Things that remind you of WDTWTF members
-
@PleegWat Yeah, well
strtok()
can DIAF for all I care.
-
-
"Yeah, it's lacking security and error handling right now, but I'll implement them later, I promise."
-
@Zerosquare said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
"Yeah, it's lacking security and error handling right now, but I'll implement them later, I promise."
That should justify summary execution
-
-
@Gustav said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
After discriminating against left-handers, now we have discrimination against right-footers.
@Zerosquare said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
"Yeah, it's lacking security and error handling right now, but I'll implement them later, I promise."
I thought this was a reply
-
-
I want four hundred and fifty dollars.
Give me four hundred and fifty dollars.
-
@remi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
There's someone from Scandinavia that
regularlypassively off-handedlybragsinsinuates about how much of amanly hunk chunk of abeardedmuscle sexbeast they are.You got a lot of things wrong about me, so I fixed it.
...oh. You were talking about that other guy with a cute fluffy animal avatar, weren't you?
-
Article @kazitor posted in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
I thought I’d be an academic forever, maybe longer.
For all its ridiculous foibles, and the resulting incipient hair loss
I'm in this, and I don't like it.
But I never wanted to be ‘an academic’.
I wanted to be ‘a scientist’.
I'm in this, and ...
I have a feeling this article is going to be a long ride.
-
@topspin Article's not wrong. Why should one do e.g. reviews for free for for-profit publishers?
I think the discussion changes if the journal is fully free, both for readers and authors -- it's not the norm, but there are a few out there.
Setting up a contract and having some sort of payment for reviewing might have a few other positive side effects. If there's payment, one might be able to express some minimal requirements on the quality of the review and possibly insist more on deadlines etc.. If there's a contract, that gets even easier.
And it's not like the for-profit publishers don't have experience working internationally. (The problem might be more that $450 or whatever is symbolic for some people and a huge deal for others.)
-
@cvi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin Article's not wrong. Why should one do e.g. reviews for free for for-profit publishers?
He is IMHO absolutely, 100% right and I hope he gets some substantial traction with this. You want me to spend time so you can make money? Fuck you, pay me.
He does clarify that he's talking specifically about for-profit publishers. These are business entities and as such focused on maximizing profits. Anyone doing volunteer work for a for-profit organization is in effect donating money to its owners.
-
@cvi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
If there's payment, one might be able to express some minimal requirements on the quality of the review and possibly insist more on deadlines etc.. If there's a contract, that gets even easier.
Never ever going to be any sort of payment without some sort of contract. Might be a simple one (but complicated enough to get past various other legal complexities) but still going to be there.
-
@ixvedeusi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@cvi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin Article's not wrong. Why should one do e.g. reviews for free for for-profit publishers?
He is IMHO absolutely, 100% right
Seconded.
and I hope he gets some substantial traction with this.
He won't (but also look at the date).
He does clarify that he's talking specifically about for-profit publishers. These are business entities and as such focused on maximizing profits. Anyone doing volunteer work for a for-profit organization is in effect donating money to its owners.
As complained about before, it's not just the peer reviewers who do this for free, but also the original authors and (probably) the journal's editors. And then either the authors or the reader are paying through the nose for what little is left to do (copy-editing (which sucks), printing/online distribution, and "prestige").
-
@ixvedeusi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
He is IMHO absolutely, 100% right and I hope he gets some substantial traction with this.
There are some problems with it.
One is incentives. You want to get paid for the review regardless of the outcome (in fact, as a reviewer, suggesting an outcome that results in another round of reviews might start looking quite tempting). The publishers clearly want to publish stuff -- no publication = no income for them. Finding reviewers who are happy to wave through papers for those $450 rather than ones that are a bit more critical becomes (more) tempting for the publishers. (Publishing crap might hurt them in long term, but thinking long term is beyond most companies...)
-
-
@cvi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@ixvedeusi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
He is IMHO absolutely, 100% right and I hope he gets some substantial traction with this.
There are some problems with it.
