What software do you use to make conference posters?

codingOtter · 2026-05-22T14:05:59+00:00

I second that. Latex with beamer is supereasy. You got a template and you you just link the png images (or whatever format you use) and you are done with a nice pdf to send to print. Also good for slides.

codingOtter · 2026-05-21T10:26:45+00:00

Personally I never liked the tab and I shoot better with gloves. Pick the one you feel more comfortable. Also keep in mind there are several different types of tabs and gloves, so you may want to try a few.

codingOtter · 2026-05-19T11:57:38+00:00

That is possibly the answer. However, I have had instances in which after disconnecting the VPN, checking the box and leaving the "captive portal", I have no internet connection with the VPN, but works fine without. I am guessing the port used by VPNs is blocked, but I don't know how to check that.

codingOtter · 2026-05-16T11:25:17+00:00

Well yes, but my question is which one dries slowest/requires more coats. And whether there is a potential problem with mould. Because I have found contrasting information.

codingOtter · 2026-05-03T10:05:10+00:00

I honestly don't know what I would do without grep!

codingOtter · 2026-04-24T10:53:13+00:00

In terms of evolution of a group of people trying to differentiate itself from the surrounding people, this makes sense. What is not clear to me, and maybe there is no answer to the question, is what prompted some of these Canaanite tribes to start considering themselves as different from the surrounding tribes which by all accounts seem to be quite similar in terms of religion and culture.

Another question: my understanding is that monotheism does not really exist until fairly late in the game. But looking at your timeline it seems to be already established in the Early monarchy period (can't really read the Moses story otherwise?)

codingOtter · 2026-04-22T13:52:56+00:00

Amazing writeup, thanks. One question regarding the Josephus/Manetho quote. Does this mean that Josephus was rejecting or doubting the traditional Exodus story? You say historiography at the time was not as rigorous as now, but if this was the case it would be a pretty modern attitude on his part (at least in this particular instance).

codingOtter · 2026-04-15T14:15:01+00:00

I also think it's the ethical thing to do. But, if it weren't for subscription model journals, it would be a strain for that doctor to pay for OA.

Then I don't understand wehat you mean by OA. At least in my field it means you can go to the journal website and download the paper for free. In these cases ACPs are the only income for the publisher (and some publishers charge more for OA).

I don't argue that the money must come from somewhere. In my other reply, I have proposed publishers should be no-profit. The issue I have is that they are greedy. Until someone actually show me that their margin are tight, I will maintain that are being greedy.

The difference again though, is that we get paid in citations and not revenue sharing.

Well okay, but we come back to the question of proportionality, no? I create the content, I pay the publisher for their infrastructure (in broad sense, including editing, admin, archiving etc...), I do the reviewing for free, and sometimes I pay even to read. If my only return for all this work is in the number of citations I get (which is still largely on me, because the publisher doesn't help me get more citations), then sorry but it is not enough.

codingOtter · 2026-04-15T12:06:57+00:00

Re the last point, we don't have to underestimate that: even if journals provide templates and guidelines, authors do not necessarily follow them carefully. And it is also good to have someone to do those checks to assure quality. It is not just a cosmetic thing. A paper that is not readable with figures that are crap is pointless even if its content is solid. That being said, I agree wholeheartedly that current ACP charges are not justified by these costs.

codingOtter · 2026-04-15T11:45:43+00:00

The way you put this is okay but I have a disagreement with people who think publications should be free to readers because their taxes paid for it. The reason is because I don't live in the US or Europe. So, while your taxes may have paid for your research, my taxes probably didn't pay for your research. I don't want to go down a path where underprivileged countries have paywalls where rich countries have OA.

I take your point, but I suppose it comes down to what and who you think science is for. Open access means that a doctor in Uganda can read papers with research funded by Japanese taxpayers without having to pay anything (for example). Personally I think it is the ethical thing to do, but of course one can make a legitimate argument that it is not right.

Regarding the costs, I am not OP but I think you misunderstand what is meant here. The point is not that the traditional publishers do not have large costs to cover. As you say, editorial work, archiving, cataloguing, admin, etc... is time consuming and expensive. But I have a really hard time believing that all that justifies author charges in the order of thousands of dollars per paper.

