text:
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post6714132142340373054..comments2016-12-07T13:54:15.569-05:00Comments on Backreaction: Blogging Heads: Woit and HossenfelderSabine Hossenfelderhttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-218062405958385662008-08-04T15:52:00.000-04:002008-08-04T15:52:00.000-04:00Hi Giotis,? I didn't say they don't interact. I me...Hi Giotis,

? I didn't say they don't interact. I meant to say I can't see no convergence despite that interaction - sorry if that didn't come out too clearly. The point I was trying to make is that a community can also be too nice. Besides this, it's only a very small percentage of people in the field working at PI, and PI isn't exactly the average institution anyway. Best,

B.Beehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-37750118866764224502008-08-04T15:43:00.000-04:002008-08-04T15:43:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,It comes as a surprise to me to hear that t...Hi Bee,

It comes as a surprise to me to hear that there is no interaction between the different groups; especially for PI which has been founded with the vision to bring brilliant physicists to work together in order to answer some of the fundamental questions about nature.

email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3995849634688258492008-08-04T14:43:00.000-04:002008-08-04T14:43:00.000-04:00Hi Giotis,I have no clue, honestly. I find it funn...Hi Giotis,

I have no clue, honestly. I find it funny however that 'quantum gravity' is often used as meaning 'quantum gravity except string theory'. As far as I am concerned introducing groups at PI was a mistake to begin with (I'm trying to convince them to replace the grouping with a tag-cloud of researchers interests...) but just by looking at the website you'll find 'quantum gravity' and 'string theory' as separate groups. Why?

Either way, this one-sided exclusion is what you'd expect in a system that has a rich get richer effect like the current one. If you're on the stronger populated side, there's loads of stuff to learn and to do and you neither have time nor incentives to look what others do. The QG community is insofar very different from the string community in that it seems to be composed of a lot of smaller groups who do all different things. If you ask me, they have their sociological problems as well. They are all incredibly nice to each other because alternatives are always good, right? - but on the downside don't seem to care what others are doing and are tolerating each other without trying to connect. That's not a way you can ever reach some kind of congruence, not a way to make progress. I am totally with Nancy Cartwright in this regard: Good physics is conflict. Best,

B.

Best,

B.Beehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2000751241517818222008-08-04T14:26:00.000-04:002008-08-04T14:26:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,Also it should be noted here that there are...Hi Bee,

Also it should be noted here that there are people from the LQG camp that work on both fields i.e. LQG and Strings. LQG supporters at least don't exclude necessarily Strings from their research as far as i know; my impression is that it is the other way around.

Lee Smolin among others for example is/was working on a background independent M-theory. Also there is/was research regarding the relationship between spin-networks and strings or string - loops duality. So it's not all black and white.

Btw do you know if there is any progress on this? I hope i don't violate rule No 4:-)

email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30958089521207678002008-08-03T14:03:00.000-04:002008-08-03T14:03:00.000-04:00Hi Nige,I am sorry to hear about your bad experien...Hi Nige,

I am sorry to hear about your bad experiences with CQG. I've made very good experiences with them. In fact, it's my favourite journal. Their referee process is fast and reliably meaningful. In the one case where it wasn't the problem was resolved quickly by the editorial board. (Similar problems I've had eg with PLB or PRD resulted in an editor's reply saying essentially "the referee has spoken, amen").

[String theorists] may share some common aims and ambitions like getting a lot of citations, getting a lot of funding, etc. But I don't see how they share any interest in understanding physics. Maybe understanding uncheckable pseudo-physics, but they wouldn't accept that it is pseudo-physics despite the fact it is not falsifiable.

Well, that just doesn't fit with the impression I've had of string theorists I know. Many of them are extremely bright, hard working people, who pursue string theory for the reason that they genuinely believe it to answer the questions we are asking. I have to wonder whether you are blowing up your personal anecdotal experience to a criticism of a whole research program.

I'd say roughly I've encountered three different attitudes of people working on the field:

1) those who are aiming at the big question and see string theory as a way to get there, may that road be long and windy, but they believe it's the right way.
2) those who are interested in the mathematics.
3) those who are in string theory because that's where the money is and who will tell you whatever nonsense it is they are working on is tremendously interesting and groundbreaking.

