I actually robot-fed my kitten from day one, so they basically don’t associate me with food at all, just with cuddles and reprimands.
I actually robot-fed my kitten from day one, so they basically don’t associate me with food at all, just with cuddles and reprimands.
Thank God for double blind peer reviews, warts and all.
Reminds me of a scene from Don’t Look Up
I see no indicators that this was AI. Lots of details, no inconsistency.
Reminds me of this work by Latour. It goes into the tremendous amount of oftentimes political labor that goes into the establishment of new scientific knowledge as paradigmatic:
This assumes that the aorta cannot be deformed by the school bus. Cooked penne can be destroyed by a six sided die.
Conversely, social scientists tend to compete on how to underdress the most.
And cats. They were a menace.
Exactly, in honor of Jimmy Neutron.
Hmmm, I’m increasingly wary of FOSS software as well. It’s part of the system and can be bought up. Not sure about the alternatives to it, though. I guess highly technical people with lots of free time can just self-host and compile, but that’s a minority.
Ah, I see. That makes more sense 😌
Kinda interesting to see, since Russia does not have Spotify afaik.
Considering how lucrative drama content is, to the point where people orchestrate drama, I guess a lot of people care.
Hmmm, I initially wanted to agree with the OP, since the whole “Pravda” thing is a naming scheme from Soviet times, but apparently it’s reasonably well regarded:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ukrayinska-pravda-the-ukrainian-truth/
I.e. not at all like Komsomolskaya Pravda, which is straight up Russian yellow press party line nonsense.
There needs to be a song called Thirteeen!
Oh, awesome! Does it do speaker detection? That’s been one of my main gripes with Whisper.
In my field it’s often general journal policy, not an individual choice. It’s hit or miss, as it can be easy to guess who the reviewer or author is in a niche field. I personally don’t go out of my way to figure out the author’s affiliation, even if it can be trivial. Regarding self citations, those are usually obfuscated at the review stage. I’d say that a paper is easy to narrow down to a circle of scholars, but it might be the first paper of a research associate, a throwaway paper by a PI, or a paper that aims to engage those narrow specialists. So is a kind of smoke screen.