thirdstation

Some interesting work regarding citations has been put forth by the Semantic Publishing and Referencing ontologies, specifically the CiTO ontology[1].

It allows an author to state the reason for the citation (supports, refutes, etc.).

Having to state a reason could reduce spurious citations while providing a more accurate view of the nature of a paper's impact.

[1] http://www.sparontologies.net/ontologies/cito

From the article:

"Our compensation philosophy helped a lot. Most of its principles stem from ideals described earlier: Be honest, and treat people like adults. For instance, during my tenure Netflix didn’t pay performance bonuses, because we believed that they’re unnecessary if you hire the right people. If your employees are fully formed adults who put the company first, an annual bonus won’t make them work harder or smarter. We also believed in market-based pay and would tell employees that it was smart to interview with competitors when they had the chance, in order to get a good sense of the market rate for their talent. Many HR people dislike it when employees talk to recruiters, but I always told employees to take the call, ask how much, and send me the number—it’s valuable information."

She says they paid market rate and no bonuses. She emphasizes here and elsewhere in the article the importance of hiring people who put Netflix first.

She was also devastatingly "moved on" herself: http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/437291792/how-the-architect-of...

How tall are you?

Instead of charging tuition, I wonder if employers would be willing to pay Flatiron $15K per hire as a finder/training fee.

That might be a good test of demand for junior Ruby/Rails/Javascript developers, in addition to how good Flatiron is at preparing them.

Option 2 physically walls off the Late Mergers in addition to mentally (in the minds of the Free Laners), making them easier to ignore.

I like option 1 because it forces everyone to move.

malandrew types faster than me. And has better ASCII art.

Perhaps instead of merging one lane into another, the animosity toward late mergers can be alleviated by making all lanes move.

If no one feels like they are in the free lane, they'll be forced to cooperate.

So, on a two-lane highway, make one center lane and have both lanes funnel into it. then you can move that free-flowing lane wherever you need.

Nice minimal design. I like the ability to read a summary before deciding to click through. I was confused at first when the main content frame was empty (like another commenter pointed out - maybe put something there on page load).

One bug, the summaries are missing apostrophes.

I am trying to reconcile these two statements made by the author:

1) "[Scrum] provides a framework that prioritizes delivering real, working, business-quality software sprint after sprint."

2) "Scrum is engineering centric. Great companies are customer and product centric."

So, with the second quote the author sets up this dichotomy between Scrum and being customer-focused. But to me, the first quote (which is accurate) positions Scrum as supremely customer-focused. Meaning, to deliver value as soon as possible, as much as possible.

I think the author fails to make any persuasive arguments about Scrum. His arguments about what Scrum is not are inaccurate. I was hoping for some useful counter-perspective.

The post, and the one it comments on [1], bothers me for a few of reasons.

One: As an MS in CS holder I certainly worry that my degree is perceived as worth less, if not outright worthless. I worked very hard for it and am proud of my accomplishment. It represents a great deal of sacrifice. It also represents the 30 credits of undergraduate coursework and six credits of graduate coursework I completed before entering a graduate program. Of course, Ms. Lerner would see the MS on my résumé and throw it in the rubbish pile.

Two: According to Prof. Regehr's second point, training in public speaking and writing is an important aspect of a research-oriented master's program. I already had a B.A. in Journalism so I was pretty well covered on both of those points. And, since I was working full-time, with a child on the way, I was plenty mature. A coursework-oriented degree is what I wanted.

Three: I violently object to the denigration of MSCS holders based on the limited experience of a recruiter. Maybe Ms. Lerner is unable to attract more qualified candidates, and so she's extrapolated too liberally. Her arrogance is what I find most offensive.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/05/09/how-different-i...

I have a MS in CS but, before enrolling in a graduate program I took 30 credits of undergraduate CS courses at a local university as part of a certificate program. My BA in Journalism did not really prepare me for graduate-level CS work.

If this option is available to you then I'd heartily recommend it.

Say I wanted to know your salary. I could start a secret and enter the minimum minus one before I send you the link.

Is there a way to prevent this sort of scenario while letting the service remain anonymous?

This is a neat idea. I like that you didn't choose to implement another todo list in order to experiment with a new framework.

I think the wording of "continue a secret" is a little confusing. I appreciate the brevity but maybe "participate in a secret" would be more accurate. "Share a secret" sounds nice -- because that's what we do with secrets :-) But, it might get confused with the sharing of that particular secret code instead.

On a UI note, having to click on the help icon to dismiss the pop-up was a little annoying.

What is ethical software? Is netcat bad because you can do bad things with it?

