VWXYNot? Comment(s) of the week:
Nina and Grant for the following exchange: Nina: "Life should be a conference, everyone wearing nametags all the time, with their first name, last name, nickname, country of origin and country of residence. Birthdate optional."
Grant: Nina, I’m sure tech types will suggest we’ll all be bumping cell phones to exchange names in a few years. (Eurgh.)
One more: you know that thing where the person can’t quite read your name tag and leans in close over your chest to read it…
Nina: "ok, how about tattooing your name onto your forehead?"
Grant: "How about a sub-dermal name implant invisible when not active that glows when triggered by trained neural signals beaming your name to the people opposite you?
Failing that we could all wear electrode scalp caps that carry a flip up sign… (Taking as my cue the brain-computer interfaces emotiv and others are marketing.)"
[NB as a chronic tartler, I approve of all the above methods]
Alyssa for "It’s cloudy again
We see it’s cold and dreary
But – we have windows!!!"
Ricardipus for "Bugger me, the grant’s
Finally done. Thank goodness.
Now back to fun stuff."
Bean-mom for "I just clicked on the article on circular RNAs–I’d seen the headline earlier but hadn’t yet read it–and just as I expected, I’m all WTF?! MicroRNAs, long non-coding RNAs, now we’ve got circular RNAs. . . I feel like someone should just write a review titled, “RNA: WTF?”"
Nina again for "edit: my advisor has improved his standing desk further by standing on a wooden board that balances on a small (but sturdy) plastic tube, to make him wobble while standing, so to keep working those balancing muscles, or something like that. The tube comes from one of my experiments. I will miss that “wtf I’ll create my own standing desk – pilates work-out” attitude, I must admit."
Bob O'H for "Reminds me of my youth playing boardgames. There was one called Civilisation, which a friend described as “almost as long as the real thing”."
Chall "it surely looks like the Leafs MIGHT go to play offs for the first time in 7 years…. if I didn’t jinx it by saying it here of course. That said, I find myself wondering how bad it will be to end 5th place if Boston stays 4th. It sort of feels better to play the 3rd (Capitals right now) than Bruins but right now I’ll settle for PLAYOFFS and miracle :)"
[the Leafs making the playoffs is a miracle indeed]
KJHaxton for "Good question! I’d put:
– occasional baker of cakes for meetings
– fair to moderate tolerance for bullshit
– low tolerance for unfairness and willing to get very cross about it (folds arms and glowers at the screen)
– best selection of tea bags in desk drawer (8 kinds at last count)
– prone to wearing scarves and shirts that don’t match
Ah well, I’m not sure I’d find a new job on the basis of those :)"
Ricardipus again for "Pros:
- rarely swears in public
- has few friends, so unlikely to have loud, belly-laughing conversations on phone or in person
- capable of speaking at length about (a) race cars, (b) cameras, or (c) bad science
Cons:
- occasionally swears in public
- has few friends, so likely to have poor social interactions with co-workers
- capable of speaking at length about (a) race cars, (b) cameras, or (c) bad science
I’d also probably include “easily suckered into serving on irrelevant committees” into each category, too."
Bean-mom again for "–Friendly.
–Doesn’t bake, but if you have a potluck I’ll bring killer spring rolls (both crispy fried pork ones, and the vegetarian fresh rice-paper ones).
–Doesn’t bake, but husband bakes. Occasionally, you may be a recipient of his talent.
–Will cheerfully listen to other people’s dramas, but won’t cause any of my own. Not at work, anyway."
and Nina yet again for "As I may have mentioned before, I’m pretty sure my cv point “Love baking (chocolate) cakes” earned me my PhD position, and it definitely often raised questions in interviews (“so, how often do you bake cake? What kind of chocolate do you use?”)"
Post(s) of the Week: Beth Snow for "Modern conveniences" (how on earth did we survive, let alone study and write theses, before Skype and cloud computing?!)
Steve Caplan for "Science education: the generalist vs the specialist" (are 3 year or 4 year degrees better for students?)
Bean-mom for "Leaving scientific research... again" (science SUCKS sometimes)
Eva Amsen, writing at the Occam's Typewriter Irregulars for "The two ideas to fix the gender balance that do not make me cringe" (the panel pledge and the Finkbeiner test)
Bob O'Hara for "Making reviewing boring stuff less boring" (would a stripped-down manuscript format work better for the, um, less exciting papers out there?)
Alyssa for "Just the pants, thanks" (absolutely hilarious take on the modern clothes shopping experience)
Eva Amsen again for "My self-updating address book" (how LinkedIn can be useful)
CromerCrox for "Plagues" (how's God been cursing you lately?)
Prof-like Substance for "If you don't talk to your kids about it someone else will" (anticipating school-yard talk about religion and other big issues)
and CromerCrox again for "Conferences" (the problem of sexism at conferences)
Archives:
October 2008 - March 2009; April 2009 - September 2009; October 2009 - March 2010; April 2010 - September 2010; October 2010 - February 2011; March 2011 - September 2011; October 2011 - March 2012; April 2012 - September 2012; October 2012 - March 2013; April 2013 - September 2013
Science: Occam's corner | guardian.co.uk
Not ranting - honestly
No Comment
Athene Donald's Blog
The End Of The Pier Show
The Occam's Typewriter Irregulars
Mind the Gap
Adventures in Wonderland
Girl, Interrupting
Reciprocal Space
Trading Knowledge
Confessions of a (former) Lab Rat
Science behind the Scenes
Deep thoughts and silliness
Blogging the PhD
City Limits
Fantastic. You have no idea how much I would like to submit something like this.
Not as much as the reviewers would enjoy reading it!
Yes, I’m sure it would make their day! And they can’t take the money back, right?
“The Bioinformatic’s community”
Sigh. Perhaps you could cheekily point out that seeing as “The Bioinformatic’s community” (sic) doesn’t exist, there’s nothing to support…
On the other hand, the CIHR could support the bioinformatics community, or rather one member of it, by tossing loads of funding my way
JK, of course. Although seriously loads of funding would nice
Well, I don’t know. Maybe there’s some supernatural deity called The Bioinformatic, who has a community of worshipers I’m supposed to join in order to get more funding?
So… if I rename myself ‘The Bioinformatic’, CIHR will give me loads of money and everyone will come and worship me at my blog?
Sounds good. Must put that down on my to-do list. It’d be a whole lot easier that grant applications, after all.
Ironically (or hilariously, depending on your point of view) I have a post in draft titled ‘Are bioinformaticians gods?’ Maybe I ought to run that tomorrow…?
Grrr. *than* grant applications. Sigh
Lest my last paragraph be misread as me blatantly plugging my blog (but gods are allowed to do that, right?), I originally wrote that post almost a year ago; it’s been sitting in the drafts ever since – Cathy’s remarks reminded me of it.
ICK Cath – all I can say is I think that is the worst thing we have to do – I hate end of grant reports – its like showing your mom your grade card – yuck
Heh! And that was always just fine as long as you had good grades to report, right?
I recently had to submit a five-year roll-up report for a grant for which I had already submitted twenty (20) quarterly progress reports. Did the agency (or their *ahem* regional counterparts) simply synthesize the content of those twenty (20) reports? No, they did not. Was the format of the data required for the consolidated one different enough from the twenty (20) other ones to be a right royal pain in the tail? Yes, yes it was.
Wow. That’s almost as surprising as the CPC being implicated in electoral dirty tricks.
Pingback: Are bioinformaticians gods? | Code for Life
Pingback: Bragging Rights Central: New Archive Post | VWXYNot?