I have no problem whatsoever with 1), even though I don't share that believe. I have a problem with 2) if they call physics what is actually mathematics and has nothing to do with reality whatsoever, if that connection is weak or unclear. If they just wouldn't claim it's physics that would be fine with me. I dislike 3) generally, whether that's about string theory or any other field.

The tendency to sell failure as success is one born out of a survival instinct because the public opinion matters. That appeal to the public, as I've argued e.g. here, is indeed one of the big problems, because it is an obstacle to any sensible argument.

You may be right about the APS. I don't know much about them.

Best,

B.Beehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-78395257509484649062008-08-03T13:59:00.000-04:002008-08-03T13:59:00.000-04:00Hi Nige Basically what you are describing here is ...Hi Nige

Basically what you are describing here is a scenery from the dark ages with the string theorists in the place of the Catholic church. I know that string theorists have key positions in the establishment but i can't believe (or accept) that things are that bad. I think you are exaggerating.

firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-89649662006472968152008-08-03T12:27:00.000-04:002008-08-03T12:27:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,Thanks for your kind response."For one ... ...Hi Bee,

Thanks for your kind response.

"For one ... string theorists have after all the same goals as all other physicists that is understanding."

I fear that you may be too optimistic here. If that assumption were really correct, then there wouldn't be any problem at all. It simply isn't. The string theorists do share a goal of understanding speculations and belief systems within the non-falsifiable string theory framework, M-theory.

But are you sure that this amounts to string theorists sharing the same ultimate goals as those who work on alternative ideas? Sure they want results and they want funding, but why are they sticking with a failed framework of ideas that has never worked?

Furthermore, the arrogance of the media-hyped string theorists, who market failure as success, is not a part of physics and generally physicists are not so obnoxious and paranoid about criticisms of the paradigm. If they can't make falsifiable predictions in other theories, they don't hype that as a success.

The real problem I've seen has included peer-reviewers for the UK Institute of Physics journal Classical and Quantum Gravity who don't read what they condemn, and who simply dismiss papers because it's about quantum gravity but isn't using the game rules of string theory. I submitted a paper to that journal at the suggestion of Dr Bob Lambourne of the O.U., and the editor of Classical and Quantum Gravity was good enough to send the paper for peer-review. This was ten years ago. I really needed that publication. The editor sent me back a photocopy of the peer-reviewers report with the names of the reviewer blanked out. It ignored everything in my paper and just went on about the virtues of string theory which I hadn't dealt with.

The paper I sent was not concerned with string theory. Yet string theory was used to censor it out. The paper was based entirely on facts, which is extremely hard to do in physics when building a theory that makes falsifiable predictions. The 1996 predictions were confirmed empirically by the discovery of the cosmological acceleration a couple of years later. You can't publish them because of string!

They're proposing uncheckable speculations based on a self-consistency between various speculations. The whole framework is critically unconnected to reality, so how can it be defended by saying that they share the seeking for understanding with scientists?

If you want to claim that string theorists share the same goals as other physicists, they may share some common aims and ambitions like getting a lot of citations, getting a lot of funding, etc. But I don't see how they share any interest in understanding physics. Maybe understanding uncheckable pseudo-physics, but they wouldn't accept that it is pseudo-physics despite the fact it is not falsifiable. (Even the name physics itself relates to physical things, not to the abstractions of a multiverse, etc.)

"But why wasn't it possible for example, to address the issue to the APS?"

The American Physical Society, just like the Institute of Physics here in Bristol, is the opposite of a forum for controversy. The members of an institute pay their fees to avoid controversy, which is why journals are peer-reviewed. If they wanted controversy, they could obviously just stop peer-review and let the mistakes in papers be argued over by the readers instead of by peer-reviewers. Clearly, they don't want that mess in their pages, because a large number of their readers (i.e. membership) are teachers and researchers who don't have the time to check papers in detail outside their own specialisms.

To teachers of physics (a fairly large proportion of membership) controversy can be an annoying, time-wasting embarrassment, which looks inelegant and detracts (from the media perspective) from large body of solid facts in physics which are not controversial.

