A lot of these are just couples walking together. I’m sure that’s been a thing prior to the album as well.

Tbf that looks like carpet!

I’d say that a proxy war that penetrates onto Russian territory (Kursk Oblast) and borders EU countries is a little hotter than Afghanistan.

In my field it’s often general journal policy, not an individual choice. It’s hit or miss, as it can be easy to guess who the reviewer or author is in a niche field. I personally don’t go out of my way to figure out the author’s affiliation, even if it can be trivial. Regarding self citations, those are usually obfuscated at the review stage. I’d say that a paper is easy to narrow down to a circle of scholars, but it might be the first paper of a research associate, a throwaway paper by a PI, or a paper that aims to engage those narrow specialists. So is a kind of smoke screen.

I actually robot-fed my kitten from day one, so they basically don’t associate me with food at all, just with cuddles and reprimands.

Thank God for double blind peer reviews, warts and all.

Tatakae!

https://youtu.be/YRCmmJZRyJs?si=SyUW8QyahSJ0NsKj

There’s a Key and Peele sketch about this

Reminds me of this work by Latour. It goes into the tremendous amount of oftentimes political labor that goes into the establishment of new scientific knowledge as paradigmatic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pasteurization_of_France

Also one of the dumbest names ever.

Conversely, social scientists tend to compete on how to underdress the most.

Shota

Always makes me think of this song.

*beefoon

Yup, and that’s why I’m buying bored apes.

What is this low grade garbage? GPT-4 Turbo is old, this is just an update of it. Happens from time to time. This one is supposed to be a bit better than previous interactions of GPT-4 Turbo.

Really makes you think.

3.5 or GPT-4? I can run the latter if need be.

I’m not sure we can fault the algorithm for overlooking a minor cast member.