Any metric you use which is not directly linked to the quality of the publication will cause side effects, as people optimize towards the metric. The problem with scientific quality is that it is almost impossible to come up with a solid metric. It is even impossible to come up with a ordinal ranking. Many brilliant scientists had their work rejected first time but later it was a breakthrough. So obviously the reviewers were in error when they rejected those papers. In some fields people reject papers when they are researching in the same area to get rid off the competition. However, only people who research in the same area are able to understand your work at all. So even with the imperfect metric used today the measurement taking process itself is flawed. In history this was not such a big problem, as you would not drop out of academia for a low publication index. You could just continue and some day you get so convincing results and no adversary is in the way and your paper gets through in a conference proceeding or a journal.
As we all know fruits can be a dangerous weapon, especially bananas. I saw a British documentary on that topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... However, people got shot for less by policemen in the US.
This also applies to many Europeans, because we do not have to pay large fees for university. But beside that, your upside is that you have most likely not the stigma of being a criminal and it is like those times during New Economy when they trained jobless people to become programmers. Truck drivers, carpenters etc. We had such people in our company as trainees. They didn't fit at all and they were not able to solve puzzles on their own. So don't worry. If you have good university grade CS degree or any other university degree in science you should be far better trained and equipped then they ever will be.
It is technological possibly to produce all our energy requirements out renewables. It might be a more expensive. So what. Yes this means a new phone will cost more and cars must become more efficient. However, the biggest problem is not energy, but other limited resources. For that we must switch to a real circular economy which will most likely not be able to produce growth.
This answer can be easily answered. Science appears to be getting worse because of a increased media coverage on the topic. To proof this, you may count the number of such media reports over time.
The article itself provides some hypotheses on the topic of "Is science getting worse?" That might be. However, I have not seen any data to support that. Even though I would also assume that present day funding methods could increase bias and negligence. But this must be tested before the assumption becomes a valid hypothesis.
If you see humans in this way then you have to address the right technicians to solve the problem. Metal machine people are not the right ones to fix issues in communication and faulty data in the central thinking machine.
The truth is. Our present problems are not technical. They are organizational. To solve them people working in these areas must fix it.
So we shall all go into politics? Most technicians would not stand a chance in that rat cage. If you are really interesting in solving these problems, then look into the way how these areas are shaped by politics.
Present problem in supporting people with food, clothes, housing, education etc. is not a production problem, but a distribution problem. Therefore, the problem must be solved by politics and economics, and these domains are not doing their job. Tech is not the limiting factor. In Africa, hunger could be dealt with even without food supplies from outside, if all the fertile soil could be used. However, large parts cannot be used because of wars or are destroyed by war. In addition Western subventions and over production cause additional stress on market prices pushing farmers out of their business, and finally using their soil to produce soja for our animals reduces their productive capabilities further. All these problems and several others can all be fixed with different politics. So go and ask them to do their work.
Maintainability is a measure used to determine how easy it is to change and adapt code to modify existing featuers, add new one and remove obsolete ones. Changing code is the task you have to do to change the feature set.
IBM and Microsoft both were regulated for their market dominance based on monopoly laws even though there were other companies selling similar products.
No only monopolies or market dominant instances. It is obvious that there are more than one grandma' with a blog. Also your grandma' is not a service provider, like Google with its search engine or Facebook with its social network site.
As Google and Facebook have monopolies similar to Telcos own networks it is logical to control these monopolies. However, coming from Deutsche Telekom is a little strange, as they always try to shake monopoly control in Germany.
British politicians become more - Well, what is the right word for it? - nuts and nuts in recent years. Their chieftain is Cameron, but there are other super strange and politic actors around, like Farage. Also Tony Blair the previous chieftain was not much different. There are a lot of funny stories about him and his wife about not so scientific methods. However, they are only there to play politics while Murdoch decides what public opinion is and the City decides what real politics have to look like.
Maybe, they will sink themselves and vote for Brexit. We will see.
