Oh it worked out fine for me in the end, I’m making 6 figures for a government agency. It’s the adjuncts that got screwed the worst, they had no promise of consistent work and landed I think 3 grand per class per semester with no benefits.
I can directly verify this based on my career. I’m not really trying to dox myself, but at a large state university in Ohio (not OSU) PhD candidates in chemistry were paid 22k a year for their teaching positions. I was offered the academic lab manager position (I held the interim title a few times while finishing my PhD) which is a PhD wanted, masters minimum position at 29k. Nontenured teaching faculty started in the high 30s to mid 40s depending on experience. Fresh tenure track hires came in at 60k with little wiggle room. Because these are state schools, all of these salaries are released to the public. Pick a university and find a prof or admin you’d like to know about and plug them in here. https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/data/higher_ed_salary
A big issue is that we’re still quite limited when it comes to analytical methods for quantifying and classifying microplastics. I’ve seen a method from ASTM from like 2020 referenced once or twice, but the most telling one is that EPA doesn’t have one for drinking water yet. I know PFAS for example seems like a recent hot topic, but Method 537 dates back to to 2009 and UCMR3 (even if Method 533 is much more recent). Until we get a consensus on what exactly microplastic is and isn’t and a consistent way to put a number on it, we’re not really generating high quality data.
I think it’s fair to say that basic science in general is underfunded and adding to that academic overhead is absurd.
That said, it’s useful to clarify some definitions in there. Basic science is anything but basic, it’s “pure research”, or projects that aim to better understand some principle and/or phenomenon (a relevant example would be the mechanisms behind superconductors).
That and the academic overhead I’m referencing is the cut that a university takes of grant awards. Most of the departments I’ve been around take 50% of the grant award, so if you need $100,000 to complete a project, you have to ask for 200 grand (or more if you want to be paid the whole year rather than just 9 months). Now a lot of this is driven by an outrageous number of administrators with insulting salaries for what they provide (does the vice president of insert some nebulous term here really provide 300 grand worth of contributions to a university, especially so when they set the salary of teaching faculty down around 40~50K and expect applicants with PhDs and years of experience).
So what ends up happening is that researchers tag buzzwords and trendy bells and whistles onto research projects that really don’t need them just to have a single digit percent chance at getting the finding to make them happen. Oh and if they don’t beat the odds, they are shown the door in 5 years. Academia really needs a shakeup.
I was mostly saying back to back in jest and was more referencing the next “impossible achievement”. Who knows, maybe some new exploit will be uncovered that broadens the viable builds for this particular one.
I absolutely adore how Hades is balanced across an impossibly broad skill range. With some practice, even more casual players can eek out a win and then you have these absolute top 0.0000001% players that can chase challenges like this. Very few titles have achieved anything remotely close. Kudos to the player here raising the bar and let’s see if anyone can string two of these back to back.
Maybe I should revise my statement to “consumer routers an informed user would consider buying”.
I really appreciate the direction these changes put c/games on. Looking forward to seeing this place grow and thrive.
It’s awesome to see these projects are still alive and kicking but they feel like a relic of a past era nowadays. Much like how stock ROMs on Android have improved to the point that rooting isn’t really beneficial in most cases anymore, the stock firmware on the majority of routers is perfectly serviceable. I’m sure there are still some corner cases where they are as transformative as ever though.
That’s an absolutely wild finding. I’m sure this loops back around to the (impossibly huge) impact of the gut microbiome.
Agreed 100%. I imagine they will have hardware and demos available early next year when it gets announced (possibly at the Super Nintendo World) which could be leading to confusion.
Sorry, must have had a typo, announced April 2011, released Nov 2012
Those threads were user driven. Honestly, the easiest way would be to reach out to TurboStrider and see if he had any interest in posting over here. He was always very cordial with the “old guard” (long time members that underwent a mass exodus over the last 6 months, myself included) on the mod team and has bristled a bit with the remaining team, at least at the time of my departure. It’s a lot more work than it appears and that’s why the mod team stayed far, far away from it (and the impossible to avoid optics of biases based on where various publications fell in order).
I think the best option right now would be to post a framework thread on launch day, have a pinned post if possible or just upvote the snot out of a placeholder and have users reply to said top post with reviews as they trickle in with a copy and paste format provided at the bottom of the framework thread. Sorry if my terminology and/or lack of knowledge on what tools we have available here comes off the wrong way, I just was deeply involved in r/games for several years and old habits die hard.
I seriously doubt Nintendo would get into a situation where they are less than a year away from a new console without even soft announcing it’s coming in an investor meeting or anything. They announced Switch (as the upcoming NX) in April 2016 for a March 2017 launch. WiiU was announced April 2011, for a November~Dec 2012 launch. The Wii was hyped 2 years in a row in 2004 and 2005 before releasing in 2006, and the Gamecube was announced August 2000 before a Sept~Nov 2001 release. Nintendo may very well be launching new hardware early next year, but history points more to a Switch Pro unless they announce VERY soon and the release window is more late summer~fall 2024.
I feel your pain there. I made the switch during the pandemic thanks to my lectures all being recorded. Hearing myself start every single class with “Okay guys let’s get started” was just so cringey that I had to do something.
I feel like there’s still an acceptable way to do this as long as you keep it respectful and follow the mantra of “say more with less”. For example, let’s say we were at a cookout and I came by and said “Hey dude, have you seen Josh Allen’s girlfriend? She’s absolutely stunning”. You pull your phone out Google her we both nod and then move on to something else. If it lingers more than that or wades into the more murky waters of specifics then I agree it’s totally over the line.
I’m just thankful that Firefox still exists. I switched over back in 2003 and got hooked on Thunderbird as well.
I think perspective is key here. Setting aside the low barrier of entry that can’t possible keep the truly dreadful garbage out, on mobile you’re super limited on your input method (touch screen and not so great motion controls). This tends leads to devs gravitating towards the sort of genres that were historically plagued with low quality shovel-ware on platforms like the Wii. As others have said, true gems exist, although I’d argue that the best of the best do tend to ports from more capable platforms. Titles like Dicey Dungeons, Slay the Spire, and others along those lines have rich play mechanics underneath of the simple touch interface. It really all depends on how how far you want to dig, and how deep of an experience you want (there are hundreds of good enough match 3 games if that’s your jam).
Well that and we’ve (as in the scientific community) been beating the drum of beta amyloid for decades with little evidence to support causation rather than correlation. In fact, there’s stronger data supporting monomers or short chains as the toxic element and that they just get big and crash out later after the damage was done.
I’d love to see the health outcomes of this sort of approach in general. One thing that has always irked me though is that we don’t directly test for cholesterol, we test for the expression of cholesterol carrier protein, and as far I know, don’t distinguish Apo versus Holo. Just presuming that expression scales linearly with cholesterol levels with no deviations for genetics (among other factors) just feels like an enormous leap of faith.