> I don't think they mean to suggest that all users "enjoy" advertising,

I don't think so either :-) I was merely poking fun at the way they co-opted the entire Internet in an attempt to make Mozilla seem like they are on the wrong side of the issue.

They would be more genuine if they wrote an open letter to the Internet instructing how to re-enable third-party cookies in Mozilla and why they are good (according to the IAB).

They did include you:

> and the millions of consumers who enjoy the diversity of content and services the internet provides

(Ignore the small-i internet typo).

Do they mean to suggest that millions of consumers enjoy advertising? Thank you for thinking of me IAB!

> We’ve heard people say that RSS is a thing of the past, and perhaps in its current incarnation it is,

Does the author mean RSS as a format or aggregated feeds being "a thing of the past"?

I don't think feeds have achieved their potential yet.

The non-beta-site version of the article is here: http://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/devices/the-gene-machine...

I'd like to see all of the nutrition information encoded in a bar code so I can scan it with my smart phone. That would make tracking my nutrition easier (provided there was also an app that could make use of that info).

You could then print that barcode on register receipts for food items ordered and on menus -- that would be awesome.

"If nothing else happens in the next little while, I will eventually buy something else and enter my credit card information again, but I simply do not like this way of not addressing perfectly valid concerns about identity theft and Apple ID security."

Companies will continue to ignore customer security and other, lesser customer service issues if they think you'll come back anyway.

spam. it's just a fake article to sell their product.

tl;dr: "you’re going to have to figure out for yourself"

> Can a systems administrator really go back into programming? Of course. You could start by availing yourself of the many opportunities to program as part of your sysadmin job. That will give you plenty of practice and a portfolio of useful tool you've built.

You probably know some devs at your current employer so, talk to them and see if there are any opportunities coming up. Or, you could find a new job at a smaller company or startup where sysadmin skills would come in handy.

Most of all, have a clear reason why you want to become a developer. Mine was (and still is) that I'd rather build products than babysit them. I was a full-time sysadmin before and during grad school (CS). Now I do programming and sysadmin, plus other soft skills like proj mgmt.

A great benefit to being a sysadmin is that you can talk to other sysadmins and get stuff done.

I have no idea why but, that thought just stuck with me. I rode a bike through there a few months ago. The outer Philly burbs are indeed a nice place to live.

Someone I used to work with called Conshohocken, "Workpants, PA" because it seemed everyone walked around in blue overalls.

Ahh. Then you are mistaken Mr. McGreal. I give no credit at all to the production of academic sausage :-)

Yes, it's cheaper to produce an archive-ready article and I think it should have moved into the category of solved problems long ago. It just hasn't.

Like you said, the industry is ripe for disruption. It has been for over a decade.

Anyway, I think we are generally on the same side.

If you haven't already read the following you should: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/academic...

He also makes the "rentier capitalism" analogy.

> I think you give to much credit to the manufacture of academic sausage.

I don't understand what you mean by that. I merely point out it needs to be done and most discussions about open access publishing neglect to mention it.

I read that article when it came out. It's a little hand-wavy on the details.

It's good idea to use arxiv because they enforce submission standards. For-profit journals can't do that and society presses try but are not always successful. What happens if arxiv decides it needs to charge for submissions to defray operational costs? It's too early to tell.

They also do not prohibit individual journals from charging for publishing a paper. Not different from today's open access policies.

Bottom line -- for me its not different. It's just someone saying, "I think I can do it cheaper this way."

> True, just like Wikipedia lacks prestige and "credibility" now.

Note, I mentioned nothing about credibility or it's sarcastic variant "credibility". Though, saying you appeared in Wikipedia is hardly prestigious, and I like Wikipedia.

> I'm willing to wait +/- 20 years until all those old folks die off or become irrelevant and today's late teens can't remember a world without Wikipedia and have never seen a printed encyclopedia.

I should hope you'll need to wait a great deal longer than that! I hope for a day when I am so old even I can't remember a day without Wikipedia.

>First of all, the reviewers and editors of journals often work as volunteers -- so the notion of cost here is somewhat dubious.

The reviewers and Editors (in the editorial sense of the word) are not the largest contributors to the costs associated with publishing an academic paper -- that's why they can be done for free (in the cases they are). When they are done for free they offer some other career-enhancing benefit.

Most of the cost relates to making the sausage, if you will. The manuscripts must be wrestled into a form that can be printed. That is boring and tedious work that you have to pay someone to do. There's the cost of the infrastructure required for these folks to do their work. Then there's the continuing cost of hosting the digital version(s) of the article.

I believe preparing an article for publication and distribution can be reduced to a fixed cost -- provided all parties involved cooperate.

It would be helpful to think about _why_ academic publishers exist in the first place before tossing them aside. Otherwise we'll just end up with the same situation we have now.