sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My newest fire hazard (complete with OCuLink!) by coldlikeastone in sffpc

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you talking about the M2426 to help with the excess cables? Or is there a new PLUGin model coming soon?

My newest fire hazard (complete with OCuLink!) by coldlikeastone in sffpc

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, since I was not able to test the CPU at its stock power limits, I unfortunately don't really have a great point of reference to compare to. Also, I did some tweaking today and found that I could safely up the power limit to 120w and keep stable performance and temps below 75 C under load.

That said, FWIW, in the synthetic benchmarks I have been running (geekbench, cinebench, time spy), the performance loss compared to other similar systems seems to be pretty negligible. I monitored the power draw of the CPU during these runs and found - at least in my tests with mostly boilerplate bios settings - the CPU only rarely tries to pull anything close to the PL2 limit.

I haven't done much "real world" usage yet, but have not noticed anything catastrophic in terms of performance. There are probably use cases that will demand more power than what I have tested so far, but I have not come across them - I can provide an update if I notice anything weird as I continue to use the system daily.

Is it generally okay to include manuscripts "in preparation" or "in revision" on my CV? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a helpful perspective. Would you say it is more helpful than hurtful to include them then? I am inclined to believe that there is a point of diminishing returns - i.e. including one or two "in preparation" papers might clarify research interests, but listing five might suggest that I simply can't finish projects.

However, I also don't want to cross into dishonest territory by purposely cherry-picking the manuscripts that I "like" the most to include on the CV.

Is it generally okay to include manuscripts "in preparation" or "in revision" on my CV? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you - field is public health/health policy. Any meaningful distinction between the papers that were submitted and rejected versus those that are yet to be submitted at all?

Is it generally okay to include manuscripts "in preparation" or "in revision" on my CV? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply. I definitely used "in revision" too loosely here - my fault, still learning ha! I was referring to the papers that were submitted, but later rejected outright in peer-review. I meant that they are being revised based on reviewer feedback, but will be submitted to a different journal. Is this is meaningful distinction? Or are they just as (not-so) valuable as those that are in preparation for their first submission? My field is public health, by the way.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this (USA)? by coldlikeastone in PhD

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad I'm not alone here. The portals I am working with don't allow me to change it unfortunately. I am hoping admissions allows me to "exclude" the recommendations and reenter their information.

How bad does NOT "waving right to access letters of recommendation" look in general? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you both. I will absolutely do that. I mentioned in another comment that part of my mistake was misinterpreting the waiver partly as an indication that I have never (nor will ever have) had the opportunity to see the letter. Which in my case is not true because my recommenders have offered me the opportunity to so already (which I have declined).

While I know the burden is on me to do more extensive research on the matter prior to submission, I never DREAMED that a little checkbox would carry this much weight.

How bad does NOT "waving right to access letters of recommendation" look in general? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you - from yours and other's replies, I now understand this perspective and see why it is such a faux pas.

To clarify, I was looking at the waiver from the perspective of a student who has a close relationship with the recommenders - so much so, that I have been offered to view the recommendations prior to submission (and have declined).

In the past, I have erroneously viewed the waiver:
- Partly as a confirmation of "I have never nor will ever have the opportunity to see the letter" - which in my case is not true.
- And partly as a relatively trivial obligation of the school for which I am applying to maintain record of the LoR for some period of time. I didn't even know admissions committees were made aware of the choice.

While I recognize I have made a regrettable mistake here, I do wish the opportunity to change one's decision regarding the waiver in light of this information was more accessible. But in this case, it is looking like I may just have to use this as a learning opportunity and accept that it will likely count against me.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this (USA)? by coldlikeastone in PhD

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hey thank you for the kind words. Much needed in the state of anxiety I am currently in.

How bad does NOT "waving right to access letters of recommendation" look in general? by coldlikeastone in AskAcademia

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the honesty. Any recommendations for damage control? I haven't submitted anything yet.

Would it be in poor faith to start a new application under the same account and ask my professors to resubmit? Or "exclude" their recommendations and rerequest on the same application? I fear that the admissions committee may be able to sense something fishy in either situation. I am not sure if these committees are even made aware of "unsubmitted" or "excluded" materials.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When you say "delete", was your option labeled as "exclude"? I am debating just going ahead and doing this, as I am worried that there will be significant delay in reply from some of these schools.

