1
bovineblitz 1 point ago +1 / -0

If I were forced to use mail in ballots I'd drop mine off in another town

4
bovineblitz 4 points ago +4 / -0

All they need was the unique identifier of the truck, then anyone with access to UHaul's system could look it up.

12
bovineblitz 12 points ago +12 / -0

I have a psych degree and went into biomedical research next. It's got a medical side to it that you can work with if you're so inclined.

Might have to work as a lab tech first, that's what I did

2
bovineblitz 2 points ago +2 / -0

It means you unconsciously favor people of your own race. There's some data that shows reaction speed biases and they extrapolate that out into this whole crazy theory.

The most insane part is that the only way to do anything about implicit bias is to use explicit bias.

3
bovineblitz 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm pretty convinced that it's spread through surfaces and perhaps not through the air at all. That's what the data points to for the flu, and coronaviruses seem to be nearly identical in transmission characteristics.

Check out this paper, they found that there's almost no viral particles in droplets/aerosols from exhalations from people who tested positive for the virus. They had 10 with and without masks on and found that in only 3 or 4 cases total they could detect viral particles. 3/10 people with masks had detectable viral particles, 0/10 with masks had viral particles. You can see they show a black line for the mean and a white box for the variability, there's not even any variability when it comes to the masks. The amount of virus copies is also low in the detectable samples which they talk about in the discussion, you need to get exposed to a lot of virus to get sick.

The kicker is that using this data they concluded that masks are effective at blocking virus particles despite having found barely any virus particles in teh first place. Despite finding very low amounts of viruses in only 30% of the non-mask samples, that was their conclusion. This immediately screams of an inappropriate statistical analysis to me, Since 17/20 samples were literally zero they should be running some sort of nonparametric test. Every test I thought of that was reasonable to run looks like it'd be a non-significant result, meaning you can' use this dataset to conclude that masks are effective.

What they did was a Tobit regression, which is generally applied in economics. Part of the model is censoring, which basically means your measures can't capture all the information due to the dataset or equipment limitations, I don't understand how that applies to this study. They did RT-PCR, they should be able to detect very low levels of RNA pretty easily. Not only that, but regressions assume a normal data distribution (think the standard IQ curve), and this data set absolutely violates the shit out of that assumption. According to this discussion, a Tobit test is inappropriate.

8
bovineblitz 8 points ago +8 / -0

We're supposed to notify facilities about shelving and shit, they want to ensure that it's all up to standards. A lot of walls in older academic buildings are concrete blocks too. A picture on drywall is absurd though, that's just a fucking nail or two.

24
bovineblitz 24 points ago +25 / -1

They have been like this their whole lives and many of them have been catered to and worked around like it's a goddamn disability.

This is often true but it's too big of a generalization. There are lots of us who came up through smaller private or state schools and worked our ways into leading institutions through serious effort. Most of the people you're talking about did undergrad in an Ivy and got into a grad school lab/department via connections. Even then, a lot of them are not like that, it's a subset of people. If you can't follow directions you can't possibly innovate and work hard enough to progress in your career. In my experience there tends to be a lot more socially retarded people around me than a lack of simple life skills. There's always a few decent people in any department though, I've never seen one without at least one under the radar real person. I'll qualify this by saying my field is biomedical, maybe that matters quite a bit.

Most of the good friends I've made throughout my career have been non-academics, I think there's generally a reason for that. In my field, most men are either absurdly liberal/preachy or they keep their focus on their work and leave it at the office/lab when they leave. Lately you can figure out who's who because the insane race theory trainings and shit are not mandatory, there's a lot more people routinely dodging these things than I expected. Quite a few women as well. And even among those who attend, I know at least a couple who do it due to direct pressure by their boss (which I think is incredibly inappropriate) and hate every second of it. I've been trying to get them to record some of it to catch the crazy shit.

view more: Next ›