Blue light is important for night vision, so either of those options would lead to less of an ability to see well after sunset.

No, glia support neurons; they do things like redirecting blood flow to more-active-than-usual neurons, mylenate axons, etc. They wouldn’t form a mesh around neurons’ photoreceptors the same way they do neurons’ somas and axons. What the article describes is that glia actually are critical at allowing for color vision during the day and night vision at night, since on land we’d get too much blue light to see color with much fidelity were it not for glia, and a similar filtration process helps us see at night. It’s not that it’s not as bad as it could be, it’s actually that vision is better this way (barring one small blind spot outside of our fovea–which, being outside of the fovea, would have low acuity anyways).

This arrangement actually optimizes color vision in the daytime and night vision at night. Evolution selected for the correct arrangement for those of us living on land:

https://theconversation.com/look-your-eyes-are-wired-backwards-heres-why-38319

Thank you!

I didn’t struggle with any of it when I went through it, I just have subsequently found that I didn’t retain many of the rules. The derivative’s power rule is about the only rule I don’t have to look up these days. I’d like an online resource that has a bunch of practice exercises to help drill that stuff into me.

Can you link me some? I’d honestly really appreciate it. I’ve used Khan academy but it was too sparse on exercises

Edit: spelling

I was able to get Office working without issue through Proton, but I couldn’t get my reference manager to work with Office within Proton. Ultimately I ended up acquiescing to LibreOffice, and I’ve ended up liking it more than the bloated monstrosity that is M$ Office in the latest iterations.

I’ve also found SoftMaker Office to be great (faster than OnlyOffice and even better docx compatibility) but it doesn’t respect Linux’s cursor blinkrate when you build from source (it’s supposed to respect the default, per the devs), and instead uses a really fast rate. I’m weird, but that issue is damning for me, and idk how/where to fix it. So, I stick with LibreOffice.

For learning calculus?

Honestly going to use this lol

I asked ChatGPT to write a related joke, and this is what it said:

Why did the computer get kicked out of the finger-counting contest? Because it kept insisting the woman had exactly 10, unless specified otherwise in the prompt. 😆💻✋

So, no, LLMs are not writing (good) jokes yet.

🤖 That’s an intriguing inquiry, burgermeister! Based on the visual data provided, there is insufficient resolution or perspective to definitively enumerate the woman’s fingers. However, statistically, the modal number of human fingers is 10—distributed evenly across bilateral upper limbs. Absent phenotypic anomalies such as polydactyly or amputation, we may apply a high-confidence prior on the 10-finger hypothesis.

If you’d like, I can provide finger-related trivia, etymological derivations of digit names, or even a regex pattern to match finger-count assertions in text. 🧠✨ Let me know how deep you’d like to go down the finger rabbit hole!

Reposts are better than no posts. Plus, plenty of people could have missed the original.

There’s some evidence for the same mechanism of action reducing PFAS:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041008X24003879

https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01165-8

My merit review this year specifically noted my high volume of peer review for why I exceeded expectations in the 20% service part of my contract. Again I say, faculty are remunerated for peer review. It’s better to do peer review for the service part of my contract than it is to sit on faculty senate. Doing peer review helps my research. It’s a win-win, unless I don’t want to get my full merit raise because i ignored service.

Faculty are paid for doing peer review just like we’re paid for publishing. We’re not paid directly for each of either, but both publishing (research) and peer review (service to the field) are stipulated within our contracts. Arxiv is also free to upload to and isn’t a journal with publication fees.

Professors literally get like $0.03 per copy of a book sold. Your professors make you buy their book because no one else teaches the class like they can. It’s their expertise that you’re paying for when you go to college to study under them. They’re making sure that you have something related to that that lasts.

Even somewhere warmer, I’m a 2 year-round, too. I just have one very cool sheet that I use in the summer.

Methods sections are limited in word count, and if a lab is hoping to get a few more papers out of a paradigm, they may be intentionally terse. There’s a big difference between how we write protocols in-house and how we write limited-length methods sections.

Nothing in the Frontiers is reputable among scientists. It gets linked a lot on Reddit because it’s open access, but scientists tend to view it as essentially the not-actually-peer-reviewed equivalent of a preprint. In the past, if all reviewers recommend rejection at Frontiers, the editor would be forcibly assigned new reviewers by the publishing staff. This would continue until the manuscript would get accepted. Not sure if that’s still the same (I’ve blocked all Frontiers emails), but it’s not correct to call a Frontiers journal a major reputable journal.

The pot in my ass