pizza_boy
Re:Fewer premature babies born since Covid-19 lockdown
on Tuesday July 28, 2020 @08:01PM (#23982008)
I hope this comes across as helpful and not one-upmanship: it is natural to think that having a child is like many of the other things you're used to in life where you can control the outcome.
That can lead to you worrying about and optimising for lots of things that won't matter too much in the grand scheme of things.
I can tell you from first hand experience that you are not in control. You will know you are in a truly stressful situation when you've forgetten about all of the items you've listed above because you're standing there watching, not sure what is going on, just hoping that everything is going to be ok.
I hope you never get to that point and in the meantime try enjoy the ride. I wish you and your family all the best!
Re:What I learned as a VC filling in as a startup CEO for 4 months
on Monday May 20, 2019 @04:52AM (#19958530)
I don't have a problem with the comments. They're illuminating under a close reading.
The role of CEO is high status and highly desirable. I think it's safe to assume most readers of this site have coveted it from time to time and had to accept at some point that they're in that role.
It's easier to accept this is you assume CEOs are exceptional and different to you in some way: as founders; impressive track record; or something similar.
However, this article gives an example of someone just like us stepping easily into that role. How can that be? Why can't we have this? Either there is a problem with this CEO or we're missing out. It's easier to believe the former That's what the comments are about.
Re:Springer retracting 107 papers published in Tumor Biology with fake...
on Monday May 01, 2017 @09:55AM (#14237447)
There may be an intersection between fabricated research and fraudulently reviewed research but I understand that at least some of the papers retracted for reviewer fraud could have been published legitimately.
Grandparent has it right. This is all about the pressure on authors to publish, and publish quickly.
Re:Springer retracting 107 papers published in Tumor Biology with fake...
on Monday May 01, 2017 @09:51AM (#14237425)
You might be interested in the Publons Academy [1] -- which we are launching tomorrow -- and some of the other tools we've built to improve the review process (e.g., more trustworthy contact methods) and formally recognise reviewers.
I'm a founder. Very interested in your feedback on what we need to be doing.
Re:Peer review post-mortem: how a flawed aging study was published in ...
on Sunday December 11, 2016 @09:52AM (#13151282)
Interesting writeup. We saw this coming on Publons: https://publons.com/p/518732/
Re:Scientific Peer Review Is Broken – Fighting to Fix It with Anonymity
on Wednesday December 10, 2014 @05:10PM (#8732037)
With Publons.com (https://publons.com) we have different philosophy: the more transparency we can bring to the review process, the better. At the same time we recognise that both blind and double-blind peer review play an important role in generating quality research.
Our approach is to focus on turning review of all kinds (including both pre- and post-publication) into a measurable research output -- something you can add to your resume. We support both anonymous and signed review with the idea that it will lead to greater transparency in the long run and also motivate reviewers to contribute more.
We have a significant number of both types of review now and are starting to look ways to measure if there are significant differences between blind and open review.
Re:Publishing: The peer-review scam
on Wednesday November 26, 2014 @04:12PM (#8664609)
This is one of the problems we're trying to solve with Publons.com. We help reviewers to build an officially verified record of past reviews (which is great when it comes to getting tenure). Editors can then use those records to vett candidate reviewers.
Re:Django REST framework 3
on Thursday July 17, 2014 @07:23PM (#8050812)
Absolutely agree. I just pledged. Thanks Tom.
Re:Show HN: Static web hosting, CMS, and now blogging
on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @10:14PM (#8045660)
Very similar to CloudCannon (http://cloudcannon.com/)
What it's like to raise money
Re:Peer Review as a Service: It's not about the journal
on Thursday May 15, 2014 @06:26PM (#7752621)
I absolutely agree with Doug. The key is prestige. Our approach to that is to turn peer review itself into a measurable research output -- see our recent partnership with PeerJ for an example (http://blog.publons.com/post/85660504608/publons-partners-wi...)
Re:Elsevier journals – some facts
on Thursday April 24, 2014 @11:29PM (#7644606)
Hi Doug. Cool graphic. I'm one of the founders of https://publons.com. Our mission is to speed up academic publishing by turning peer review into a measurable research output. Would love to take you up on your offer to meet for a beer and have sent you an email.