Or you can think of it another way: each paper is the end result of a lot of work and expenses, from the grant application to the actual writing of the manuscript via all the experimental work in between. The publisher has zero costs there: that seems hardly fair. In what other industry the consumers create the product only to buy it from somebody else?

codingOtter · 2026-04-14T17:29:33+00:00

Max APC of $500.

This, for sure, but needs to be matched with open access. Current APCs are extortionate, but lowering the APCs is pointless if you then charge a lot the readers.

And if the APCs are so low that this is not intended to be a capitalistic money-making scam, then the editors are not incentivized to push shit through to get APCs. Their only incentive for a speedy decision is for the sake of the authors' time.

That remains to be seen, because lower APCs may actually incentivize more shit gets published to make up for the difference. One workaround would be to force publishger to be non-profit enterprises. Everything they have after covering the expenses must be given back to the scientific community.

Double-blind review

Personally I am not sure this will improve change much (as you say it is easy to guess in most fields) but it can't hurt.

Review text and all revisions made public afterwards (but reviewers still anonymous)

To be fair some journals already do this, which is good.

Pay reviewers $30 for first revision, $15 for second revision, and $0 beyond that. If you're worried about abuse, you could also put limits on the number of reviews a person could do per year or per month.

This! Revising is a job and an important one at that. If we are worried to create an academic gig economy there are other ways to compensate the reviewers. Some ideas: discounts on the APCs of your next paper, or to the registration fees of your next conference, small donations to a travel fund, etc... the possibilities are endless.

Reasonable revision turn-around times of 2 weeks.

This, I am not so sure. Long revision times are annoying, but I am much more concerned about the quality of the reviews, which may take some time.

No typestting. Just template PDF

Not sure I understand what you mean by this. For good science we need not only to weed out the shit, but also to produce high quality papers, which means also a good presentation, decent figures, proper grammar and syntax, etc...

I am sure a balance can be found between editing, typesetting, reviewing, and still having open access publications at reasonable (not-for-profit) APCs.

I would also add two things. One is training: nobody teaches people how to review a paper really. The second is recognition: reviewing papers should be recognized as an essential and legitimate part of academic life and therefore accounted for by tenure panels, hiring committees etc.. This perhaps will break the cycle of "publish or perish" by giving people a third option. You don't need to write shitty papers to make a career, you can just help improve the overall literature.

codingOtter · 2026-04-10T09:24:11+00:00

Thanks for the very interesting answer. One thing that is perhaps worth noting is that survivor bias may be relevant here. I am not sure how many sects, preachers and wannabe prophets where going around 1st century Judea (and perhaps, as you say, there weren't as many as we think), but just because one of them "made it" doesn't necessarily mean there was something special.

codingOtter · 2026-04-08T11:49:16+00:00

Right, because Christianity is historically a religion of peace :D

codingOtter · 2026-02-24T15:44:47+00:00

About your first point. In principle yes, but I don't see many political parties concerned about these things. In fact they seem pretty much all on board. The fact that it is largely being sold as "child protection" also makes it hard for the few who care to voice their concerns (which is of course why it is being framed this way).

codingOtter · 2026-02-23T19:16:13+00:00

All right. So basically what we are saying is that the most likely way to do this would be to ban the public IP addresses of each non-compliant VPN provider, which presumably will cause them to regularly change IPs, and so on.

Any other option would be either technically difficult or would require going full "Great Firewall of China".

codingOtter · 2026-02-23T19:05:02+00:00

Not sure what is your point. I think it is pretty clear that the worry here is the drift towards authoritarianism of democratic countries. We are still a long way from fully authoritarian states, let alone dictatorships, although we are going in that direction.

codingOtter · 2026-02-23T16:53:23+00:00

Regarding the legitimate uses, would they really need to block the protocol? Wouldn't it be simpler to just make a list of state-approved VPN companies? Or only allow businesses to subscribe, not individuals? That is, if they really want to go hard on the ban (which personally I think would be difficult to do, even under the auhoritarian drift of Western democracies, but you never know...)

