Circuits

Oh really and how far are you willing to take it? For instance, should child pornography also be untamed so long as it's known as art?

I agree but mitigating the risk of breaking the camels back is worth it if the only side-effect is one less crappy Netflix show.

I would assume that somewhere on the bottom line there is an analysis of what the drug itself is doing. For instance, does the drug cure something or does it treat the symptoms of something? I imagine most of former are thrown out right off the bat. What we need is a system for testing, developing and selling medications that is less effected by the human condition. Perhaps, we should close the private sector and hand this off to the government or at least breakup the process by allowing the private sector to sell without the burden of testing and development? Perhaps, we as taxpayers, should be handling the burden of cost for testing and development?

An old high school friend of mine died a few years back and I am still getting birthday notifications on Facebook. His profile just sits in limbo, a record of his activities the last few weeks before he died.

Yeah, personally, I would say it's pretty obvious that extraterrestrials, aliens, little green men, are visiting our planet and have been for some time now... not sure why this is so hard to accept but apparently there are a lot of people who would rather die in a fiery car crash than admit that the snake attached to their leg has in fact bitten them.

As a coworker of mine would say: "A watched pothead never toils." I have always found it amusing when people talk about time's existence. It has always seemed like a ruler or a measuring stick; t = d/v, to me. Some people disagree as to it's existence but I think perhaps the problem isn't with our concept of time but with our definitions of existence.

So how exactly, will Polar "re-boot" the internet, deflate inflated tuition and decrease the cost of textbooks? What exactly does "re-boot" the internet even mean? Honestly, this seems like a whole lot of snake oil to me. If you have no intentions of directly combating tuition prices, which would require political intervention at the highest level of government, then why would you mention it? Unless of course your intentions were simply to evoke some emotional reaction in your viewers... reminds me of a family guy episode I watched where Louse ran for mayor. Eventually her campaign devolved from something substantial into a buzzword shouting competition between her and her running mate. I was half surprised when the article ended without talking about how Polar was going to rid the world of terrorism and the opioid epidemic.

As far as I am concerned, yes but who knows with scientists now a days. I feel like their all just flying by the seat of their pants.

Is anyone really under the assumption that AY would even bother pursuing a UBI if he's elected? I am not, I am under the assumption that this is a campaign strategy meant to get him more votes.

It depends on how the question is phrased. If they hand you a white board and say: "Show us the code" then you are going to have to build something. However, if they ask you something like: "If we asked you to build a ToDo app that solves x problem, how would you do it?" Then it's reasonable to assume they are open to more solutions than you jumping up and grabbing a marker. Being able to distinguish those differences is also important.

At my company we don't bother with specific problems. When we ask a candidate: "If you were asked to build x program how would you go about it", the answer we are looking for is along these lines: "I would go online and find someone who has already done the problem and replicate/alter it to fit my needs". The majority of the questions we ask are like: "Where do you see yourself in 5 years.", "What does our company do?", "Present us with a time when you had to overcome a challenge and failed.". If your going to work with someone then its best you know that they are capable of learning. After all, a degree isn't about proving you know something, it's about proving you have the ability to learn and fight for that knowledge when necessary. It proves you have drive and direction in your life; important qualities in a candidate.

It is nice to see but without proper enforcement I am afraid that change will never come. IMHO, the biggest step they need to take is to allow repeat questions or at least to mitigate the "murder the SO" mentality that's displayed whenever it happens. It's one thing to suggest the question already has an answer. It's a whole different beast when you type out how worthless the SO is for not doing research prior to posting the question and ban against them with 50 down votes, ostracizing them completely. Moderators should be given an option to punish users for incorrect/inappropriate comments and action on questions.

I like the idea but I don't know if I agree with the proposed approach to reviews. Personally, at a minimum, I would like to see the following from every reviewer:

A structured summary- background, objectives, data sources, synthesis methods used, results, limitations, conclusions and the implications of important findings drawn by the article.

In more detail:

An introduction that presents the problem and the issues dealt with. An assessment of the methods which describes the research and the evaluation process; specifies the number of studies references and gives a brief evaluation of their validity. A description of conclusions/results and their quality based on identifiable and preconceived academic/professional metrics. A strong summary of conclusions, limitations of those conclusions and the outcomes of the procedure used for the research.

I would really love to see reviews of reviews as well as a reviewers rating system (individual reviewers should have their own ratings) but given the limited number of reviewers that maybe asking too much.

I would have to agree. I have never taken RT evaluations seriously which is one of the reasons I was so disappointed to hear they would be involved in the project.

I think your outlook on the subject is extremely pessimistic and is a strong reflection of your own jaded feelings towards misinformation.