The committees in charge if APS and IoP are elected by members, and if they start allowing the venting of hostilities about controversy, they risk losing their positions.

If you think about it, the government doesn't profit when a newspaper prints a corruption scandal or problem with government policy. The newspaper prints controversy as news solely because people other than government are buying the newspaper, and the news affects those people who are not part of the government.

If the government had total control of the newspapers, then newspapers would end up not publishing so many controversial stories that threatened the popularity of the government.

In other words, with APS and IoP, you have various committees and journal editors in the same buildings, drawing salaries from the same membership revenues.

You can't expect them to annoy the membership by allowing annoying controversy. They have printed some news of the string theory controversy, but they haven't printed a real backlash yet (something that in the public eye would effectively "cancel out" the 25 years of string theory hype so far).

If they did that, then there would be extreme anger from very powerful figureheads in physics such Weinberg et al. (see how Weinberg deals with British academics who oppose Israeli attacks on Palestinians: he conveniently yet falsely labels them anti-semitic, according to the quotation at this page). Editors and committee members and leaders could become embroiled in a terrible row, risking a lot. The string theorists who cause the problems are physicists who behave in a paranoid way, ignoring the real motivations and making up false accusations; these people are politically-astute propagandarists who have the media at their beck and call.

You can't hope to have a sensible conversation with people who are irrational enough to claim that uncheckable multiverse speculations are part of physics.

Best wishes,
Nigenigehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-57673176202490190502008-08-03T11:23:00.000-04:002008-08-03T11:23:00.000-04:00Hi Nige,Thanks for your interesting comment. I thi...Hi Nige,

Thanks for your interesting comment. I think however your analogy to warfare is not very adequate. For one this is because string theorists have after all the same goals as all other physicists that is understanding. This is not a question of one being the winner and the other being the loser, it's a problem of balance.

If you want to stick with your warfare analogy, leading this discussion publicly is like denouncing your neighbor country's government to be corrupt, and asking the world to cut back on trade, without first telling that neighbor, look we're living next to you and would really like to talk about what we think is a problem. I'm not talking about some people from the one side talking privately to some people from the other sidee, as that would probably not have had any effect (and very likely took place anyhow). But why wasn't it possible for example, to address the issue to the APS? For one, it is a problem that seems to be located mostly in the USA (for reasons that one can speculate about), second they ought to be interested in what's going on in their community, third they reach the right group of people - those who can at least roughly judge on what the heart of the discussion is. (Fourth, being a member might finally have been good for something.) I really liked Lee's opinion piece in Physics Today. A lot of people replied to it, and it really started a discussion. Why wasn't it possible to pursue this approach somewhat further? I think this would have been a far more fruitful exchange.

Best,

B.Beehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30183403929610532832008-08-03T10:44:00.000-04:002008-08-03T10:44:00.000-04:00Thanks for posting this discussion. RE: the discus...Thanks for posting this discussion. RE: the discussion of how to get around the problems of string promotion, e.g. could string theory have been opposed in a less public way?

I read pacifist history and in virtually every major war in history, the pacifists (both at the time and afterwards) claimed that if one side had tried a bit harder to explain their case in private to the other side, everything could have been solved without open hostility. (Wars were just a gigantic misunderstanding, and if people were less stupid and more talkative regarding issues, there would never be any hostility, you see.)

Every conflict could have been avoided if only one side had surrendered without a fight. The problem is not that they couldn't communicate but that they didn't want to agree a surrender peacefully and have other people's ideas imposed on them "peacefully". The stronger side gave the weaker side the choice of surrender or war. The weaker side chose war. They actually wanted to try to defend themselves. (It takes two fighters to have a war because peaceful surrender is not called a "war".) It's pretty analogous to the situation you're discussing.

The story of how Dr Woit's book was censored out from a university press (which would not have promoted it so sensationally) by a string theorist peer-reviewer who took a quotation out of context, changed the words to make it look stupid, and then gave it as an example of Dr Woit's alleged stupidity in criticising string theory, is something I'm well aware of.

