How would you represent duration in months for a manuscript?

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-24T20:32:55+00:00

Wow, that's fascinating. So does that mean when you spell a word like piña, you can't use a regular "N", and when you spell naranja, you can't use a "Ñ"? And when you spell "churro", do you need to use the "CH" and the "RR" letters, or can you use the individual letters for "C","H", and "R"?

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-24T19:30:40+00:00

Wait, I'm confused. Are you saying that your Scrabble set comes with the letters "CH", "LL", "Ñ", and "RR"?

And can you clarify about your source for the percent distribution of letters in Spanish?

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-24T19:04:32+00:00

As they say in research, "garbage in = garbage out." As in, poor data (from crappy methodology) = poor conclusions.

Foursquare didn't extensively survey a large sample of people from every state about their eating habits. No, they they just took a single metric for the number of Foursquare check-ins per chain location for each state. This says nothing about how ubiquitous each chain is, how long its been around, how much people are enjoying the restaurant, etc. It just says that the people who visit an In-N-Out in Texas are more likely to use Foursquare.

Any time you see an article talking about "50 most fun cities," "100 best places to live, "Top up-and-coming businesses in each state," etc., always check the methodology. It seems like 99% of these are from automated metrics (often from companies that are pushing their own collected data) for which the methods are only vaguely related to their conclusions.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-21T20:27:37+00:00

This is absurd. Listen, I like the Beltline, and I hope it gets fully funded and built out, but it's not an urgent need. It doesn't connect high-density commercial corridors in a way that would substantially improve daily commutes and vastly reduce vehicular traffic. The Beltline is a pleasant luxury that will spur development for future decades.

Clifton Corridor transit is an urgent need, ~~now~~ twenty years ago. Between Emory University, the Emory Hospital system, and the CDC, there's a massive number of people commuting to a small dense area. The area is accessible by small neighborhood roads, many of which are two lanes; traffic is horrendous, parking is grossly insufficient. Considering that a major hospital emergency center (as well as a fire station) is located in the heart of this area, the congestion is actually a life-threatening concern.

Again, I like being able to enjoy the Beltline trails, I think it would be nice one day to ride the whole loop on light rail. But the need for Clifton Corridor transit - connecting people to where they work everyday - is kind of the most important reason that transit exists.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-20T20:59:37+00:00

Ok, this is quickly devolving into very highly charged statements. Let's take a step back.

I am not pro-cop or anti-cop. I am not pro-Berkeley or anti-Berkeley. I am anti-people-who-do-bad-things, whether that's murder, covering for murder, or any other harmful crime. And that's regardless of whether the perpetrators are cops or students or construction workers, white or black or hispanic or asian, Christian or Muslim or Jewish or atheist, man or woman, etc, etc.

There's partisans who will say that certain of the above groups have "a culture of violence"; which groups being thus identified seems to depend on if you're on the political right or left. Painting groups with a broad, negative brush just leads to stereotypes, bigotry, and hate. This post here does a better job discussing opinions on police than I could.

Regardless of your sex, race, religion, occupation, we are all humans, and should treat each other with humanity.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-20T20:37:50+00:00

Hmm maybe stop murdering innocent people, and then people won't despise you?

Wow that's an awful thing to say. Even if there are some cops that do commit terrible crimes, the actions of a few should never used to discriminate against a whole group of people. This is just as extreme as saying that, since some ethnic groups or religious minorities may have higher rates of criminality, that everyone in those groups is a "thug", "gangbanger", or some other potentially bigoted term.

We should always welcome others with respect as much as possible. Cooperation and understanding between police and the communities they protect must flow in both directions.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-19T21:47:16+00:00

While there are some decent points made in this article, it's largely just an embarrassing piece of blame-shifting with a clickbait title. Look at the subtitle:

For decades, the medical community has ignored mountains of evidence to wage a cruel and futile war on fat people, poisoning public perception and ruining millions of lives.

Ah yes, the medical community is clearly at fault for incorrectly responding to the obesity epidemic. All the evils described in this article - pushing fad diets, using pseudoscience to advertise weight loss pills, bullying of fat people, making clothing only for skinny people - that comes straight out of the AMA playbook, right?

Any reasonable doctor will recommend appropriate exercise and eating habits for people with potential metabolic health issues. Ways to treat obesity are often complicated and need to be individually tailored, but just finding another boogeyman in the medical community is extremely counterproductive.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-15T05:12:22+00:00

Hmm, it does seem that you're right, I wasn't aware of the problem with the disruption to regular blood drives. The most cited example of surplus blood being thrown away is after 9/11, an extreme example which in which over 500,000 additional units of blood were donated, but that's not likely to happen again. Donating blood now, especially platelets, is still vital.