Re:Nobel winner declares boycott of top science journals
on Monday December 09, 2013 @11:39PM (#6878996)
The key is to start developing better ways to measure researcher productivity. That's where all the different forms of altmetrics come in. For us (Publons.com) we're using peer review itself to generate article level metrics (and give reviewers credit for it) that focus on the quality and significance of a paper, not just its popularity.
Re:The Arsenic DNA paper exposes flaws in peer review
on Thursday October 03, 2013 @04:25PM (#6491765)
> it would also give some recognition to the work that goes into reviewing a paper
I think you're spot on with this comment. That's exactly what we're building at publons.com. Check it out.
Re:“Close to 10% of the papers we receive show some sign of academic m...
on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:19PM (#6421851)
ImpactStory monitors github, which is pretty cool. Example:
http://impactstory.org/CarlBoettiger
Re:“Close to 10% of the papers we receive show some sign of academic m...
on Friday September 20, 2013 @12:00AM (#6415839)
I've said as much in the article comments, but it's worth repeating here: there's really no surprise that this sort of thing happens when more than a million articles are published every year.
There is so much pressure on researchers to publish. I really do think the way to solve this sort of problem is to find ways to give researchers credit for other forms of contributions.
This is what figshare is doing with datasets, and what we're doing with peer-review: http://blog.publons.com/post/61380784056/announcing-doi-supp...
Re:Skin in the Game as a Required Heuristic for Acting Under Uncertainty
on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @12:20AM (#6125366)
You're partially correct. I'd say that we tend to adopt the successful cultural adaptations of our ancestors and discard the others.
In other words, when comparing an ancient society to one descended from it, I'd expect the "successful" adaptations of the ancestor culture to be disproportionately present in the descendant. The converse need not be true.
In Taleb's example Taleb of the builder, those ancient heuristics became our tort law (and will be a part of our reputation networks in the future). He doesn't mention all the cultural adaptations we've since dropped...
So it's obvious at best, and an appeal to authority at worst.
Re:Skin in the Game as a Required Heuristic for Acting Under Uncertainty
on Monday July 29, 2013 @06:59PM (#6124416)
It's not immediately obvious there's anything new or interesting in there: how is this heuristic different to a classic Hansonian bet [1]?
One potential advantage is that having "skin in the game" has a more positive connotation than betting on outcomes, to the general public at least. Regardless, Hanson at least deserves a mention.
From a stylistic point of view I'm not a big fan of the appeals to authority (e.g., "the ancients were fully aware" ) either.
From a startup perspective it's worth mentioning that mentorship or advice is also generally more confusing and less useful when the mentor lacks "skin in the game". Hence mentor "whiplash".
Re:How to Get Startup Ideas
on Monday November 19, 2012 @10:35PM (#4807621)
Check out ponoko (http://www.ponoko.com/).
Re:Pioneer Anomaly Solved
on Friday April 20, 2012 @12:17AM (#3866466)
Nice paper; probably cooler than the FTL neutrino result from last year.
If you're a physicist then you might like to review, rate, or discuss it on publons: http://publons.com/publon/2406/review/
Publons is in beta at the moment, so please let me know if you have any problems, suggestions, ideas: [email protected].
Re:Defining Property
on Monday March 12, 2012 @05:56PM (#3695828)
In economics a cost or benefit that is difficult to charge for is known as an externality. The pleasant smell of food might be a positive externality; second hand smoke a negative.
Ronald Coase (who also produced The Nature of the Firm) did the seminal work here. It turns out that in cases where it is difficult to assign property rights government intervention is often the best way to address externalities.
Readers of the essay may benefit from a footnote mentioning these basic economic principles.
Re:Ask HN: How to get a U.S. Visa (and work on your own startup)?
on Sunday May 16, 2010 @04:14PM (#1352699)
> And then the university will sponsor my visa?
That would be the hope.
I guess that more related your startup is to a field of research at UCB the better your chances.
> What kind of visa would that be then?
J1, although possibly H1B (I believe you can switch if you stay long enough as a researcher).
> I have no problems trading capital for a visa :)
That's my intent. It (probably) can't hurt to ask: http://entrepreneurship.berkeley.edu/resources/bel.html
Re:Ask HN: How to get a U.S. Visa (and work on your own startup)?
on Sunday May 16, 2010 @01:37PM (#1352384)
I'm in exactly the same position as you.
If you're at UCB then perhaps you can frame your startup as a spinoff company, which universities love. You'd be trading capital for a visa.
That's the best idea I have right now.
Otherwise there's always 20% time at google.