I wrote the opinion page/editorial for the British "Electronics World" magazine issue of (I think) October 2003, criticising string theory censorship tactics, but it brought in abusive letters by pro-string theory PhD students at Nottingham University. (A google search showed that they were all students of the same professor.) The letters ignored the arguments and just made personal abuse about my intelligence in asking why so much funding was being given to unproductive areas, so the editor had to censor them out. However, the editor also decided not to commission any more articles on the subject.

It's human nature that people like Smolin and Woit have different reasons for objecting to string theory, but if you read the books the main reason comes down to the arrogance and abuse from the most outspoken (and thus media-hyped) string theorists to gentle criticism.

They are extremely defensive, to the point of taking any question or scientific criticism as a personal insult, ignoring the science of the question and then making personal insults to the person making the criticism.

This paranoia is a well-known groupthink symptom. You can't have a discussion which is rational with people who won't read your evidence and who won't keep to the science, but who prefer to personally attack those people who are being scientific and looking at nature factually, rather than to develop applications and unifications of many different speculative beliefs that can't be falsified. Almost exactly the same happens to anyone criticising the government of a despotic regime from within the country: their points are ignored, they are treated as traitors or criminals and are personally attacked. This is called "shooting the messenger". Bad news is dealt with by attacking those publicising the bad news, instead of tackling the underlying problem.

The problem with string theory, as both Smolin and Woit keep stating in their books, is nothing to do with the failure of string theory after twenty-five years of mainstream research, but is due to the effects of the arrogance of string theorists on the subject.

There is no shame in trying to do something and failing. There is only shame if you fail to get a working theory with falsifiable predictions yet keep obfuscating the facts in public hype, claiming you're on the brink of the theory of everything when actually you have an anthropic landscape of 10^500 vacua for the universe (none of which has even been shown to model the world), and then censoring out critics and alternative theories without even bothering to read any of them. That what's shameful. Not the failure, but the hype and the abuse of science by people who profiteer from failure.

It's the hype that makes the failure of string theory as a physical science "not even wrong". Even things like the AdS/CFT correspondence requires a negative cosmological constant, instead of the observed positive one, so it's applicability to the real world requires forces where there is not repulsion but attraction such as the strong nuclear force. Maybe it's a useful approximation for calculations of that, but it's not a falsifiable theory. Epicycles for an earth-centred universe were a "useful approximation" and were "self-consistent" mathematically for a thousand years before being disproved. String theory can't get even be disproved. Again, I'm not hostile to research in string theory (or anything else, because we thankfully live in a free world, where nobody has the right to force others to give up on anything), but the endless hype for mainstream speculations by extremely arrogant and abusive people who also "peer-review" physics journals and censor out alternative ideas, really pisses genuine scientists off. (By genuine scientists, I don't mean those who are the groupies of Witten or those who think "doing science" is the process of censoring out science without reading it, and instead publishing speculations that can't be falsified.)

There is a lot that can be done if you look at the empirical facts of quantum gravity (such as the fact it must satisfy certain empirical criteria of the real world as confirmed by certain tests of general relativity): you can try to unify those empirical facts with other empirical facts in cosmology. You don't need to go to view fundamental physics as seeking to unify speculations. You can instead work on the few empirical facts we actually do have, and get somewhere (falsifiable predictions) from that. However, this is ironically now dismissed as "crackpot" by the string theorists, so certain are they in their own hype of their own unchecked theory of spin-2 gravitons etc.nigehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25358792862134135632008-08-02T05:24:00.000-04:002008-08-02T05:24:00.000-04:00Meritocrat,Interesting to hear your perspective on...Meritocrat,
Interesting to hear your perspective on this; however, it is not entirely compatible with what I've seen and heard elsewhere.
One of my postdocs was in a maths dept, which is where my impression of the maths situation comes from. I shared an office with a more senior pure maths postdoc who used to tell me about it in gory detail. He was quite a cynical type, and not someone who would be easily brainwashed I imagine. The situation I described in the previous comment is a lot more simplified, rosy and airbrushed than what he described (for the sake of brevity) , but still has the essence of it.