One is incentives. You want to get paid for the review regardless of the outcome (in fact, as a reviewer, suggesting an outcome that results in another round of reviews might start looking quite tempting). The publishers clearly want to publish stuff -- no publication = no income for them. Finding reviewers who are happy to wave through papers for those $450 rather than ones that are a bit more critical becomes (more) tempting for the publishers. (Publishing crap might hurt them in long term, but thinking long term is beyond most companies...)
Okay great. So how about $350 base with a $350 bonus if you falsify. Economics the science back in to keep the economics out.
-
-
-
-
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
doesn't work as planned
It works exactly once and only in the embed, clicking the link to the full Youtube site makes it not work.
-
-
-
-
-
-
https://youtube.com/shorts/ndcEEusLQo4
I suddenly want to visit the ocean....
-
-
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
-
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out?
A flag with only one star? Works for me! You might even call it a Lone Star flag.
-
@HardwareGeek Suggested improvements:
,
,
-
@HardwareGeek Canada?
-
@cvi said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@HardwareGeek Canada?
: Is maple leaf an instrument?
-
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@HardwareGeek Suggested improvements:
,
,
-
@HardwareGeek said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
A flag with only one star?
?
But that's also missing the white stripes.
-
@Gustav Is that
or
?
-
@Zecc said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Gustav Is that
or
?
It's U+200F RIGHT-TO-LEFT MARK
. Must be a rendering issue.
-
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
The stars don't have individual state assignments per any canonical canon, we'd need to impose one, from the North of course, unless you've become numerate somehow lately? Although this would imply literate.
-
@Gribnit said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
The stars don't have individual state assignments per any canonical canon, we'd need to impose one, from the North of course, unless you've become numerate somehow lately? Although this would imply literate.
Seems like the order in which they joined the Union would be the easiest place to start.
-
@boomzilla Delaware first!
-
@boomzilla said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Gribnit said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
The stars don't have individual state assignments per any canonical canon, we'd need to impose one, from the North of course, unless you've become numerate somehow lately? Although this would imply literate.
Seems like the order in which they joined the Union would be the easiest place to start.
But Southern states would only be scored based on the second time they joined the Union, right?
-
@Gribnit said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
The stars don't have individual state assignments per any canonical canon, we'd need to impose one, from the North of course, unless you've become numerate somehow lately? Although this would imply literate.
Transliterate the state names in ancient Greek, then use alphabetical order.
-
@PleegWat said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Gribnit said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@Carnage said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@topspin said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Hey, I just had an idea... How about someone making a flag where the states that they dislike are struck out? That would fit pretty well in the garagey parts of the forum.
The stars don't have individual state assignments per any canonical canon, we'd need to impose one, from the North of course, unless you've become numerate somehow lately? Although this would imply literate.
Transliterate the state names in ancient Greek, then use alphabetical order.
Also that hasn't got a full canonical order. Did you mean Hebrew?
-
@PleegWat said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Transliterate the state names in ancient Greek, then use alphabetical order.
The Coding Confessions thread is
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@HardwareGeek said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
A flag with only one star?
?
But that's also missing the white stripes.Here you go.
-
@PleegWat said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
Transliterate the state names in ancient Greek, then use alphabetical order.
Transliterate by English pronunciation or English spelling? Transliterating by pronunciation is a bit weird, as some English sounds don't exist in Greek (ancient or modern), such as soft g (Georgia, Virginia), v, and sh (Washington). I've tried my best to approximate these using the available sounds. I further assume the English long-i sound (as in Idaho; /aɪ/ in International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) notation) was produced by the diphthong ΑΙ in ancient Greek, although that digraph is pronounced very differently in modern Greek. Similarly, I assume the ou diphthong in English (/aʊ/ in IPA notation) was represented by the ΑΥ diphthong in ancient Greek, even though it is entirely different (/av/ or /af/, depending on whether a vowel, voiced consonant or unvoiced consonant follows) in modern Greek.
Since you specified ancient Greek, I have written the names in all majuscule (upper-case) letters, since miniscule (lower-case) wasn't invented until Byzantine (I think) Greek. Similarly, I have written them without accents, since they weren't developed until Byzantine Greek, either, except for the dasia (῾) used to specify aspirated breathing on the Ἁ in ἉΟΥΑΙΗ and Ῥ in ῬΩΔ ΑΙΛΑΝΔ. (This doesn't exist in modern Greek; where absolutely necessary, it is replaced by Χ to form the /h/ sound.)