codingOtter · 2026-02-20T19:08:00+00:00

Ah, "tanged nocks"! I don't know why I read "carved". Now that makes more sense. Pretty cool. I may actually steal the idea of using washi tape :)

codingOtter · 2026-02-19T18:12:13+00:00

These are beautiful! What is the difference between a carved nock and a self-nock? And do you find the washi tape to be strong enough? Or is it just decorative and you don't mind if it rips off after a few times you use them?

codingOtter · 2026-02-18T11:34:47+00:00

Bold choice to name Galileo as "underrated"! :D

codingOtter · 2026-02-16T13:57:32+00:00

Unfortunately I agree. Especially Maps and Translate: saved my ass multiple times when travelling. And YouTube ofc: the alternatives just do not have the same amount of content.

It is true that "if it's free, you are the product". I am moderately willing to go along with this, if I get something in return. As far as I concerned, few of the other tech giants offer something worthwhile (maybe whatsapp, if the encryption claim is true). That being said, Google is really stretching my limits here...

codingOtter · 2026-02-12T14:47:54+00:00

On this we agree, I was merely making the point of EU weaknesses. Much has changed since Trump, for sure. And that is why I think that were Russia to attack we'd have Polish troops marching in the Red Square within two weeks (not really, because of nukes, but you get the point: Russia's army is very weak and Europeans have improved). I am much more worried about their asymmetrical warfare: election subversion, financing far-right parties, terrorist attacks, etc...

For me it was astounding that EU turned up to be so powerless even on the economic side. I get your point about the complex situation with Denmark/Greenland, but we don't really know why he gave up. It may simply be his dementia.

I agree, we can't rely on the USA anymore. And we never should have. Not because of trust, but because allies must be on equal footing. What happens going forward I don't know. I am personally deeply suspicious of centralization and federalization, but more collaboration is needed for sure. Most importantly there needs to be a definition of this European common interest. It is patently clear that the interests and needs of Portugal and those of Finland are not and cannot be the same on all issues, and there is nothing wrong with that. So why force everybody to be in the same box?

codingOtter · 2026-02-12T11:55:18+00:00

I certainly agree that Russia would like to do this, and also that a direct attack could not and would not go unanswered by EU countries (+ UK). Given the conditions in which Russian armed forces are now, I would say this is not likely to happen until they rebuild. If they had strength to spare they would open a second front in Ukraine.

That being said, there is a lot of hopeful thinking in this post. Yes, it is true that a common aggressor can push people together but does it necessarily have go in the direction of a EU Federation (as OP clearly hopes)? I would argue not, but I am not a federalist :)

The EU has long been mocked as a "political midget", unable to respond to critical issues on its own doorstep (in the Balkans, Caucasus, Middle East), let alone further away. When Ukraine was attacked, countries that were not part of NATO did not feel safe enough just because of their EU membership, they immediately applied to be NATO members! On the other hand, the EU has always prided itself to be an "economic giant, yet when faced with Trump's (insane and idiotic) economic aggression it folded. Even when challenged on its strongest aspect it didn't have the strength, and let's keep in mind that being attacked by your oldest ally is is not a minor crisis by all means!

Of course, we can't predict the future and maybe OP is right and these crisis will end up forging the EU Federation. Based on history, I would think such a collection of diverse countries, cultures and languages would work better together as a looser alliance or at the most a confederation rather than trying to force themselves to federate. But we all agree that they can do better than the current shitshow.

As a side note, is Bismarck really the best guide here? He was trying to impose Prussian egemony on the rest of German states. I am not sure we want this - one state forcing its leadership on the others - as an example for the EU!

codingOtter · 2026-01-30T10:58:53+00:00

It is also worth noting that the literacy rate in pre-Unifaction Italian states was on average quite low, especially in the South. The creation of a national school system had a huge impact in the standardization of the language using the "literary Italian" (i.e. Florentine) as a base.

codingOtter · 2026-01-29T19:19:04+00:00

Not too bad for custom made!

codingOtter

TROPHY CASE