Regardless, one thing that struck me about him and the mathematicians in general was their focus on quality and standards. E.g., he used to agonize over which journals to send his papers to, wondering which was the highest status journal for which his paper had sufficient quality to be accepted. My impression from this was that there really was some quite serious quality assessment going on in mathematics. (If it was just his connections that were determining where he could publish, or if getting accepted in various journals was just a crapshoot, then he wouldn't have needed to agonize over it.) One incident I remember in particular was when he submitted a paper to the prestigious journal `Communications in Analysis and Geometry': the referee recommended publication, but the editor declined to publish it, saying that the referee hadn't been "positive enough" in his report, and that the journal had a "big backlog". Assessment at this level of detail would never happen in a physics journal.

In response to the points you made, let me just say without going into details that I know of quite a few young mathematicians who were not particularly well-connected, were not working on particularly fashionable topics, but nevertheless, after building up a record of publications in good quality maths journals, were able to find ok faculty positions. I can't think of any such successful "unblessed" people in physics off the top of my head. (No doubt there are some out there, but they are really quite rare.)

So, based on what I have seen, and despite what you wrote, I am still much enamored with the idea of quality stamps based on a journal hierarchy system like what the mathematicians have. Sure it will be far from perfect, open to gaming etc. But at least it is "something", compared to the "nothing" we have now in physics.

I have no idea how you arrived at the analogy with Stalinism. For me the relevant analogy would be with institutions (courts etc) that, in principle at least, are there to ensure due process for citizens so that they are not at the mercy of the oligarchs. Of course, in practice such institutions can be manipulated by those in power, but that doesn't mean a country would be better off not having them at all. There is always the hope that as democratic ideals take hold the institutions will start to function independently as they are supposed to. Plenty of examples of that in email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51100589247381183392008-08-01T15:47:00.000-04:002008-08-01T15:47:00.000-04:00Christine: *now* I understand why people go to all...Christine: *now* I understand why people go to all the trouble of lugging a laptop all over the world! :-)

Yeah, but actually you only need to take with you a nice book.Christinehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-4410049112496821132008-08-01T12:06:00.000-04:002008-08-01T12:06:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Platohttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-19125893671376766202008-08-01T11:52:00.000-04:002008-08-01T11:52:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Platohttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-18354528453628236372008-08-01T08:16:00.000-04:002008-08-01T08:16:00.000-04:00Amused: I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you...Amused: I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you, but I am in a mathematics department and I can assure you that things are just as bad here. Surely you don't think that the bigshots in math would look at the way senior physicists rule their slaves and not find a way of replicating it? The only difference is that the system has been going on over here for much longer and is more entrenched. You don't hear so many complaints because [a] the people who understand it have despaired and [b] we have been a *lot* better at brainwashing our young people to accept it.

Basically it works like this. It is in the nature of things that the subject moves at a glacial pace. The consequence is that *infinitesimal* advances can get published in very good journals *if* you are in the right field. And who determines what the "right" field or subfield or subsubsubsubfield is? The big shots of course. Most of the papers you see in number theory, for example, represent advances that would never get published in a decent physics journal. [Of course mathematicians like to say that the kind of stuff you see in physics journals would never get published in maths journals --- the sad truth is that both statements are correct.]

The rest is left to the reader as an exercise. The upshot is that there are just as many questionable promotions and so on among us as among you. Sorry, but there it is.

I don't know what the solution is but I can tell you that setting up a universally accepted hierarchy of journals is a sort of Stalinist solution. It works very well...if you are email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-68737002491729534902008-08-01T04:33:00.000-04:002008-08-01T04:33:00.000-04:00About assessment of researchers:(Sorry in advance ...About assessment of researchers:
(Sorry in advance that this comment became so long)

While evaluation of people based on publication and citation numbers etc is not so good, I think the suggestion to instead evaluate them by simply reading their papers is problematic as well if it involves someone being assessed by others who are outside their area of expertise (as would typically be the case for most members of a hiring committee). In this situation the person's "salesman" abilities to hype their work will be able to have too much influence. For example, I know of people in my own field whose papers read as if they contain some tremendously important advance. Since I have the background on the topic concerned I can see that the actual results are far from living up to the hype. But if I was reading these papers without having expertise on the topic I could easily be taken in by the hype and conclude that the results were a big deal. (And I might be especially susceptible to that if the candidate had charmed me with his/her social skills, or if he/she was a former student of my buddy who I was counting on to hire my own student at some later point.)