Who would have thought that? Or to say it with Louis de Funés (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GioEH34fhxE)
C: They do not trust you anymore. LdF: No C: qui LdF: Oooooh! C: They think you are spying on them. LdF: No C: qui LdF: Oooooh! C: They will not buy any stuff from you anymore. C: qui LdF: Oooooh!
However, you are lucky the Europeans will either by your shit or the Chinese one.
Medical science has no clue how allergies are acquired. They know it is a failure happening in the immune system. However it is unclear why. Some assume that it happens when an allergen looks similar to a previously llearned molecule from a virus or bacteria. Others assume exposure . The article assume lack of exposure. All three are hypotheses but we do not have a conclusive model for the issue. Nor do we know how to unlearn things.
Correct. Fix the problem not the symptom. But big oil and big coal will never do that. Furthermore, conservatives think that they are the only one who know what is right. And if they think its right it must be right.
Great idea. First, we foster the greenhouse effect with aerosols. Second, we shield the atmosphere with more aerosols. Instead of breaking something and try to fix it by breaking another thing. It would be more wise to stop messing around. However, that would not be in the interest of the fossil fuel industry. And it is against the idea that a conservative can never do wrong.
Look at Norway if you want to see a functioning system. It is not a technological problem it is a political, sociological, and phsychological problem. Have a look and read carefully this comment on the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/com...
In every poster, paper and talk we give the affiliation is specified which pays us. Furthermore, if the project is financed by a research fund, private company, the government or the EU, we must add a funded by clause to the publication. If the research project has a website, the funding is mentioned there too.
And that is what exactly? I do not need Uber. I could use MyTaxi or even talk to someone over the phone and call for a Taxi. However, in a decent city there is something called public transport. And when I can wait 10 minutes for a cab, I can also wait for a bus or local train to bring me home for a fraction of the price. Owning a zone card. That trip would not cost me any extra. Actually every time I use public transport it is beocming cheaper.
Money is always a loan of someone. Presently, a lot came from the central banks. If they rise the price for money or reduce the size of lended money it will go bust. Money is not a real thing. It has no fixed value. Same applies to gold or any other thing you use to describe wealth. However, as long as the intrest rates are higher in the US. A lot of European money is transferred to the US, lowering the Euro which makes products from there cheaper. This allows the Germans to sell more stuff in the US increasing a cashflow back to the EU. With the upcoming TTIP and TISA agreements this will even improve for money owners. However, housprices, house rentals, water supply etc. will become more expensive for the average people.
It is full of flawed logic. It was either a template based generator who does not check on the internal logic of the generated output. Or it was a clueless human which is the wetware implementation of the same thing. Even if it were true that their is a high demand in skilled coders, then this would lead to automation, but this would result in just another level of abstraction and would require even more skilled workers. Beside that, I just had a conversation yesterday, that they were unable to port an old Access database to a real database in a two years project with eight developers. Now they are using code monkeys to handle the tables in Excel. If resources could be wasted like that then there is first a boost in professionalism required.
You are wrong. This is a typical misconception. A brain works quite differently based on some analogous pattern and with certain chemicals affecting the processing. We actually do not know how the brain really works and why it works that way. Therefore, you cannot conclude your brain model out of the observations. If you ever had a hunch, you should know that your brain is able to come up with ideas which you are not able to determine logically.
Normally people are not irrational, they just do not know what they need. Therefore, it is ITs job to dive in the realm of the customer and learn their language and domain. The task is called domain engineering and requires skills in sociology, phsychology, and computer science. It works that way when working with engineers as customers in the same way as with business people, however, the meaning of words totally different. The engineers are even more complicated. We were developing a domain specific language for a specific type of embedded systems and wanted to know what they do the most and what they would like to be covered. The answer was, that they will program in any language they were ordered to use. So we needed to approach that differently;-)
So yes, you are right in your conclusion, but the bitterness speaking out of the words "clueless users" is a little bit misplaced. It is like an undertaker who complains about dead people being always so uncooperative. "Why can't they wash themselves? They did it all their lifetime."