All that said, I don't promise that I have been entirely consistent, and it's quite likely that a native Greek speaker would transliterate some of these differently. Also, I alphabetized them by hand, so I may have made some mistakes in that, too.
ΑΙΔΑΧΟ
ΑΙΟΟΥΑ
ΑΛΑΒΑΜΑ
ΑΛΑΣΚΑ
ἉΟΥΑΙΗ
ΑΡΙΖΩΝΑ or ΕΡΙΖΩΝΑ
ΑΡΚΑΝΣΑ
ΒΕΡΜΑΝΤ
ΒΙΡΔΖΙΝΙΑ
ΔΕΛΑΟΥΕΡ
ΔΖΙΟΡΔΖΙΙΑ is a rather lame attempt to transliterate the ge sound, which doesn't exist in Greek. More reasonably, although not a transliteration of the English pronunciation, since the name George has the perfectly cromulent equivalent Georgios, ΓΕΟΡΓΙΑ.
ΙΛΛΙΝΩΗ
ΙΝΔΙΑΝΑ
ΙΟΥΤΑ
ΚΑΛΙΦΟΡΝΙΑ
ΚΑΝΖΑΣ
ΚΕΝΤΥΚΗ
ΚΟΛΟΡΑΔΟ
ΚΟΝΝΕΤΙΚΥΤ
ΛΟΥΗΖΙΑΝΑ (or ΛΟΥΖΙΑΝΑ if you're from ΛΟΥΖΙΑΝΑ)
ΜΑΣΣΑΤΧΙΟΥΣΕΤΤΣ
ΜΕΝ
ΜΕΡΙΛΑΝΔ
ΜΙΤΧΙΓΑΝ
ΜΙΝΝΕΣΟΤΑ
ΜΙΣΣΙΣΣΙΠΠΙ
ΜΙΖΖΟΥΡΙ
ΜΟΝΤΑΝΑ
ΝΕΒΡΑΣΚΑ
ΝΕΒΑΔΑ
ΝΟΡΘ ΚΕΡΟΛΑΙΝΑ
ΝΟΡΘ ΔΑΚΟΤΑ
ΝΟΥ ἉΜΠΣΙΡ
ΝΟΥ ΔΙΟΥΡΖΗ
ΝΟΥ ΙΟΡΚ
ΝΟΥ ΜΕΞΙΚΟ
ΟΚΛΑΧΟΜΑ or maybe it should be ΩΚΛΑΧΟΜΑ, especially if you're singing it — "ΩΚΛΑΧΟΜΑ, where the wind comes sweepin' down the plain, ..."
ΟΡΕΓΑΝ
ΟΥΑΙΩΜΙΓΓ
ΟΥΑΣΧΙΓΓΤΟΝ
ΟΥΙΣΚΑΝΣΙΝ
ΟΥΕΣΤ ΒΙΡΔΖΙΝΙΑ
ΟΧΑΙΟ
ΠΕΝΝΣΥΛΒΕΝΙΑ
ῬΩΔ ΑΙΛΑΝΔ
ΣΑΥΘ ΚΕΡΟΛΑΙΝΑ
ΣΑΥΘ ΔΑΚΟΤΑ
ΤΕΝΝΕΣΣΗ
ΤΕΞΑΣ
ΦΛΩΡΙΔΑ
-
-
@Zerosquare Meanwhile I assume everyone else has already realised this was a random pick and I may as well have called Hebrew, Cyrillic (which I know has multiple transliterations in different countries) or whatever else.
-
@PleegWat oh. I'm honestly a bit disappointed now to know that it wasn't a directed troll at
since he's talked about knowing Greek a fair amount.
-
@boomzilla said in Things that remind you of WDTWTF members:
@PleegWat oh. I'm honestly a bit disappointed now to know that it wasn't a directed troll at
since he's talked about knowing Greek a fair amount.
But what sort of unscrupulous monster would take advantage of this compromising information?!??