throwaw4ybio's comments

Think of it more as short-selling Steven Pinker's work in the marketplace of ideas.

edit: I like this analogy the more I think about it. If I tell my friends I strongly disagree with Steven Pinker today and his "valuation" continues to fall, I can gain social credit. There is a risk involved in this, however, because sometime in the future science may gather strong confirmatory evidence that Steven Pinker was right all along, and I'll have to trade in an even greater amount of social capital (e.g. because I'm forced to admit I was wrong or go all defensive kook).

Sorry, following the increasingly bizarre news with cryptocurrency and GME is something I've been doing too much of lately.

>Pinker traces the origins of this dynamic all the way back to 1975 and the publication of E.O. Wilson’s “Sociobiology,” when Wilson and other biologists “would get shouted down” for expressing the view that genetic and other evolutionary considerations determine, in part, social organization.

Two things that might serve as food for thought:

1) I guarantee that know-it-all, newly-minted young adults getting mad at professors didn't start in 1975, though simultaneous social shifts (e.g. things like the anti-Vietnam-War movement) might have made it more socially acceptable for the youngins to speak up in those places.

2) People complaining about being oppressed on campus because of their ideas frequently seem to have the same weird idea. Whereas, no one goes and yells at Lee Smolin when he bags on string theory.

Cost of materials (e.g. sand) are going up, plus the "nuclear grade" upcharge. Add a 2x to 4x multiplier for "accidents" that require demolition and rework. :)

If you want nuclear to happen:

1) Disrupt the nuclear construction contracting process. Until fleet contractors like Bechtel et al are stopped from parasitizing the industry, it's going nowhete due to spiralling costs.

2) Lower the cost of reinforced concrete.

3) Close the fuel cycle.

3 is technically feasible, 2 isn't very sexy, but possible. 1 seems insurmountable.

If his goal is to change the publisher's mind, calling them "craven" is a terrible rhetorical tactic.

I agree, there are plenty of social scenarios that aren't congruent to iterated prisoner's dilemma.

E.g. if you implement tit-for-tat in your marriage, you're gonna have a bad time.

Would love to see a legit reply to this point. Usenet is there.

The trouble is that it is behind your security perimeter once it is on your home network. It can start discovering other devices, monitoring traffic, enumerating ports and services, etc.

They should be careful not to cross into Icarus territory.

I have to admit that this "last man" stuff rings of the "soyboy" rhetoric you hear in some corners of the web.

>If the system gets corrupted, a second group of scientists will emerge who claim to be the real deal. Let them battle it out and choose the smarter group for further funding.

Would this involve an application? Perhaps a committee?

>It's like the Komsomol have come to town.

You don't think this is over-egging the custard a bit?

Thanks for the tip!

Oh absolutely agree. The amount of time we spend washing dishes is absurd. We yearn for the end of the bootstrap phase.

Exactly this! (+1 to govdeals too, when the auction is in geographic range) While we've gotten nibbles from accelerators, up to the interview stage, they want to see an MVP before funding us. This is, of course, kind of a non-starter when you don't have 200k lying around for a minimal denovo lab, and there's not much in the way of rental lab space where we are. Thankfully, after four years of grinding on this as our side gig -- and a big slowdown due to the plague -- we've got enough preliminary data to apply for an NIH grant, which we're very optimistic about.

My wife and I have a setup up in our house (it's all GRAS and Biosafety Level 1 stuff) and have mostly bought off ebay and govdeals. She's a neuroscientist and I'm a physics/engineering guy. My job is to handle the business end, acquire gear, and maintain it so that she can science as hard as possible.

Most of our lab gear is 80s and 90s-vintage gear we've fixed up. You'd be amazed what a little analogue electronics knowledge can do here; people will throw out a device rather than replace the belts or motor brushes. We'll get used and broken gear at a fraction of of the cost of new and certified refurb machinery.

I'm currently modding our venerable Labline orbital shaker incubator. Over the course to two months the tachometer and both of the remote bulb thermostats on it went out, so I'm installing a Johnson Controls A421 to manage the heater and adding a $20 Hall effect tachometer to replace the analog tach. The mechanicals are solid, though (got it for $300 plus freight!) and getting another would be a slow expensive crap shoot.

BTW, readers, do you think that there is an audience for a blog that talks about the details of rebuilding old equipment like this? I'm not big on video, so it would mostly be long form writing with lots of images.

How can I take this seriously when it doesn't mention ebay anywhere?