Haha, I was actually joking, I didn’t think it’s really true. This is hilarious!
Haha, I was actually joking, I didn’t think it’s really true. This is hilarious!
Maybe they’re talking about themselves in 3rd person (dragonfucker)? 🙃
I recently read an interesting article proposing to get rid of the current peer review system: https://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-rise-and-fall-of-peer-review
The argument was roughly this: for the unfathomable (unpaid) hours spent on peer review, it’s not very effective. Too much bad research still gets published and too much good research gets rejected. Science would also not be a weak-link problem but a strong-link problem, i.e., scientific progress would not depend on the quality of our worst research but of that of our best research (which would push through anyway in time). Pretty interesting read, even though I find it difficult to imagine how we would transition to such a system.
An axiom is a statement that is accepted to be true, usually to serve as a foundation for further arguments. I assume OP meant that NGT would often make general statements without much justification and OP perceived these statements as not nuanced / “true” enough.
A few bad things in code for which we have fairly consistent evidence:
As a software engineering researcher, I strongly agree. SE research has studied code comprehension for more than 40 years, but for that amount of time, we know surprisingly little about what makes really high-quality code. We are decent in saying what makes very bad code, though, but beyond extreme cases, it’s hard to come to fairly general statements.
That’s a great analogy via movie quotes if I’ve ever seen one! Need to rewatch that movie… :)
I’m confused about this as well. Why is this trial happening before one that would bring criminal charges for the insurrection to lock him up? If he lost such a trial, he would be automatically banned from running, right? Or is the required evidence different for this one and that’s why they go with it?
While I agree with the general notion of this, there are still companies that are considerably worse than others. Choosing the lesser evil is still something that would overall help society and the planet.
But who would lead the executive branch then and how would you ensure that they are reasonably separated from the legislative branch?