HexesofVexes

Lesson 1 - Plot every pair of variables in this file as a scatter plot using Excel. Calculate every pair of correlations possible from the same file in Excel.

Lesson 2 - ggpairs and why R is amazing

Hello folks! - informally archaic

You would also get the best job title ever: “Chief Codebase Unfucker”

Old enough to remember a world that smelled like an ashtray. Old enough to have played sonic 1 on a Japanese cart on release. Old enough to remember the wild west days of the web, before it became a corporate wasteland.

See, that’s probably the most reasonable argument I’ve heard in an online post.

There are also some good tips here about being more ethical in your meat purchases (essentially, avoid over purchasing and wasting meat, learn your labels to avoid cruel producers, if you have the luxury buy from local farms) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sVfTPaxRwk

So, if your field appears instantly/imminently monetisable, then the private sector is an option. However, the wider benefits of your research are VERY unlikely to reach the wider public in your lifetime. Yes, you will basically be working to make someone else rich. However, this kind of grant is very likely to succeed in academic settings as universities love patents.

If you’re doing abstract or fundamental research, you’re pretty much out of luck - the private sector does not want anything to do with this. However, it’s little better in the academic sector because you have to spend almost all your time chasing grants, or teaching topics outside your expertise (i.e. the ones industry sees immediate value in) to survive.

In short, there is a lot of options to finish things (because everyone loves intellectual property as an asset), but very few to develop them (no-one likes to pay for the groundwork).

“I want to make the world a better place at no real benefit to myself”

“Ok, but only if you beg us for the money”

Modern academia in a nutshell

Teaching in a school has greatly changed over the past 3 decades. It’s still a rewarding career, but not one I wanted to stick with - the pressure to work miracles is too high, and the support just isn’t there to do so.

I already use geany as my main DE! It’s got a lot of great features, but it’s not really a notepad app.

Never heard of it, so now I will take a look. Thanks for sharing.

Notepad++ is, at its heart, a text editor.

It’s lightweight, can run portably, and has some oddly specific but useful features such as dual window linked scrolling, syntax highlighting, and even allows regex for search/replace which is neat.

You can use it for coding (I use it for short python scripts), but that isn’t it’s main use.

VScode is, primarily, an IDE - not really something you use as a plain text editor.

For those who want to stick with Windows, Notepad++ is far superior anyway.

Oddly enough, Notepad++ doesn’t really have a full featured native Linux alternative (as of my last deep search around June 2025).

Good and evil are subjective - the idea behind “humans are a virus” is an implied negativity. Thus the counterexample mapping to a good virus ;)

https://magazine.hms.harvard.edu/articles/good-viruses-do

Not all viruses are evil, so it might hold up?

Lemmy doesn’t always get sarcasm - please don’t stop though!

A running joke could be renaming the genders as “solo” and “co-op” for MMOs.

In some fields (e.g. mathematics) old papers hold up well. However, in fields like psychology where the landscape shifts a lot that’s probably a good shout!

Honestly, I always poke the stats no matter how good the journal. The best way to read any article is as a skeptic (the onus is on the writer to prove their point), and any small irregularity is something to be queried.

No matter how good the journal, it’s only as good as the reviewers, and reviewers are humans too. Odds are a paper in nature is all above board, but I’m somewhat of a pedant when it comes to checking test conditions.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-19418-4.pdf

Paper itself above. Need a deeper reading with my notes but on the surface the stats are so-so. They check normality, but don’t confirm linearity (use of pmcc will not be valid without - there are also a few other conditions to check for hypothesis testing with PMCC if memory serves), use of a continuous test (PMCC, ANOVA, unpaired t’s) for discrete (likert) data is also little controversial, but generally condoned.

As for the conclusion, not a psych phd so I’ll assume they know their stuff!

Honestly, I think most tech CEO decisions are being made with crackgpt.