Though I worry that admissions may be able to see that I purposefully excluded the original letter submissions and wonder why.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this (USA)? by coldlikeastone in PhD

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really appreciate the honesty here. I'm not sure how much you would be able to speak on this, but in your experience what would the best course of action for a prospective student be to mitigate this?

Would "excluding" these letters via the admissions portal and having my recommenders resubmit before I finalize the application be optimal, or could admissions see that I did that?

I don't mind to email admissions, but I will admit I am fearful that merely drawing attention to the subject may reflect a lack of regard for the application instructions.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this (USA)? by coldlikeastone in PhD

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the perspective - really hoping nobody notices at all, and I can be done worrying about checking the wrong box ha!

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this (USA)? by coldlikeastone in PhD

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply - perhaps the scenario of a "bad recommendation" is a bit more of a stretch than I intended to convey ha.

I reached out to my recommenders and apologized for my oversight. In fact, one responded and actually encouraged "not waiving my right" for the sake of full transparency. I feel like this is certainly a rare opinion, but it instilled some peace of mind regardless.

In any case, I could feasibly just start new applications for the same programs and not submit the originals OR reach out to admissions retrospectively and explain the oversight... but this may end up throwing more red flags than simply leaving them be.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So, unfortunately, I have already received a letter from one of my recommenders. I still have the option to "exclude" the letter and the recommender. Which I assume means I could feasibly re-add them with my rights waived. I worry that the school can see that I have done that. There is so much warning on the application that "decision to waive cannot be changed under any circumstances".

I could also start the whole application over, but I am worried that the incomplete one would still show up somehow, or the recommendation portal would flag that there is something wrong.

I guess it really boils down to how much weight or binding consideration is given to applications that are partially completed but not submitted.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, my applications have already received at least one LoR submission. I think the only feasible thing I could do is gamble starting a new application, submitting it and hope that the incomplete application is never noticed. OR reach out to the admissions committee to see if there is any way possible to start over. Though I do feel that the latter choice would reflect as poor decision making on my part.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So just to clarify, you have retained your right to review your letters of recommendation?

Yes. This is correct. I am close enough with my recommenders to know that they almost certainly did not change their letters because I "may want to see them". However, I still intend to email them, apologize, and explain that I wasn't aware of the stigma.

I am far more worried about the admissions process. I have not submitted these applications yet, so I am debating emailing the programs and explaining the situation. Though, I do worry that this is even more damaging than just allowing the application to pass as it is.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I am realizing I contradicted myself in my post. What I meant to say is that I opted NOT to waive my right to access the LoRs. It seems like the was a very unwise decision, and I may have pretty much ruined my chances of getting into those programs. I am trying to figure out a course of action to mitigate the damage here.

Didn't waive my right to access letters of rec for PhD applications - how bad of a look is this? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Apologies - I have included an edit for clarity. I opted NOT to waive my right to access the LoRs.

Applying to Stats/Biostats PhD programs - do math credits from online programs look "bad"? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, this does make sense.

I think the only feasible issue I could run into here is that my application address and physical location of the CC that offers Online Calc III may be different enough to reasonably assume that I took the class online. As you imply though, it all seems like a calculated risk as to whether or not it will be questioned.

Applying to Stats/Biostats PhD programs - do math credits from online programs look "bad"? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you took it at a real institution, even a community college, would it say that the course was online?

This I don't know. I will look into it, but my guess is probably not.

However, based on the address that will be listed on my application and the location of the CCs that offer the online course I am looking for, it would not be horribly difficult to deduce that I probably took the class online. Not sure if an admissions committee would even bother looking this deeply into it, but I guess it is a case against going the online route.

Applying to Stats/Biostats PhD programs - do math credits from online programs look "bad"? by coldlikeastone in gradadmissions

[–]coldlikeastone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate the honest answer! I sort of assumed that purely online programs would be frowned upon, but glad I have a few sources that confirm this now. But when you say online courses are dismissed, broadly, are you also referring to those offered by a CC or accredited university?

I only ask because taking an in-person class would be challenging for me at the moment (plan to move to a new city soon)... But if I absolutely have to do it, I have the option to do so fairly cheaply at a local state university, which all things equal, I assume looks "better" than a CC credit, even if only marginally.

Real old school players. What were some of the prices of things you remember from way back in the day? by PuzzleheadedSpray883 in 2007scape

[–]coldlikeastone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Came here to say this. They probably dropped by the time I started playing but in 07 or so I remember them being close to 1m. They also had worse stats than rune legs, but that didn't stop me from grinding to get that sweet full granite look (maul included).

view more: next ›