So, assessments of the quality and importance of someone's work should be made by people with the requisite expertise in the relevant areas. Currently this happens in two ways: directly through recommendation letters, and indirectly through publications, in that publication implies (in principle) that the work was assessed and approved by a referee with expertise in the relevant area. However, as we know, recommendation letters have become a useless joke, and publication doesn't signify a whole lot either: The threshold for getting published in the supposedly top journals is low, and papers making incremental advances are published side by side with those making major advances – there is no way to tell the difference for those without expertise in the relevant topics.

However, there is an (in principle) straightforward solution, and it already exists in the maths community: establish a journal hierarchy which is able to provide reliable quality stamps over a whole range of different levels. The mathematicians have this already:
all the different maths journals are assigned different statuses, and there is a tight and meticulously maintained correlation between status of a journal and the quality of the papers it publishes. To give an example of how this works: someone on a maths hiring or promotion committee, without having any expertise in the candidates' areas, can know that a publication in, say, Math. Zeitschrift signifies a decent but unspectacular piece of work, while one in Int. J. Math is slightly higher quality; Duke Math J. is a big step up, and Annals of Math is the pinnacle, signifying a tremendous paper of the highest quality.
The great thing about this system is that it provides a fair and transparent playing field for all. So you have done some great work and want it to be recognized, but you aren't a "blessed one" with connections to important people? No problem, just go publish your paper in Invent. Math. or Ann. Math. It will be carefully assessed by expert(s) on your topic (which could take up to a year), and if they agree that the work is important enough for the journal it will be published. With that, your job application will trump those of all the blessed ones who haven't managed to obtain a similar quality stamp for their work, regardless of how socially skillful they are or how exuberantly their famous mentors praise them.

Of course, it isn't quite as wonderful as that in reality – those working on fashionable topics with connections to important people will no doubt have an easier time getting published in the top journals than outsiders – but it is unrealistic to expect a complete meritocracy in any case, and this system seems to be far better than anything else I've heard of. At any rate, the mathematicians seem happy with it – I don't hear them complaining that it leads to unfair outcomes. No complaints that it is leading to "bubbles of nothing" either, and mathematics must be at least as susceptible to that as physics seeing as they don't have experiments to guide email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55758212927993898302008-08-01T04:15:00.000-04:002008-08-01T04:15:00.000-04:00Bee, I hope you will write that novel one day when...Bee, I hope you will write that novel one day when you have the chance. Someone should write a novel about all this stuff, and make a movie too!

I also agree about the limited usefulness of publication and citation numbers. When Lighthouse keeper and I have mentioned such numbers in previous comments it is not because we attach importance to them but because the system professes to attach importance to them: They play a big role in the official justification for hiring and promotion of insiders, but, as Lighthouse keeper said, become mysteriously unimportant when it is outsiders that are being assessed. So the point is to point out the double standards.

However, I have to admit to being very attached to the idea of quantifiable measures of people's research productivity and quality. This is to a large extent based on my personal experience of being on the receiving end what Lighthouse keeper describes as super-confident senior physicists declarations of work being junk, which also includes the assessment that the person talking to them about it (either informally or in a seminar) is a rubbish physicist. Having been consistently written off as rubbish by these people during my time in academia, while at the same time seeing how others who don't appear to have done anything special, or even independent, get a completely different reaction due to their ability to exude the right aura and rub the big shots up the right way (and get recommendation letters and jobs as a result of it), has made me kind of bitter and liable to say uncharacteristically mean-spirited things like "If these `blessed ones' are so wonderful, let them go prove it by […]" (no doubt you can guess the rest).

I also want to say something about the suggestions for how to better assess researchers, but I'll make that a separate comment or this would become too long.