Slashdot Mirror
Any metric you use which is not directly linked to the quality of the publication will cause side effects, as people optimize towards the metric. The problem with scientific quality is that it is almost impossible to come up with a solid metric. It is even impossible to come up with a ordinal ranking. Many brilliant scientists had their work rejected first time but later it was a breakthrough. So obviously the reviewers were in error when they rejected those papers. In some fields people reject papers when they are researching in the same area to get rid off the competition. However, only people who research in the same area are able to understand your work at all. So even with the imperfect metric used today the measurement taking process itself is flawed. In history this was not such a big problem, as you would not drop out of academia for a low publication index. You could just continue and some day you get so convincing results and no adversary is in the way and your paper gets through in a conference proceeding or a journal.
As we all know fruits can be a dangerous weapon, especially bananas. I saw a British documentary on that topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
However, people got shot for less by policemen in the US.
This also applies to many Europeans, because we do not have to pay large fees for university. But beside that, your upside is that you have most likely not the stigma of being a criminal and it is like those times during New Economy when they trained jobless people to become programmers. Truck drivers, carpenters etc. We had such people in our company as trainees. They didn't fit at all and they were not able to solve puzzles on their own. So don't worry. If you have good university grade CS degree or any other university degree in science you should be far better trained and equipped then they ever will be.
It is technological possibly to produce all our energy requirements out renewables. It might be a more expensive. So what. Yes this means a new phone will cost more and cars must become more efficient. However, the biggest problem is not energy, but other limited resources. For that we must switch to a real circular economy which will most likely not be able to produce growth.
This answer can be easily answered. Science appears to be getting worse because of a increased media coverage on the topic. To proof this, you may count the number of such media reports over time.
The article itself provides some hypotheses on the topic of "Is science getting worse?" That might be. However, I have not seen any data to support that. Even though I would also assume that present day funding methods could increase bias and negligence. But this must be tested before the assumption becomes a valid hypothesis.
The whole article does not contain one solid argument. It is utter rubbish.
If you see humans in this way then you have to address the right technicians to solve the problem. Metal machine people are not the right ones to fix issues in communication and faulty data in the central thinking machine.
The truth is. Our present problems are not technical. They are organizational. To solve them people working in these areas must fix it.
So we shall all go into politics? Most technicians would not stand a chance in that rat cage. If you are really interesting in solving these problems, then look into the way how these areas are shaped by politics.
Present problem in supporting people with food, clothes, housing, education etc. is not a production problem, but a distribution problem. Therefore, the problem must be solved by politics and economics, and these domains are not doing their job. Tech is not the limiting factor. In Africa, hunger could be dealt with even without food supplies from outside, if all the fertile soil could be used. However, large parts cannot be used because of wars or are destroyed by war. In addition Western subventions and over production cause additional stress on market prices pushing farmers out of their business, and finally using their soil to produce soja for our animals reduces their productive capabilities further. All these problems and several others can all be fixed with different politics. So go and ask them to do their work.
Maintainability is a measure used to determine how easy it is to change and adapt code to modify existing featuers, add new one and remove obsolete ones. Changing code is the task you have to do to change the feature set.
IBM and Microsoft both were regulated for their market dominance based on monopoly laws even though there were other companies selling similar products.
No only monopolies or market dominant instances. It is obvious that there are more than one grandma' with a blog. Also your grandma' is not a service provider, like Google with its search engine or Facebook with its social network site.
As Google and Facebook have monopolies similar to Telcos own networks it is logical to control these monopolies. However, coming from Deutsche Telekom is a little strange, as they always try to shake monopoly control in Germany.
British politicians become more - Well, what is the right word for it? - nuts and nuts in recent years. Their chieftain is Cameron, but there are other super strange and politic actors around, like Farage. Also Tony Blair the previous chieftain was not much different. There are a lot of funny stories about him and his wife about not so scientific methods. However, they are only there to play politics while Murdoch decides what public opinion is and the City decides what real politics have to look like.
Maybe, they will sink themselves and vote for Brexit. We will see.
