josephhardin

I assume the title is such as yesterday was women in science day.

I just spent a fair bit of time on this question last week and here is my new setup. (Previously I used a mixture of mendeley with goodnotes and an Ipad pro with apple pencil).

Currently what I have moved to is using zotero on the desktop as the master store. This works well with the chrome and firefox plugins to auto add papers.

I use feedly to monitor RSS feeds for each journal from my phone, and then pull them up on the desktop once every so often to add to zotero. On the ipad pro with apple pencil I use papership to interface with the zotero library. It's annotations are usually good enough, but if I really need to do something fancy, I'll export it to pdfexpert, annotate it, then move it back in.

I disagree. Yes most of what each person says will not apply in any given case, but discussions like this where everyone is just kind of throwing it at the wall can be useful to try and pick out large trends. Plus as people discuss specifics of their workflow, individual threads can become more interesting. Also the more esoteric workflows can be interesting to hear people describe to put our own systems into context.

While there are some very real issues at Hanford, the issue this week has been vastly blown out of proportion in the media (I work fairly near to the the location). There is a massive amount of work that has gone into detection of any kind of nuclear leak around here.

I think it may depend a lot upon the candidate. I personally feel like I make a pretty good salary, and with many jobs I would otherwise consider applying to, I don't feel like it's worth the time to go through the interview process just to find out their max salary they can offer is a pay cut for me. Similarly if there is a job that looks interesting to me, but advertises it's range and it's in the ballpark of what I want, I would be MUCH more likely to apply.

It also provides a lot of information about what the job will be expected to do. With what I do, people are not going to be willing to give me the salary I want, while also wasting my time on remedial work when they could get someone much cheaper that could do those tasks. So by keeping my interest in higher salary jobs, I can try to limit it to jobs which hold more interest for me personally.

If you google matplotlib viridis there is a discussion of the issue. Using perceptually uniform colormaps(not to mention ones that translate to gray scale correctly) is normally the correct thing to do, but not always. Sometimes you want to highlight particular conditions. For instance, jet with radar data tends to nicely separate different atmospheric conditions if set up right. The same perceptual colormap version feels somehow lacking.

Really? I was there for a month working and found that most people spoke flawless english.

Usually my thought process goes something like: "Hmm, that's weird, why doesn't this work"

"Oh..duh"

"...okay nope that wasn't it. "

...googling

"Ahh that should fix it"

"F!&*"

"Oh, duh that was simple. That should fix this part and then I should get this to output the right....hmm, that's weird"

I'm really not sure. I mostly just keep up with terrestrial weather.

This is interesting, but not as groundbreaking as they make it out to be. People are already using GPS signals to calculate things like available liquid water. For instance, see http://www.suominet.ucar.edu/ .

One of the main problems with something like this is that you get an integrated quantity, with no easy way of backing out the exact elevation this occured at. If you get a dense enough network, sure you may be able to work it back out, but you also don't really get a sense of the drop shape.

For comparison, the most advanced satellite weather system we have is the Global Precipitation Measurement(GPM) constellation. This uses a series of radiometers and radars to provide a much more detailed picture, that also includes 3d data. See http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GPM/main/ for more information.

If you stick to ground radar, you can get even more impressive by using polarization. By transmitting dual polarized signals, we can actually get a measure of the shape of the raindrops(based on the difference in power returned by the two polarizations). The US NEXRAD network recently upgraded it's radars to be dual polarization capable(finally). This also provides us with the ability to differentiate between ice and rain(Something we couldn't, strictly speaking, do before). We can also separate out the signals caused by bugs(which can be a huge issue), as well as other sources of signal contamination.

Maybe not the most sophisticated of pages, but sometimes it is good to get a brief reminder of what might be asked, especially for those of us that are not considered senior yet.

There are two possible scenarios here. Either you are above him on the organizational chart, in which case you probably have the authority to let him go.

More likely(As you're not sure what his contributions are), you are lateral to him on the chart. Possibly try to engage him in what you're working on. Maybe he's not particularly self driven and would value the guidance from someone more senior. If he turns it down, either just ignore it and move on(if it is not affecting you), or if his failure to do work impacts you directly, then complain to your manager. T

I'm not sure why this is not getting any comments, but it would be nice if the list had a little more curation(General topics, quality, etc).

Check out northern Colorado. Between Denver, Fort Collins, and Boulder there is a fair bit of tech, cost of living is decently low(outside of Boulder), and you can live right next to a national forest.

I thought this was interesting, figured maybe HN would want to see it if it hadn't already done so before.

