News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Daniel Kahneman “I placed too much faith in underpowered ... by icelancer on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @02:15PM (#15229829)
Well, Sci-Hub is the start of it all. Elbakyan deserves Nobel consideration if you ask me, and I am not being hyperbolic. She has done more for science around the world than the bottom quartile of laureates.

Secondly, supporting OA-friendly journals is the next step. PeerJ is a very good initiative on that front for a lot of reasons - they open and document the peer-review process, which is unheard of. It's a tremendous asset to look through peer review and see how the "science" is really done. I highly recommend everyone find some papers that they are interested in on PeerJ and check the peer review logs.

Re:Daniel Kahneman “I placed too much faith in underpowered ... by Fomite on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @08:37PM (#15234444)
I confess that I'm seriously considering no longer reviewing for open peer review journals. I vastly prefer double-blinding.
Re:Daniel Kahneman “I placed too much faith in underpowered ... by icelancer on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @09:10PM (#15234641)
PeerJ is single-blinded in favor of the reviewers, if that makes you feel better. You can remove blinding at your discretion.