OEIS is perhaps the best model. I'm not sure if Neil Sloane looks at every sequence that goes in but he approved my entries. It's now in a trust and will definitely continue once he stops contributing.
I didn't realise the fairphone didn't have a jack input. I had a fair phone 2. I'm slowly starting to think the company is a scam. My fairphone could have lasted quite a while longer but they stopped making the part I needed. I mean we need more things like this in the market place so there could be 3rd party but there wasn't any option (this was a couple of years ago now)
Just a little point that the life expectancy given there is "at birth" and unless I'm mistaken, it's the mean. Which means infant mortality contributes enormously to this figure. It's a misconception that in the past you would only rarely see someone much older than 50. I'm not sure how this would affect the analysis. But it's worth bearing in mind. I'm sure there were plenty of great grandparents before 1900. That usage of great seems to stem from the 1500s. https://www.etymonline.com/word/great-grandfather#etymonline...
Some interesting points raised by other comments to this post. My best guess is that he meant that you could have a traumatic experience afterwards that leaves you worse than before. Maybe (just spitballing) whatever mental defences you have against trauma are enhanced by not being too plastic.
There's good evidence that psychedelics can increase neuroplasticity, you can web search those keywords. It would be surprising if it didn't at least sometimes help with cognition. On the other hand, a colleague who works in the field said to me "who says plasticity is good?" I've yet to ask him to clarify this; it challenges my assumptions but he is way more knowledgeable than I.
There are also studies into psychedelics and creativity (as in problem solving, rather than painting) which again you could look up. The one I'm thinking of in particular was before the war on drugs and rather flawed methodology. But there have been more recent studies.
Agreed wholeheartedly but didn't want to come out swinging!
Not only that but my experience of reviewing has also been positive, and has given me ideas for research and how to present research (notation, paper structure etc)
Except my first review which was a 100 page survey paper on a very specific kind of inequality that exists for practically any graph invariant, so every page was pretty much identical just with alpha then beta then omega then chi... And the deadline was my birthday!
Peer review is pretty unpopular round these parts. In mathematics/TCS I've had mostly good experiences. Actually most of the time the review process improved my papers.
Clearly something is rotten about the way peer review is implemented in the empirical sciences. But think of all those high profile retractions you read about these days. Usually that comes about by a sort of post hoc peer review, not by anything resembling market forces.
I think it would be fair to say: there's (often) a trade off between freedom and laziness. From there it follows that, in such situations, you cannot be both maximally free and maximally lazy.
Just an idea but how would you advise someone learning programming/a new programming language? Probably you'd say: build something with it. So same goes for excel. Try to hook up a spreadsheet to some database, have it update automatically, have drop down lists that populate automatically from the database (e.g. have a "country" drop down and automatically populate a "region" drop down based on the choice of country) and so on. You need some BASIC and SQL for this but not much
I don't understand the casette pitch. I'm filling the dishwasher anyway. The tablet is like 1 more item in the dishwasher, not having to do that is below 1% improvement.
The headline (and url) is hugely misleading here. This is not based on any statistics or analysis, it's pure opinion from a newspaper that is basically a tabloid by now, an author who is a self-described hardline Brexiteer (and Irexiteer for that matter) and is mostly famous for airbrushing British atrocities in Irish history.
True but that's a diphthong, "jo" is just a long(ish) o vowel sound. A lot of English dialects simply don't have an equivalent sound so it's hard to spell it. It's the IPA "o" or close to it. In my accent (south East England) "your" is pronounced almost identically to "jo".
Jo (pronounced a bit like your without the r sound) is affirmative in lots of European languages, including Finnish and Czech (it's spelled joo in Finnish iirc)
When I was young in the UK, a TV show got in trouble because their phone in quiz, with a cash prize, was too easy. The verdict was, it's not a quiz it's a lottery, and lotteries are regulated (there can only be one national lottery). That's quite an abstract piece of analysis for a governing body to make. They realised that this ostensible quiz "encoded" a lottery in a sense.
I think a similar analysis applies here: these are not games, they really are casinos, just with the veneer of games over the top.
I think we probably agree on a lot of things! I would prefer to increase the relative power of local councils and often think about how to implement some version of sortition. You might be interested in the concept of "random ballot" (that's the Wikipedia page title) if you don't already know it.
Money is power. Regulation is a fig leaf. Think of taxation: the government makes all the rules on how much tax a business should pay under this or that circumstance. How much tax do the biggest companies pay? Next to nothing, pound for pound. Because they are able to use their money to exert power. Companies will always do this, so regulations will always erode over time.