aheilbut

Many years ago, after the University of Toronto installed ads in the bathrooms, Steve Mann set up his Eyetap system to replace the ads with pictures of waterfalls.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/25/science/scientist-at-work-...

ZocDoc addresses this problem really well.

One interesting group of practical applications are the product design and optimization tools from Affinova http://www.affinova.com

I always thought Netmanage Chameleon worked better.

Someone knows something about how to get sustainable research funding.

This is a company making a device for Pavlovian conditioning.. Remember, you'll get zapped if you don't make that commit on time!

Netezza (acquired by IBM) has been doing this for many years.

I should probably give Zotero another try. At the time I started using Mendeley, it was really the best at automatically importing metadata for pdfs. And I don't think Zotero does the watch folder thing.

One thing I do like about Mendeley is that it's content to leave my pdfs alone in the filesystem (and I can rely on Dropbox for syncing those), whereas Zotero seems to want to import everything and manage the files itself.

Mendeley is not bad at all. I save papers to a Dropbox folder, organized directories by general topic / relevance to project. Mendeley (on one computer) watches that folder, and imports the papers and fills out the bibliographic info, mostly automatically.

Mendeley lets you tag and organize things in virtual folders, as well as store notes and annotations. The bibliographic info for subsets of papers (eg. with a particular tag) can be exported to bibtex files when writing.

Mendeley is available on all platforms, and syncs across multiple computers. The only catch is that the links to PDFs are only maintained on the 'master' that watches the folder. (If you try to watch folders on multiple instances of the same synced database, all hell breaks loose.)

Pubchase (www.pubchase.com) can also sync with your Mendeley library, and does a surprisingly good job of recommending papers of interest.

It's so bizarre that it must be intentional.

It's incredibly telling that the only thing the NYT was allowed to photograph was the machine shop.

It does make a lot of sense for notifications to be unbundled from social networks, individual apps, and the phone operating systems, but there really ought to be an open protocol for this stuff.

As a Canadian, why can't you do such work on TN status?

This is much more psychobabble than neuroscience.

Have a look at ExAC, which has 60k exomes and a pretty snazzy UI: http://exac.broadinstitute.org

I think the other factor was supposed to be the cost of the assays. If they're just using the same machines as everyone else to do the same tests, they have no competitive advantage.

Nobody can, because none of the relevant data has been made available.

According to these reports, there is only one test that they are allowed to run on the proprietary system that is supposed to provide that advantage. All the others are being run using conventional methods.

It's usable with their javascript-based version, but someone has also written a 1Password-compatible clone that works quite nicely: http://hg.icculus.org/icculus/1pass/

It's an empirical question. I would predict that you could do pretty darn well with height, weight, resting heart rate, blood pressure, bloodwork, and asking the patient about their physical activity. Fitness trackers are cool, but I'm just arguing against breathless health claims without justification.

What if you could pick out early warning signs of heart conditions just by looking at somebody and observing that they are overweight? It turns out that you can.

Introspection probably isn't a good way to assess this.

This is interesting, but while the article focuses on the issue of attention, it doesn't address the role of abstraction and chunking. There's been a lot of work in psychology that argues that 'expert performance' comes from lower-level concepts and operations getting grouped and automated. Attention remains important, but it is able to operate on larger, more meaningful pieces without getting bogged down in details.

If you don't understand the difference, read this sentence again.

It's self-referencing, but I agree that this is not strictly recursive.

I like this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Think-Like-Programmer-Introduction-Cre...

I think there are conflicting incentives, and we've seen how these things tend to play out. It's really the universities and the professors teaching the classes who are providing the courses, and they need to be careful that they don't inadvertently put all this material into a walled garden under the assumption that they're giving it away to the world.

For now.

The poor guy seems to have a remarkable knack for accidentally stumbling into all kinds of drama.

http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2012/03/23/the-strange-tal...

PLoS has tried to do that, with journals like PLoS Biology.

Hypothetically, AAAS is in the best position to pull something like this off, but as the publishers of Science, they're sadly very committed to preserving the status quo...