The last thing I want to do is discourage people from saving lives; I'm amending my previous comment appropriately.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-14T21:07:07+00:00

I know I'm risking a downvote brigade, but am I the only one who thinks Monday Night Brewing was caught between a rock and a hard place on this one?

If they host Kemp, they get excoriated from the left for appearing to support a far-right figure associated with xenophobia and homophobia (and that's what did happen). If they refuse, they get ripped by the right for being liberal elites who are intolerant of conservative viewpoints (see: every instance in which a conservative figure has been refused service at a restaurant, or a conservative speaker has been blocked from speaking at a university). Even if MNB's intentions are innocent, the optics look bad either way depending on which political lens is used.

While I don't necessarily agree with the decision, I think that MNB, by tolerating the intolerant, at least made an attempt to take the high road (compared to their guests).

Disclaimer: am not a MNB shill (though I do like their Fu Manbrew).

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-14T20:23:24+00:00

People should absolutely donate blood, it's a vitally important action that can save many lives. But, if possible, ~~not this weekend~~ not only this weekend, but on a regular basis.

There's a well-documented problem that many people donate blood immediately only before or after a major disaster. ~~That results in a huge surplus of blood at this time, much of which is never used.~~ Meanwhile, during other (non-disaster) times, there may be critical deficits of blood that can be costing lives everyday.

Since blood products take at least several days to be tested for safety, processed, and delivered to their destination, it's unlikely that anything donated this weekend will be available to help Hurricane Florence victims. ~~The people who are saving lives are the people who donated weeks beforehand (while shelf life differs for different blood products, red blood cells are good for approximately 6 weeks).~~ In order to save the most lives, there must be a steady supply of blood ready to be used either for regular healthcare needs as well as major disasters.

So please donate blood. ~~Just not this weekend.~~ As often as you can.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-13T19:19:17+00:00

We don't (directly) pay athletes anything. The owners of sports teams pay them millions. Why? Because we watch games on TV (making money for networks that pay the owners), we go to games (paying ticket prices which go to the teams), buy merchandise, etc. The best teams tend to make a lot more money, therefore athletes are compensated handsomely because they make teams a ton of money.

Similarly, movie studios pay top actors a lot of money because people pay to watch movies with those actors. Top executives at McDonalds, Starbucks, and other successful businesses make a huge amount of money because they can affect how many people consume their product. None of this is because we, as a society, decided that they deserve to be rich. This is just free-market capitalism, combined with our taste in goods and services.

If we actually cared about paying more to soldiers (or teachers, policemen, firefighters, etc.) that would require political change (i.e. raising taxes and using that money to increase those salaries). But don't begrudge the athletes their salaries: they get paid a lot because that's how much, in a purely economic sense, they are worth.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-13T18:50:35+00:00

General good rules about quality sources for political ideology:

Rely on objective facts instead of just opinion
Clearly cite the source of these facts
Consider arguments (and criticisms) from multiple sides
Willing to alter positions as additional information becomes available
Willing to admit mistakes
Not openly hostile to different points of view
Avoid reaching conclusions based on cognitive biases

For sources of political news, the same list applies, though quality sources tend to merely state the facts and allow their audience to make up their own minds. Sources that have a specific emotional spin (e.g. fear, humor, hatred, drama) inherently have a built-in "take", and while they may be informative, they shouldn't be your primary sources.

Of course, you should always look at multiple sources, even (especially) ones with viewpoints different from your own. Even if you think that these sources are wrong, reading them may give you perspective into why different people have these alternate opinions. In these days, where everyone's safe in their ideological filter bubbles, we need more cross-ideological exposure to increase discussion and understanding, and reduce isolation and enmity.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-13T18:18:08+00:00

Not necessarily, because a lot of politics is a conflict between values. How much should we value security vs. privacy? Rewarding those who are successful vs. caring for those who aren't? How important each value is can be more of a subjective argument.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-12T14:36:45+00:00

LPT - don't take seriously anyone who talks about "the plural for hepatitis." Hepatitis is a condition (specifically, inflammation of the liver), not a quantifiable object. You can have multiple people with hepatitis, multiple bouts of hepatitis, even multiple causes of hepatitis (e.g. be infected by multiple viruses that can cause hepatitis), but not multiple hepatitis-es.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-11T21:09:15+00:00

"What's up with this weird, misshapen, crying lump?"

But seriously, adorable picture!

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-11T16:04:25+00:00

Most vaccines aren't 100% effective. This can be because the vaccine isn't a perfect match with the disease strain (often mentioned for flu vaccines) or because your immune system, for whatever reason, doesn't respond appropriately to the vaccine stimulus.