Christine: you have solved my dilemma of what to do at conference coffee breaks now that I have quit smoking. I will bring my laptop and do exactly what you do – email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81039967318265641752008-07-31T22:21:00.000-04:002008-07-31T22:21:00.000-04:00I absolutely agree with Bee about papers and citat...I absolutely agree with Bee about papers and citations. Apart from the effects on my career, I honestly don't care whether my papers get cited --- I'm a lighthouse keeper after all. And to be honest, the fact that one of my papers has been cited over 130 times is a complete mystery to me. The point I wanted to make is the same one made more clearly by Amused: these things become important when someone wants to push the career of well-connected people, but mysteriously become unimportant when we misanthropes are up for tenure or promotion.

I think Amused makes another interesting point: he says that the people at the top really believe that the present system is good. This had not occurred to me, but I think he may be right. The thing that always strikes me about very senior physicists is their extreme self-confidence. With rare exceptions, they do not hesitate even for a microsecond to declare that a piece of work is junk, even on the basis of a short talk which they did not understand. They think that they have a sort of instinct which tells them what is good and what is bad, and this instinct relieves them of the burden of actually understanding new work. This also explains why they are often amazingly ignorant of the literature: if they can't remember it or haven't seen it, it can't be important. This instinct is dressed up as "deep physical insight". In fact I would go so far as to say that this "deep physical insight" is responsible for most of what has gone wrong with physics academic life, especially in the US.

Bee, what a pity you didn't publish your novel. It would have been hilarious in a dark sort of way.

Christine: *now* I understand why people go to all the trouble of lugging a laptop all over the world! :-)Lighthouse firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20659999723017043212008-07-31T19:35:00.000-04:002008-07-31T19:35:00.000-04:00I love the coffee-break description above. I am of...I love the coffee-break description above.

I am of the type that at coffee-break takes a cup of coffee and a biscuit, exchange a brief 'hi' to a few people that I eventually know and quickly return to my sit, where I open my notebook or some other thing to read, until next talk. Usually, I find myself complete alone in such situations. It is a great strategy of mine.

Concerning the access to this blog at my work, I have recently noticed that the access is being permitted to the posts, but the comments are blocked. No problem, since I have connection at home, where I am right now writting this comment.

Best,
ChristineChristinehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28054931907369450032008-07-31T11:50:00.000-04:002008-07-31T11:50:00.000-04:00Hi Lighthouse Keeper, Hi Amused,It is quite ironic...Hi Lighthouse Keeper, Hi Amused,

It is quite ironic but a pre-version of this blog was indeed the begin of a novel containing exactly that sort of nonsensical academic dance. It was titled 'The Black Hole Bomb,' but at some point I had to realize there are indeed people who believe in black hole bombs. (Also, it became to auto-biographic so I decided to instead just write a blog about my real life.)

Anyway, something else that I can't avoid noticing is that this discussion about publications and citations is somewhat lopsided. Much as I don't think few publications and few citations speak against a researcher, I am not very convinced by people who argue for their usefulness by number of publications, citations or single-authored papers. I don't mean that personally - since I don't know either of you or your work how could I? - but I know several examples of people who managed to produce a large number of well-cited papers, many of which single-authored, that however are completely redundant (and some contradict each other). You can do that if you have optimized your social network.

So it remains to repeat: the only way to really judge on a researchers promise is to actually get to know him or her, and read his papers. There are no shortcuts. Best,

B.Beehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88091993828853236932008-07-31T10:09:00.000-04:002008-07-31T10:09:00.000-04:00Lighthouse keeper,Thanks, and good luck to you too...Lighthouse keeper,
Thanks, and good luck to you too. It is certainly galling to see less accomplished people get better jobs or promotions ahead of oneself, so I can understand your reaction to that. Personally I'm not sure if I have grounds to be bitter though, since if everything had been done entirely according to merit it is quite possible that my situation would be no different from what it is now (there would certainly be many people ahead of me on merit). In the end, the unavoidable reality is that there are too many people and too few jobs, so it is inevitable that some good people are going to have a hard time and lose out.

It is certainly true as you said that the people at the top find the current situation convenient and comfortable and don't feel any motivation to change it. But I'm not sure that they really are aware of the reality as we experience it. Many of them are wearing rose-tinted glasses, and there is also a strong conviction among them that their proteges ("the blessed") really are better than any of the rabble, regardless of what publication numbers or other measures might say. This view is usually shared by the blessed themselves, who are imbued with a great sense of their own wonderfulness relative to those who are not of the same academic "pedigree".

