Does the data reject the null hypothesis? If you group people into hundreds of groups (occupations) and measure something (Alzheimer's rate) variance ensures that the means of the measurements will vary. Some groups will have low means other will have high means. The distributions may be equal but due to random chance there will be outliers.
There are many researchers who already avoid US conferences. The risk of arbitrary arrest, being denied entry, or general asshattery from border guards who want to snoop through your social media is just too high. The needless and unjustified war against Iran is just the final straw.
This comment is devoid of data. There have been less stoppages and detentions than you can count on one hand of scientists and mathematicians. There are hundreds of thousands classified via various levels of visa. None have been arrested in some unlawful manner, and the onus is on you to define "asshattery" in a way that is defensible. Foreign adversaries have been embedded within the US academic institutions before the Cold War. Just because the current US president is a divisive convicted felon doesn't suddenly mean we shouldn't care about controlling our own borders.
The US (and many nations for that matter) monitor, track, and protect their borders by foreigners and of a group of mathematicians cannot fathom why this may be the case amidst all-time high mistrust, spying, and academic and corporate espionage and then they should've studied harder.
But it is not just about the numbers, you are probably right that statistically, mathematicians don't have much to fear at the border, but the current administration seems to go out of its way make the US unwelcoming. All countries will protect their borders in some way but they usually don't make a show out of it like the US does.
If you go to a hotel and are greeted by a grumpy guy who asks how how you dare book a room on their property, it is a natural reaction to move to the hotel next door where the staff is hopefully more friendly.
These are just cases that make the news. There is a very real possibility of being detained, having devices confiscated, or being refused entry if you are an outspoken critic of the president.
when i consider traveling to any country i don't care about statistics. i care about feeling safe. unless you can prove and guarantee that i will not be bothered when crossing the border then i'll stay away.
What an utter piece of shit comment. I have had friends (research mathematicians) who were harassed at the border and you have the temerity to do the "cite your sources" shitcrap for "data" which is available with a single click of the mouse -- as the very gracious sibling comment showed, doing your work for you.
Last I read the strike price for offshore wind was about half of that for nuclear power (Hinkley Point). In other words the "huge subsidies" aren't going to who you think they are.
You don't understand what a subsidy is. Offshore wind subsidies are taken out of electricity bills, not the price. The price you are seeing does not include the subsidy.
The reason why Hinkley Point is expensive is completely solvable. The reason why it is expensive is because it is supposed to be expensive, that is the purpose. An A road near me has required two lanes, so far they have spent near £100m over twenty years and have not built anything. The basic premise of the UK political system is that people have no idea what the price of anything should be because it is all a political fiction.
When the costing was done for Hinkley 10 years ago the price was going to be, iirc, something like 50% above the price of gas which was at record lows. This was regarded as extremely expensive...electricity prices are up multiples and multiples since then. Since then, you have had armies of lawyers, consultants, lobbyists, planners working on the project full-time...and you are asking why it is expensive? Thinking this requires knowing so little about how much nuclear costs around the world and having literally zero idea about infra projects work in the UK (spoiler: there is massive corruption at almost every level, tens of billions in graft every year).
Yes, offshore wind has CFDs too. If you are building an offshore wind farm, you are spending lots of money to construct something that isn't a low-cost operator and will likely cause significant economic issues with customer's ability to pay you...therefore, CFD. This is how the government was able to intervene to cause non-economic outcomes.
And yes, as I explain above but which you seem to have not read...there was unbelievable levels of graft involved with Hinkley. EDF is not the victim, the reason why the CFD is there is to pay suppliers to EDF which are: lawyers, consultants, planners, etc. At some point, someone may get paid for building a nuclear power plant but that is a largely accidental outcome. If you compare to what other countries with functioning political systems, Korea for example, it is multiples. The costs and prices are so ludicrous, so out of control that no-one could think they make economic sense...and, of course, they don't. It is just corruption.
Non CfD offshore wind farms probably can be economical without CfD if they had access to very cheap capital. But without CfD the risk is higher and so is the profit margin on the debt which ultimately makes it more expensive to generate the electricity which in turns increases risk of low wholesale prices.
Also, for years CfD rates were actually lower than wholesale price and are currently generating at lower strike prices than average wholesale prices. The problem now is more inflation, capital costs, and commodity prices for materials. But then a lot of other things are more expensive also.
It's actually almost exactly the opposite, at least when considering the number of media outlets. Fox news is a massive outlier with a huge audience and strong republican leaning, but most of the major networks engage in democrat-aligned signaling (not necessarily the progressive branch of democrats).
> 90% of US media is not aligned with the Democrats
The media works for the same people both parties do. If capital wanted to manufacture Democrat-aligned outrage they could easily do so overnight.
But it's a complete mistake to think about politics in a partisan manner at all. Of course the democrats won't ever fight for you. Doing anything decreases chances of getting elected again.
Whatever force will depose capital won't come from the two-party system.
The media works for the billionaire elite and it is mostly aligned with the Republican party. And if you think that "both parties are as bad" or that the last president was as batshit insane as the current one, that same billionaire elite has duped you.
Microsoft showing 2FA down everyone's throat is quite painful. I don't for a second believe they are only using my phone number for authentication. They are storing the data and they are correlating it with other apps they force 2FA on.
Um, no? Arguing against 2fa is I don't want to cede even more PII with the American tech oligopoly which, no doubt, will share said PII with the American regime.
You cannot copy others' work and claim it is your own. Thus, you cannot copy ChatGPT's work and claim it is your own. There is a qualitative difference between having an LLM generate text and having a program spell- and grammar check text. Since you are not going to highlight which passages in your article ChatGPT wrote for you and instead intend to pass it of as your own creative work it is dishonest. Very dishonest. If caught you will get in trouble and may be kicked out of your academic programme.
There is not a single paragraph that I might “steal” from ChatGPT. I’m consistently using multiple LLMs to write, polish, rephrase and all other kinds of edits
I really don’t get the point of the necessity of typing manually. Can you explain?
I remember this study! It caused huge controversy in Sweden.
The phd student who conducted it trawled through students' Facebook pages and took their profile photos (without consent). Then he had a jury of 74 teenagers rate the photos on a scale from 1 to 10. Then he tried to correlate beauty with grades for distance or in-class education. De-anonymizing the data was trivial so everyone could pretty much see how the jury had rated each profile photo. And research data is public.
It was a seriously weak study with questionable methodology and a too low effect-size to draw any conclusions anyway. So no reason to get alarmed if you are ugly. :)
I have written some OpenGL applications in X11, so they did not use much of X11 besides setting up windows for the OpenGL contexts, after which the rest of the programs were written using the OpenGL API.
Those applications seemed quite simple to write in comparison with what is described in the parent article, despite doing animation in real time based on the mouse and keyboard inputs.
reply