Who would have thought that? Or to say it with Louis de Funés (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GioEH34fhxE)
C: They do not trust you anymore.
LdF: No
C: qui
LdF: Oooooh!
C: They think you are spying on them.
LdF: No
C: qui
LdF: Oooooh!
C: They will not buy any stuff from you anymore.
C: qui
LdF: Oooooh!
However, you are lucky the Europeans will either by your shit or the Chinese one.
Medical science has no clue how allergies are acquired. They know it is a failure happening in the immune system. However it is unclear why. Some assume that it happens when an allergen looks similar to a previously llearned molecule from a virus or bacteria. Others assume exposure . The article assume lack of exposure. All three are hypotheses but we do not have a conclusive model for the issue. Nor do we know how to unlearn things.
Correct. Fix the problem not the symptom. But big oil and big coal will never do that. Furthermore, conservatives think that they are the only one who know what is right. And if they think its right it must be right.
Great idea. First, we foster the greenhouse effect with aerosols. Second, we shield the atmosphere with more aerosols. Instead of breaking something and try to fix it by breaking another thing. It would be more wise to stop messing around. However, that would not be in the interest of the fossil fuel industry. And it is against the idea that a conservative can never do wrong.
Look at Norway if you want to see a functioning system. It is not a technological problem it is a political, sociological, and phsychological problem. Have a look and read carefully this comment on the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/com...
In every poster, paper and talk we give the affiliation is specified which pays us. Furthermore, if the project is financed by a research fund, private company, the government or the EU, we must add a funded by clause to the publication. If the research project has a website, the funding is mentioned there too.
And that is what exactly? I do not need Uber. I could use MyTaxi or even talk to someone over the phone and call for a Taxi. However, in a decent city there is something called public transport. And when I can wait 10 minutes for a cab, I can also wait for a bus or local train to bring me home for a fraction of the price. Owning a zone card. That trip would not cost me any extra. Actually every time I use public transport it is beocming cheaper.
Money is always a loan of someone. Presently, a lot came from the central banks. If they rise the price for money or reduce the size of lended money it will go bust. Money is not a real thing. It has no fixed value. Same applies to gold or any other thing you use to describe wealth. However, as long as the intrest rates are higher in the US. A lot of European money is transferred to the US, lowering the Euro which makes products from there cheaper. This allows the Germans to sell more stuff in the US increasing a cashflow back to the EU. With the upcoming TTIP and TISA agreements this will even improve for money owners. However, housprices, house rentals, water supply etc. will become more expensive for the average people.
It is full of flawed logic. It was either a template based generator who does not check on the internal logic of the generated output. Or it was a clueless human which is the wetware implementation of the same thing. Even if it were true that their is a high demand in skilled coders, then this would lead to automation, but this would result in just another level of abstraction and would require even more skilled workers. Beside that, I just had a conversation yesterday, that they were unable to port an old Access database to a real database in a two years project with eight developers. Now they are using code monkeys to handle the tables in Excel. If resources could be wasted like that then there is first a boost in professionalism required.
You are wrong. This is a typical misconception. A brain works quite differently based on some analogous pattern and with certain chemicals affecting the processing. We actually do not know how the brain really works and why it works that way. Therefore, you cannot conclude your brain model out of the observations. If you ever had a hunch, you should know that your brain is able to come up with ideas which you are not able to determine logically.
Normally people are not irrational, they just do not know what they need. Therefore, it is ITs job to dive in the realm of the customer and learn their language and domain. The task is called domain engineering and requires skills in sociology, phsychology, and computer science. It works that way when working with engineers as customers in the same way as with business people, however, the meaning of words totally different. The engineers are even more complicated. We were developing a domain specific language for a specific type of embedded systems and wanted to know what they do the most and what they would like to be covered. The answer was, that they will program in any language they were ordered to use. So we needed to approach that differently ;-)
So yes, you are right in your conclusion, but the bitterness speaking out of the words "clueless users" is a little bit misplaced. It is like an undertaker who complains about dead people being always so uncooperative. "Why can't they wash themselves? They did it all their lifetime."