Love this analysis of vulnerabilities to Wikipedia's knowledge integrity from this paper: arxiv.org/abs/1910.12596
.@mad_astronaut using ML to predict when people click on citations (admittedly, mostly they don't but when they do)
- recent info
- open info
- personal info
Had to step out, so missed far more of this than I would have liked :-(
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Bitcoin is destroying the planet 2. Reviewing papers is unrecognised and unrewarded
So (and hear me out here) 3. We invent a new cryptocurrency which you 'mine' by contributing quality reviews of the literature
APCs for journal articles are replaced with KudosCoin fees, which you can either generate by reviewing or buy off people who do
The thought being that escape from both the tyranny of metrics and the prestige economy - whether impact factors or Instagram likes - is impossible, so we should at least ground it on the true basis of scholarly life, the gold standard of peer review
Interested in the phenomenology of why some students find turning their video on in seminars so aversive. Any thoughts? If this is you, can you describe why to me in a way I'll get?
Is it related to the way some (mostly younger?) people find answering phone calls unbearable?
Many interesting replies to this - for which thanks. I hear lots of *reasons* why students may keep camera off, but I am specifically interested in the *feelings* that someone has when they are motivated by these reasons, whatever they are
Part of their "night science" project ("exciting and significant parts of scientific research that occur behind the scenes") biomedcentral.com/collections/ni…
Why would you be driven to make baseless claims about election fraud? it seems so norm-eroding, so dangerous a precedent to set - knocking out the epistemic ladder up which we climb to democracy, leaving a future in which legitimacy can't exist.
Presumably (1) you would only do so if you felt that the threat posed by losing the election was as large as the threat of the collapse of legitimate government anyway (i.e. if you were really desperate) but also ...
...(2)Do accusations of electoral fraud betray a lack of faith in the rationality of voters: "Reasonable people couldn't vote for the opposition, so those votes must be fraudulent"? In this way calls of electoral fraud are the right's Cambridge Analytica
"a framework for segmenting a scholarly article’s audience on Twitter...into granular, informative categories inferred through probabilistic topic modeling of metadata collected from each user’s network of followers"
(could be useful @nikaletras ?)
During my PhD I nearly lost my mind thinking about why we build computational models in cognitive science. {thread}
Modelling defines what makes cognitive science different from psychology. All cognitive scientists know that formal, computable models are good, but we don't always say exactly *why*
And when we do say, we find we don't exactly agree
After my PhD (which I completed without completely losing my mind), the issue of articulating exactly why we put so much effort into modelling still bugged me. Eventually I wrote something up, organised around answering the charge that models are just tautological