I was working full time and did my PhD at the same time. My employer let me do the work at work (there was a lot of overlap) and only had to travel to university to take a few classes (made up the time by working longer hours and sometimes on weekends) and meet with my academic advisor. I also had an advisor (mentor) at work that I would interact with on a daily basis. The downside was that I had to pay tuition, but the company paid for some and the rest I paid from my salary. I still made more than a graduate student at the institution. Overall, it was a great experience. I would recommend doing it this way if you are interested in going into industry and you already have a built-in job. I was upfront when I got hired and told them I was looking to do a PhD and they agreed.
Sure. A lot of the playground are kinda dull today especially as the kids get older. My kids learned to climb trees in my yard and in the parks around. They also sometimes climb on top of the playground elements to get their thrills.
A few jobs back when I was working for a fairly large telecom company there was a similar kind of thing for the software department. I was in hardware but sometimes I would interview software people if they were hired to participate on my project. The software department asked me to rank the interviewee on various categories and give a score. If the total score from all interviewers were larger than some value, they wouldn't hire them because they didn't want them to get bored and leave. Needless to say, this process frustrated many people. It was not consistent across the company though. For the hardware department there was no such system.
Brazilian JiuJitsu. After trying and failing for many years to exercise, this sport keeps me coming back. I feel the difference from before: better posture, strength, and flexibility. I also feel happier.
Not sure about that. If Matlab is their main competition, then they are much cheaper and you get tons more (that you may never use but its there...) for the price of just Matlab's base software. The downside is that the engineering community by and large uses Matlab because it's what the legacy code is and it is taught in school. I've used Mathematica and I enjoy using it (and Python) more than Matlab but at the end I have to use Matlab because that's what my colleagues use.
Are they that close now to be often interchangeable? Last I looked, they were as different as Lisp is to C: Mathematica is very strong for symbolic manipulation and discrete simulations and DSLs and can somewhat do numerics, whereas Matlab can get you serious performance in numerics but at the cost of awfully inflexible language.
This reminds me of the documentary Race to Nowhere. They talk about the high suicide rate amongst teens due to burn out from school and how some were brought back from the brink.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_Nowhere
Only 150 people with 35 intubated. There are several factors that could explain (at least part of) their results and one is age. They do mention that age denotes a statistically significant difference between intubation and no intubation under Table 1.
It is not easy to tell but depends on how you read this it could be that they had some data and they went fishing. You can always find correlations by fishing through the data and looking for when does the p-value become low enough [0] but its not a valid way to do data analysis.
It is also data from one hospital and one region. I don't think you can draw too many conclusion from this one study.
It is published in a journal with impact factor of 6.36 and a metabolic journal. If this was a significant finding I would think they would publish in a higher impact factor journal.
Yeah you are right. Instead they burn down businesses and riot in the streets and go attack far right rallies. It seems both far left and far right are embolden these days. No science on either side. No one wants to listen to the other side. Not a good situation.
It's fairly unsurprising that the extreme parts of the spectrum aren't listening to each other, given how far removed they are from each other ideologically.
What's way more worrying to me is that they aren't listening to the people that try to understand their perspectives, but keep them grounded in reality. It seems to have become an 'either you are with us, or against us'-situation for a huge number of people, sadly.
I don't need to listen to the Qanon conspiracy theories, racist rants, gun worship, law enforcement deification, homophobia, transphobia and other dehumanizing speech of the far right.
The grassroots WalkAway group was removed from Facebook today. It was not about Q and had only encouraged rallies and protests, and did not condone breaking into government buildings. It was a repository of hundreds of thousands of video and text testimonials from ex-Democrats explaining why they felt alienated, often by seeing events/individuals they felt were covered unfairly by the media or by cancel culture in their private life, and their lived experiences of why they left the party. Is that not useful information?
I don't know anything about the WalkAway group, but from your description and nothing else it seems like it shouldn't have been taken down and that it could have been very useful.
But I don't see how Facebook taking down the group is the fault of the Left at large (or in the US). I don't know many serious Leftists who are fond of Facebook, not to mention feel the company represents them.
My comment did not intend to attribute the corporate act to Leftism, intent was to show the parent commenter that it is flawed to assume all banned speech is the result of impartial enforcement of basic rules against malicious toxicity. Because there is a slippery slope in action every day - moderators are human and algorithms are based on badly conflated example data and that leads to bans like this one.
A victim of the algorithm perhaps? Or too many links on the social graph to the more problematic elements.
I don't mean to rationalize its removal. It sounds like a project that should exist, one that serves as a mirror for introspection.
This isn't something new or that "the left" only does. In much the same way we see lgbtq groups closed because the algorithm or human moderator believes queerness == explicit sexual content rather than "a bunch of other humans"
I dispute your contention that it's a grassroots thing, that's one of the most astroturfed political campaigns I've ever seen. It's a formula: minor right-wing celebrity announces they're going to city X to 'clean it up' or highlight some deficiency, makes a bunch of posts about it on social media announcing their itinerary, inevitably attracting some opposition from annoyed locals. Then they livestream the local opposition and say 'look how unreasonable these people are, #walkaway.'
I am not, because they work together. Search their names and you'll find plenty of examples of them pairing up to do this schtick. I've seen it in person.
None at all. When the democrats are in office you kick out far right. When the republicans are in you kick out far left. This way you avoid getting regulated. It’s a free country and your company it’s all good. It opens up opportunities for other companies to come in and take the business. Oh wait... are you a monopoly?
No food for "the enemy". No air travel. No payment processing for their businesses or political causes they support. You can earn your social credit points back by kowtowing to Xi the Great - wait wrong country.