I doubt it. You'd have to know the update strategy, as well as the key. Theoretically it's impossible to get the secret out of the device(though in actuality, I doubt that is true).

The M.S. does, but as stories like this become more common, non-namebrand MS programs will start to lose some luster. Being able to point to a publication, or a project you run, or something genuinely useful to at least someone, goes a long way to distinguish you from the people who went to school, but never programmed in their free time, and do it purely as a job. Passion as a buzzword is very overrated in this community, but at least a little bit of it is required to make you stand out. I'd imagine this goes doubly so for the startup world.

Also the me should be an I, and listed after the others. Though to be honest, most people make the same mistake. Your English is at the level where you can pass off as a native from an English speaking country so I would not worry too much. Everyone has at least a few mistakes in almost everything they write.

I'd say if you can do it in two years, including deficiency courses, and without publishing, you're probably not getting your moneys worth and yes it will be looked down upon. Three years(take a lot of courses) and/or a publication or two will look much better. Of course, if you think you can do extra curricular activities to create a portfolio(github projects, contributing to open source, create a product), then it might not matter how well the MS is looked upon, if you show you have a track record of delivering.

It's not that we don't have a facebook account, but rather that we don't want to have another app tangled in with all of our facebook data.

I was middle class(maybe lower middle class), and my entire education end up paid for. Not only that, but after work study, I actually made enough money to live on without having to get an outside job. Students taking out these huge loans should just consider a state school, or to put in for scholarships.

My (Terminal at that institution) masters was paid for completely, as well as being paid a salary. In STEM fields I'm not sure I know anyone who didn't have their MS paid for. Sure, some professors will push you to get a Ph.D. but you always have the option of just writing your thesis and finishing.

Some stores do a better job of this than others. REI in particular has usually been amazing. I went in last weekend for a shirt, and saw that packs are on sale. The salesman there fitted me for a pack, recommended a cheaper one than I was getting that turned out to be a better pack, then asked if there was anything else I would like to know about, without pushing a hardsale. By the end of the trip, I had a new pack, a new down sleeping bag, some compression sacks, and a few other things. That guy, based on his knowledge, and just being generally friendly without feeling sleezy turned a 20 dollar sale into about $600 in sales.

248? In Helsinki I think I saw more than that passed out on a single tram ride. Helsinki had far more homeless than any big US city I've ever been to(at the very least they were far more visible). I also had more negative experiences with aggressive homeless there than I have had here. I forget the tram line, but it was the one that goes from University of Helsinki to Tooloo.

It's likely a combination of both. A quick way to discern would be to look at velocity, zdr, and rhohv. For ground clutter and returns caused by the inversion, you will expect to see very low velocities(close to 0) relative to the background precipitation. Additionally Zdr will end up looking like a roughly random field. If it is insects, then the velocity will roughly match the background precipitation, but you will have a high zdr(as insects look like very very oblate bags of water). In both cases you should get a drop in rho_hv, the correlation coefficient between the channels which will help to differentiate it from actual precipitation. Also it looks like you're primarily concerned with pulling out the rainfall in several cases. For this, I'd look at the specific differential phase(K_DP) as it is a much better estimator of rainfall than reflectivity. In general, it is linearly proportional(exponential, with an exponent close to 1) to the rainfall rate. I'm not sure how good the nexrad estimators are for kdp though.

You might find http://www.chill.colostate.edu/w/Non-precipitation_echoes:_i... to be interesting. It shows some of the dual-pol stuff on insects.

Well it's very impressive that you got that performance without using any dual-pol parameters. Abstract submission for the AMS radar conference is next week, and I'm sure they'd be interested in this. http://www.ametsoc.org/MEET/fainst/201336radar.html

Also I didn't see it mentioned, but are you pulling in level 2 or level 3 data?

This is neat, though there are far better methods for doing this type of thing. Now that the Nexrads are dual-pol, you can look at the correlation between the horizontal and the vertical polarizations to filter out the vast majority of the noise.

The noise you are filtering out is primarily insect returns. If you watch it, it will get worse at some times of the day rather than others. If inversions happen, you'll also see some beam bending that can cause you to pick up powerlines/roads, etc. You can verify it is mostly bugs by looking at the differential reflectivity. The differential reflectivity(difference of horizontal and vertical returned powers) will be somewhat random for ground clutter, and higher values for bugs.

With this approach, without knowing exactly how you do it, I'd be worried that it would have the tendency to filter out initial formations of stratiform clouds, and just leave convective formations. I can point you to some theory on how a lot of the filtering is done for research in atmos if you'd like, feel free to message me(I'm working on my Ph.D. in weather radar).