You must log in or register to comment.
Remember when “woke” was used in memes like this, and not as a thought-terminating cliché by extremist bigots to hide their bigotry behind concerns?
Using an mail service which send mails with an setted delay, to send it with an “I have arrived well” to friends and family after my death.
Baroque: possessing a marvellous proof, which the margin of your book is too narrow to contain.
Kafka was a visionary in a lot of ways.
Yoke: Something you use to write an NTSB report
Joke: Something that most people won’t understand
Coke: wooooooooooooooooh!
Journals are such a scam. Pay us so we can charge other people to read your work
I get that it’s a fee to safely archive and copy papers properly, with maybe access control and logging. I don’t see the fees updating with the times , even if they’re still maintaining archives with paper copies as well.
Elsevier and Nature Group are for-profit. That is the problem. Once profit is involved, morals and ideals go out the window
And more specifically, a bunch of parasites that demand to be paid a hundred times what the people who do all work start crowding around the trough, even before the stockholders get their cut.
That’s why it’s broke
I’ve got a notebook I use to doodle cad designs and record measurements. I am constantly temped to put in a page of gibberish just in case I become the next Da Vinci, so generations of people will waste their time tying to decipher it.
some group of nerds in the future: “ok but this is rumored to be the MATHEMATICALLY BEST POSSIBLE 3D printable parametric drawer organizer. If we can break the file encryption, humanity will become so effortlessly organized that we’ll shave centuries off of becoming a space-faring species.”
I imagine this would be the most efficient way to do science if it weren’t for the effectiveness of collaboration that, regrettably, demands the presentational overhead.
What if there was a bunch of lemmy instances for scientists to post journals on and the other scientists could up/downvote and roast the other scientists work publicly.
I’ve had this idea that we should have server dedicated to people just putting their research. Other people can review and get responses/improve it. People new to science and students can reproduce the results and validate them. And of course we can have upvotes system (i worry about this as everyone have same weight of vote seems dumb, so maybe everyone gets points for contributions and votes are based on the person’s credibility/points).
Our current system is too expensive and only profitable to journal systems. We could make a system where people can donate when they submit a paper and the money goes to reviewer/server/papers they cited, etc. and we lack reproducing results because there’s no credit, giving credit for that would encourage learning and make sure papers are reproducible. If a lot of people tried and can’t reproduce it, we can doubt the results.
An equal points voting system is the best way to come to the truth between a group of people, but they all have to be honest with their oppinions, which can make it fall apart if there are outside forces pressuring voters. If you have a jar of marbles and have a room full of people try to guess how many there are, the guesses will generally average out to the correct answer. If you had a group of marble and math experts guessing, then it would be extremely close, unless you let them debate about it first.
I’m down. Honestly, hard to do worse than the publisher scam we’re railroading now.
I think it would work nicely if each public university had their own instance. Since it’s government owned, it would be illegal for them to censor other scientists. I guess if the public university web was big ebough, they could make private universities and other institutions agree to be censorship free, plus moderation would be transparent and in the open. Not sure how moderation would work exactly, it should be fairly self regulating if users are exclusively credentialled experts with real names attatched to their accounts.
The very last part may be the most difficult in the current iteration of the www, but numerous proposed solutions are viable (including one by sir berners-lee himself) and I’m all for it.
I love that Srinivasa Ramanujan’s notes are on display in the library at Cambridge (if I remember correctly). The man is hands down one of the greatest men to have ever lived. I was so happy when The Man Who Knew Infinity came out. He deserves his place alongside Leibnitz, Newton, Gauss, Einstein, al-Khwarizmi, and too many others who contributed more to our world than 99% of humanity will ever know.
I do this to myself but it’s digital notes in Obsidian.
Yes me too! Gotta love hypertext personal wikis /digital gardens 🌱
I set up a build server for my obsidian notes. Push changes to GitHub, Jenkins picks it up, turns it into a website, and deploys to another server. I’m running into an issue though the tool I use to turn it into a website is abandoned. Might have to roll my own 😔
Roll your own conversion script to change the notes format into one of the maybe half-dozen new doc manipulation tool suites that hook right into gitlab (and GitHub if you must).
I’m not familiar with what you’re talking about. If not m already converting my notes why not just go right to html?
Zampano posted this
Zampano’s dead, it was clearly Truant
Joke: This image
