Violence is never the answer.
10.09.2025 21:25
👍 127
🔁 18
💬 30
📌 3
Violence is never the answer.
Promising results from McMaster's Phase 1 inhaled Aerovax Covid vaccine trial 💉
The vaccine safely produced respiratory mucosal immunity (trial didn't assess ability to prevent infections - later phase trials may do this)
brighterworld.mcmaster.ca/articles/pro...
Evicting NSF from their building in Washington is pretty revealing. But if they auction off its History Wall, I know which tile I’d bid on. Here’s the list to choose from…
marketdesigner.blogspot.com/2025/06/evic...
Tim Roughgarden (a16z crypto and Columbia) is giving a seminar on Thursday, 29 May 2025: "Shill-Proof Auctions" (with Andrew Komo and Scott Kominers). Guest panellists: Marek Pycia and Zhou Yu. @timroughgarden.bsky.social @skominers.bsky.social
FYI “Spencer Foundation, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, William T. Grant Foundation and Kapor Foundation are providing quick turnaround grants of up to $25k for education scholars impacted by the abrupt NSF grant cancellations.” www.spencer.org/news/meeting...
Happy Palindrome-Ambigram-Reflection Day, QED!!
I hope your day has been excellent in every possible direction 🙂🙃
Carrie Bradshaw at her computer
Once again, I was left to wonder: was Pete Hegseth signal chatting military attack plans to everyone but me??
Am I the one that’s insecure, or is it his communication practices that are insecure?
A podcast episode with @skominers.bsky.social and @rhhackett on #congestionpricing in New York City (and beyond). Link: web3-with-a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/con...
Wordle 1,371 4/6*
⬛⬛⬛🟨🟩
⬛⬛🟨🟨🟩
🟨🟩🟨⬛🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
@casssunstein.bsky.social and @rthaler.bsky.social must do Wordle today
Happy [PI / PurIm / EclPIse] Day!!
Hold some PIstachio hamantaschen up to the moon, QED 😄🤚📐🌑!
(And yes, of course, there's an NFT 👇)
cc @shengwuli.bsky.social
Cross-posting an extremely niche social science joke x.com/skominers/st...
On the amazing downfall of Alzheimer's research by widespread manipulations and the crooked incentive structure in science: www.nytimes.com/2025/01/24/o...
High pay for participating in clinical trials (for example) may require greater efforts to make sure consent is well informed. #econsky
marketdesigner.blogspot.com/2025/01/info...
What's the theory one would have to concoct to hypothesize the opposite of what this article finds? Maybe "postdocs who publish a lot of papers are probably tapped out and can't publish anything else now, whereas the ones who haven't are well rested and ready to start producing hit research soon."
What a time to be alive
Edited by Susan Fiske, who also described replication studies as “methodological terrorism”.
At least this one will surely replicate (as long as those evil replicators don't bring in any evil identification)
Inspectors General, the govt’s internal watchdogs, were a post-Watergate reform, reporting abuses to Congress.
Trump fired some IGs in term 1 after his first impeachment showed that Senate GOP will defend abuse.
Only reason to fire 17 IGs now is to abuse power and break the law with less pushback.
... which, to be fair, is basically what the authors say is their alternative hypothesis. But how could this ever be true in equilibrium?
To hypothesize a null effect, we would need to believe something like "the postdoc period is just a holding tank while people wait for faculty jobs to become available that reveals no information about the candidate and also has no impact on their eventual academic work"...
What's the theory one would have to concoct to hypothesize the opposite of what this article finds? Maybe "postdocs who publish a lot of papers are probably tapped out and can't publish anything else now, whereas the ones who haven't are well rested and ready to start producing hit research soon."
Should we be surprised that people who have positive publication trends during their postdocs are more likely to get faculty jobs? What could the counterfactual hypothesis have possibly been?
(And that's before you even ask about reverse causality since their measurement of being a "hit paper" is based on citations, which presumably have some mechanical correlation with whether the author stays active in academia 😅)
... and then interprets this as a signal about the impact of quality postdoc experience without even nodding to the possibility that these might be both driven by unobserved quality of the individual as a researcher.
Utterly astounding to me that it's possible to publish a paper in PNAS that shows a correlation between having a "hit paper" as a postdoc and later academic success... www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
I'm judging a Quora knowledge contest, which is a cool way to talk about ideas. Entries due tomorrow (Jan 22).
Here are three questions I'm excited about.
Would love to read your answers, and the prize for the best answer is $1000 for each question.
Based on research described in this thread, and the associated @theatlantic.com article and @nberpubs.bsky.social working paper: x.com/skominers/st...
