Logo

TootFeed

20230531-062156

Alright, rebuttal time *cracks knuckles* 😈

20230530-190847

@jwildeboer the "Gartner Hype Cycle" would like to have a word. πŸ˜‘

20230530-190648

@sharoz Carolina Reaper in an unlabeled jar 😈

20230525-205621

@cynicalsecurity *slow clap* this is kinda the CS equivalent of building a hugely intricate model ship in a very small bottle. Insanely talented πŸ‘Œ

20230524-140355

OTOH, if I'm not the lead author, I'm more often than not guilty myself of throwing in a few edits two days before the paper is due, so perhaps this is well-deserved karma πŸ˜…

20230524-140234

Feeling kinda ghosted by my co-authors right now. πŸ‘» Deadline is in 5 weeks, so pleeeeeenty of time, no need to be such a nervous nelly, amirite? πŸ™„

20230524-083945

Time for a again, did mine yesterday. Ask yourself: if your main storage thing went up in smoke right now, how horrified would you be? So go do a backup, and don't forget to actually verify it as well πŸ˜‰

20230524-083518

@brembs BTW, could you perhaps re-{tweet,toot,post} our @jovi announcement? Thanks! hci.social/@jovi/1103120531824

20230524-075009

@Riedl TBH, I think #2 is incorrect. Corporations are very basic greedy optimization algorithms that rarely look beyond the next quarterly results.

20230524-073804

@brembs ... or maybe journals such as JoVI: πŸ‘‰ journalovi.org/ (which probably wouldn't be called a journal by any large publisher anyway)

20230523-055429

@mjskay Applause! πŸ₯³ I thought that's the whole idea behind @jovi, right? πŸ˜‰

20230521-211648

Was at the garden store today and noticed these two side-by-side (left one is a plain snack bellpepper, right one is vegetable dynamite 🧨). My inner 12-year-old was very tempted to switch the labels πŸ˜…πŸ˜ˆ

20230521-074118

@emilygorcenski I know that NiemΓΆller's poem is kind of overused, but this sounds like a perfect example. πŸ˜‘

20230518-063503

@AndrzejWasowski @nathancassee @neilernst @aserebrenik ah whoops. I knew not everything is peachy on Prolific, but considering that this basically means 90% of respondents massively overclaimed their expertise, I'm starting to wonder if this is still a viable option at all... πŸ€”

20230517-060120

@andresmh Sigh. Humans and their dumb old tribe-wired hindbrains. πŸ˜‘

20230516-204236

ALRIGHT IF I HEAR SOMETHING LIKE

"it's not research, just engineering"

ONE MORE TIME, I'LL SLAP SOMEONE RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF THEIR IVORY TOWER WITH A WET R PACKAGE 🀬😀

20230516-203001

@joelchan86 well, we're just about to put exactly that kind of study into our revision, because R2 can't conceive of a paper that doesn't have a user study πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈπŸ˜‘

20230516-201306

@mjskay @eglassman @andresmh @lonnibesancon P.S. this is still brand new, we got our ISSN last week and the corresponding data hasn't yet propagated all the way around the web (seems to require some manual steps), so the DOIs also don't resolve yet. We'll announce that loudly on @jovi πŸ˜€πŸ˜‰

20230515-111650

@nblr so... a manager? πŸ€”