Wait this is not the same Sarah Andreson, the comic artist, is it?
Zo0
joined 1 year ago
Well you're not entirely incorrect with that assumption. What we call science today is actually the Scientific Method Which is a much more skeptical approach to science than the earlier methods, hence the credibility. I like many others agree that the fees built into the system is quiet absurd and the process is not perfect, but currently that is the only legit way to get others evaluate your research.
Came to comment this lol. Man that scene was brutal
Quality Content
The channel has 1m subscribers. It is by definition a random youtube channel to ~%99.9 of the population.
Reminder that legality is not based on morality.
Shrimp is bug
The latest one was LSPatch. Did so much for me. Last message from the maintainer was something along the lines of 'Seems like people are not happy with the project so I'm dropping it'.
I recently found out one my favourite FOSS projects was abandoned due to bullying. It was a small project and very fresh so it obviously came with some bugs and issues which is a given. The maintainer gave up only few months after because of all the negativity.
Well you can change your 'assistant' in Android so not even that.
I don't know what to tell you man, sometimes even I wonder if it's worth it at all. Publishing to a journal is such a difficult task. Before submitting your paper you need the approval of two other well-established individuals. Then you send in your paper to your selected journal and each one has some specific format and policies, which many are arbitrary and inthe end of the day depends on the person reviewing your paper. This can take weeks of back and forth.
However if you think you did something noteworthy, as far as I know, this is how you get it in front of the eyes of your peers. Even then there's a chance that your paper gets ignored lol.
So like many others in this thread, I'm not a fan of this process because even though it's strict, a lot of bs still passes through