He’s the monarch…. I’m … not surprised in the least.

Banish the monarchy if you want to complain.

Cybertrucks, VR headsets, and projectile vomiting…

Ahh the future!

Nah she’s racist, lol

I’ve never installed a driver on Linux… that’s a windows thing? and how the hell is Linux the one that needs more ram. What in the world are you talking about?

Prestige, money, career. Plus a dash of something else.

All it would do is create an audit trail of your data to keep scientists honest. You can still iterate and change course but now you’re responsible for the record (if you look at the data at some point the data at that point could be recorded as is and a log keeps track when you check the data). Why did you change course and when? Was that appropriate? The data is verified when and if you decide to review it.

How science is done has a problem, just suggesting a solution. I know that’s not how it’s done.

All the data is a matter of record. It makes sure the raw data is ACTUALLY the raw data without bias. It makes sure you’re not ignoring negative results (a huge issue). Statistical detection of cheating will never be as good as reviewing the raw data and changes over time.

As for scooping data, it’s a matter of the record now. There’s data available showing that they scooped you. Currently there’s nothing. The data doesn’t have to be public until the study is published.

I think the main barrier would be scientists and the incentives inherent in the system (career, money, prestige) that creates the cheating in the first place.

I’M A HWAT!

The Freakonomics podcast covered this topic pretty nicely just recently. Would recommend a listen! It’s not just international or low impact journals that are having issues.

I feel like zero trust research could be a thing in the future in some areas.

So for example, the study would be pre registered with expected outcome as is starting to be done more often now. But also the third party has a private encryption key and the experiments data is encrypted somehow during collection with a public encryption key.

Obviously very much depends on the type of study, but data is very often collected with collection software of some sort that could implement this.

The scientist could not snoop the data even if they wanted. The public key can encrypt data but only the private key can unlock it.

Then once uploaded to the third party they can unlock it with their private key. Then the data is public before any analysis.

Seems to me that this would force science to be done the way it ought to be done!

Don’t knock sitting without pants in a banana until you’ve tried it!

Will rewatch out of respect

Also it’s a css JavaScript skin over the actual YouTube website with some video player integration.

It’s not like the whole interface is from the ground up.

Have you used it lately? Broken layouts don’t happen for me very often in the last few years (I work in an office with libreoffice/word used beside each other daily).

I’m also a long time fan.

Never paid for editing. I do use it to annotate though.

Great for prototyping and quick scripts.

That and such rich set of libraries for anything you want.

Learning nix might be worth it on a server.

Then update after 5 years 🤷🏻‍♂️

It only matters if you want support after 5 years. Just upgrade to a new release if you don’t need 10 years. If that’s a hassle, get the free subscription for 5 machines and you get 10 years.

Seems reasonable!

Which seems completely fair. This is a silly article and too many comments here aren’t understanding this.

If a business wants 10 years of support then yeah they should pay as it’s cheaper than upgrading.

For personal use just goddamn update after 5 years geeze lol.

Edit: this person’s blog post just misunderstands the situation. See here for actual release info and when ESM starts for each release. 5 years standard as of 24.04.

And you can get the extra 5 years for free anyway with a free subscription for up to 5 machines.

Works fine for me. iPhone 12 on 17.3

Whyy