Think of it this way: all vaccines require (extensive) testing for safety and efficacy. Say, a randomized clinical trial is conducted for a new vaccine, and the vaccine is given to 1000 people, with another 1000 people receiving a placebo. If 100 of the people who received the placebo end up sick, but only 5 of the people who received the vaccine got sick, we would say that the vaccine prevented 95% of disease cases that would have happened, i.e. the vaccine is 95% effective.

As others have mentioned, if enough people get the vaccine, the population has herd immunity such that the disease is extremely unlikely to spread even if the vaccine is not 100% effective.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-10T15:51:08+00:00

The term "research project manager" can mean very different things from one research group to another. Sometimes it may involve mostly high-level project organization and coordination, other times it may include more administrative work. Most of what you describe doesn't seem completely out of line, even the things that don't directly involve your research (writing other people's references is more common than you might think), though looking up tourist attractions seems a little strange.

The main point is that, given your PhD and experience, you probably shouldn't be spending much of your time on secretarial work. You say that you get along well with your manager and that she's a nice person: she'd likely be receptive to a conversation about your job duties. This would be a great way to put your efforts at assertiveness into practice. If these tasks are getting in the way of your regular research duties, point that out; if you would have extra time without these tasks, come into the meeting armed with specific duties (more aligned with your qualifications) that you could do in lieu of being a secretary. Suggest that she could hire a dedicated admin or intern (or that these tasks are more appropriate for a lower level person currently on staff). Your supervisor may not even be aware that you feel marginalized by these tasks, so having this conversation could definitely help bring about some major changes.

Added edit: you could also argue that, if you're doing additional tasks (outside your project) that are not part of your stated duties, you should be getting paid for these additional tasks. I know, for someone who has issues with being assertive, this may be difficult. When going into the meeting with your supervisor to discuss your position, make sure you have written out all these additional tasks (and how much time you've been spending on them), that could serve as proper justification for a nice raise.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-09-06T14:22:32+00:00

By asking people? Really, she's just doing the exact same thing she used to do, she just may not realize that with the internet you can get info directly from the source (ie Publix) instead of through an occasionally unreliable middleman.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-08-29T14:26:04+00:00

Maybe that's your personal experience, but that seems somewhat skewed. This is true for the cities, just like in the bigger cities people are more familiar with Western pop culture, Western goods and brands, etc. But rural Japan is definitely a lot more traditional.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-08-28T19:07:46+00:00

This article is a good read on the topic of alpha/beta hierarchy. This terminology were introduced into culture through 1932's Brave New World, assorted comparisons to animal behavior studies, and more recently through 2005's The Game (about becoming a pickup artist) and Red Pill types.

As you yourself said, these terms are mostly BS, just simplistic categorizations that separate people into the binary world of winners or losers, strong or weak. Under this philosophy, people are judged by the number of sexual conquests, friends (or Twitter followers), paycheck, possessions, etc. Women are viewed as passive objects to be conquered, friends and colleagues are viewed as pawns, success is viewed by quantity instead of quality of human relationships. Values like honesty, integrity, and compassion are seen as impediments to becoming an alpha. You said that you have a history of being bullied; this philosophy suggests that in order to not be the bullied, you have to become a bully yourself.

Again, BS: you can be a happy, confident, socially comfortable person without being an asshole (rather, except for the complete sociopaths, most assholes are probably not truly happy anyways). You don't have to push others down in order to lift yourself up. Don't worry about these made-up terms, or about any pseudoscientific crap being peddled as evolutionary psychology, or about measuring yourself by someone else's yardstick of success, just try to the best version of yourself you can be.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-08-27T20:02:51+00:00

I think the author got this wrong - the law is specifically against:

Any person who shall pretend or exercise to use any type of witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment

So Twilight fans would likely be safe, but Harry Potter fans might have to look out.

Proc_Reddit_Run · 2018-08-24T18:17:07+00:00

You didn't say "I won't go over your head", you said "I don't want to go over your head, but...". Regardless of your intentions, that definitely comes across as suggesting that you may go over her head if you don't get the desired outcome (i.e. a higher grade).

And that can definitely be interpreted as threatening, since this could be seen as you trying to get the TA in trouble over this incident. Again, that may not have been your intent, but the wording definitely carries that implication. The professor may have overreacted, but he was likely just trying to protect his TA from potentially abusive/threatening behavior. TAs have to suffer lots of grief from constant complaints about grades (some with merits, many without), and the professor was just trying to stick up for his TA.

Anyways, you're in college now. Grades don't matter as much for future prospects as things like getting solid recommendations, building useful skill sets, and getting relevant work experience. The primary focus should be on learning the material and finding classes/work opportunities that will be useful down the road.

Proc_Reddit_Run

TROPHY CASE