admin access. face it, the IT helpdesk is a bunch of newly minted, underpaid graduates. Many of the rest of us have been programming for decades, and while that doesn't make us IT or security experts, it does mean that we've picked up at least as many of the basics as the helpdesk staff have.
It occasionally takes that long for items to get through the post to Australia from the US. Usually, it's quicker, but I can't blame the seller if it isn't.
To me, that rather misses the point. There is existing technology (photosynth) that can construct highly accurate models of specific monuments given photos with location information. This is something new and different: it can be used to construct a model of any widely photographed site or monument at short notice from existing photo collections available for free on the web, with no need to gather or commission additional data. Even if the results are not picture-perfect, to me, this is much more exciting.
What constitutes a good rate of publication varies enormously from one field to another. In biotechnology, one paper might describe one simple, week-long laboratory experiment. In aquatic chemistry, one paper is more likely to describe a two-year field program with associated lab analyses and interpretation.
A lot of them are written to meet the acceptance bar for the conference.
For conference papers, sure. Most conference papers are never read anyway. They exist merely to fill in some of the details that a speaker won't have time to cover in a 15-minute seminar at the conference. Good journals have a much higher bar, so I stick with journal papers.
When giving seminars, researchers explain things simply, but leave out important details and much of the discussion, either because there simply isn't time or because they know they have to struggle to hold a live audience's attention.
That way I can view the "dense" parts several times and ask better questions through email, which is crucial for understanding.
Or you could read the dense parts of a paper several times, and ask questions through email. Wouldn't that be easier?
As a scientist, I can't see myself using it much, if at all. It's so much quicker to read an abstract. I read 50-100 abstracts each week to keep up with my field. If each video was 5 minutes, it'd take 8 hours a week to get the same information. And that would be 8 hours a week of my own time, because although I'm expected to keep up with the literature, it's not something I can log my time against.
I agree. Look for a job now. If by the end of the academic year you don't find one you're happy with, re-enrol for next year, but spend the summer job-hunting. If you get a job, withdraw your enrolment and graduate. Unless you're applying through recruiting agencies, it won't matter whether you have the bit of paper yet, since you'll have qualified to graduate and most employers will be happy with that.
Bear in mind that grades only matter for your first job. After that, most potential employers will only be looking at your experience and references.
From his website, "Neil Gaiman is the winner of 3 Hugos, 2 Nebulas, 1 World Fantasy Award, 4 Bram Stoker Awards, 6 Locus Awards, 2 British SF Awards, 1 British Fantasy Award, 3 Geffens, 1 International Horror Guild Award and 1 Mythopoeic."
Many of these are judged awards, not fan awards.
Why does it matter
It matters because, although "knowledge candidate" may be unlikely to match the score of "double knowledge candidate", he has a good chance of beating the score of "110% knowledge candidate" purely through random chance. The test may still distinguish between extremes, but it doesn't do so well at sorting closer candidates.
You're missing the point. Counting only correct answers on a multi-choice test doesn't measure what you know, or whether you have the necessary minimum knowledge.
With 4 choices for each question on a 100 question test, the average student (student A) who knows 50% of the answers will get at least 62 correct if they guess entirely at random when they don't know the answer (50 plus 50/4 correct guesses). The average student who knows only 25% of the material (student B) will get at least 44 correct using the same approach (25 plus 75/4). Although A knows twice as much as B, A's score is only 40% better (not 100%).
Of course, it's even worse than this. First, because there is a large degree of scatter: a student choosing at random might do much better or much worse than this. Second, because multi-choice questions are often structured so that half of the possible answers are obviously incorrect, which changes the odds.
With only two plausible answers to choose between, A might get 75 correct and B might get 63: in this case A, who knows twice as much as B, gets a score only 19% better than B.
If points are subtracted for incorrect answers (say -1/4 pt to -1/2 for each one wrong), the effect of guesses can be taken out of the equation so that differences in scores actually reflect differences in knowledge. Or if the questions are easier, a smaller proportion of both students' answers will be guesses, so the effect should be smaller.
"Interested in and conversant with" doesn't make you a scientist (in my opinion as a research scientist). Nor does a science degree. Do be a scientist you have to do science (i.e. scientific research).
Definitely applies to me. I bought my XP machine mainly to support my iPod - otherwise, I'd have been content to stick with my clunky old machine for another few years. I went with Windows rather than a Mac because it was compatible with my machine at work and with the games I had, but my first criterion was iPod compatibility.
The claim that it was immune to lawsuits was found to be invalid. That's why CSIRO counter-sued.
Not at all. CSIRO's research is not fully funded by the government and the organisation is obliged to seek around 30% of its funding from external sources such as royalties. CSIRO researchers are encouraged to patent commercially valuable work and the organisation's policy is to give staff bonuses if their patents earn the organisation royalties.
Bank.
I've twice deposited more than I thought I had into an ATM and had the bank credit my account with the full amount (instead of the amount I entered) and write me a letter to let me know of my error. And yes, I know I'm not careful enough with money.
I'm at a leading research institute. Each publication takes only two lines to detail (full reference plus number of citations). My policy is to list the best or most recent 10 publications in detail, and otherwise list the total number. Other than that, a good CV needs a list of your previous jobs (2 lines per job) dates and places of educational qualifications, and details of awards received (at most one line per award and if they take too much room that way, you're probably listing trivial awards that will have no impact on your success). Referee's details can go on the CV or on your cover letter. The place to get locquatious is in addressing the selection criteria - but that's separate from your CV.
I got tenure with a two-page CV. And when I was on a selection panel for a postdoctoral reesearcher, the successful applicant had a two-page CV. The next best two applicants had 2-3 page CVs, and the least qualified had 8 pages of filler.
An academic resume shouldn't be much longer than a normal resume. If you've written 150 peer-reviewed journal articles, say so, and list only the top 10 in full. If you've only written ten papers, consider only listing the top 5 in full. If you've more than a handful of journal papers to your name, don't bothing detailing conference proceedings papers or contract reports. Don't list all your talks, just plenaries and keynotes (if any). If you've won 10 student prizes, 10 local awards, 5 national prizes and 2 international prizes, just list the national and international prizes. Your CV should give a good idea of what you've achieved, but it shouldn't be so long and detailed as to bore the selection panel.
Unfortunately, the only thing that's really going to smell like sulfur dioxide is sulfur dioxide.
If I called several times, it would most likely be over the course of several days.