I've had a good opportunity to see this mentality in action in my current job. My boss, an associate prof whose PhD is 3 years earlier than mine, is not at all perturbed by the fact that I have more publications than him (not counting conference proceedings; he has a ton of those). I might have more, but his are *better*. The fact that his few single-author papers have almost no cites, while one of mine has 90+, just goes to show that citations don't signify anything. On the other hand, the fact that a couple of his papers (as junior author along with senior accomplished folks) have 100+ cites is testament to what great work he has done. The fact that one of his papers (again with senior coauthors) is published in PRL reflects on how great it is, while my 3 single-author PRL papers reflect on how easy it has become to publish there. And so on. The mentality of these people is that their superiority as researchers is guaranteed by their pedigree. When various measures of research accomplishment favor them then those measures are of course valid and good, but when the same measures disfavor them compared to members of the rabble then it is of course a sign of shortcomings in the measures. There is so much comedy material email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-78289973973204777212008-07-30T21:31:00.000-04:002008-07-30T21:31:00.000-04:00Dear Amused,I did say that I am well aware that I'...Dear Amused,
I did say that I am well aware that I'm lucky. Still you might be surprised how demoralizing it is to see assorted nitwits being promoted over your head precisely because they were [as you put it] "blessed". I have been in this great institution for 25 years and I'm still an associate prof. In short: I have good reason to be bitter, but there are plenty of other people out there [including you] who have even more reason to be bitter. I think we are basically in agreement; see below.

As Bee said, the real crux of the matter is the extreme reliance placed on getting letters from famous people. One of the recent promotions to full prof here involved someone with *one* single-author paper --- all the rest, and there were not many, were co-authored with his [famous] thesis advisor. All he had to do was to write to that person and ask him to persuade other famous people to write. If his advisor had stepped out in front of the proverbial bus, this guy's career would have died at the same moment.

I think everyone is well aware of these facts, but the people at the top find the situation so convenient and comfortable that they are unwilling to do anything about it. The alternative would be to ignore these stupid letters and really study what the candidate has actually done --- really *read* his papers [or thesis in the case of a postdoc]. But that would be hard work; also, helping other people's students [in exchange, of course, for their helping yours] is a major part of the networking skills these guys prize so highly. Anyway, good luck and stay off the smokes!

Bee: yes, I forgot those aspects of the coffee-break culture. Come to think of it, there always *does* seem to be a lot of smoking at these events; I guess it is not much more unhealthy than gobbling down Academic Biscuits at top speed, or risking a heart attack from a surfeit of bad coffee. Somebody could write a highly entertaining novel about all of the ridiculous things that go on at these highly useless meetings. Another data point: at the last conference I went to, it was after dark and I got lost on the grounds. Then I saw a group of people approaching and was going to approach them for directions. But then I saw that they were *really* famous people with force-fields turned up to maximum strength. So I returned to the obscurity from which I ought never to have emerged, and climbed a tall fence to escape onto the street outside. It was oddly satisfying.Lighthouse email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41628269177033824632008-07-30T20:14:00.000-04:002008-07-30T20:14:00.000-04:00Bee doesn't appear she's used to being in front of...Bee doesn't appear she's used to being in front of an audience, cos she does this weird eye movement and body motion. Plus, especially in this day, you need a higher bandwidth camera.

Peter's decent, but stutters or/and speaks a little fast at times.bellamyhttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82398053681788388282008-07-30T16:34:00.000-04:002008-07-30T16:34:00.000-04:00Bee, yes, that is something I also like about the ...Bee, yes, that is something I also like about the smoking crowd: the implicit understanding that talking too much is not a good thing. It distracts from the important business at hand ;-)firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20199883411702199062008-07-30T16:06:00.000-04:002008-07-30T16:06:00.000-04:00Hi Amused,Funny you mention that. I often hang out...Hi Amused,
Funny you mention that. I often hang out with the smokers outside even though I don't smoke because I feel more comfortable there. Probably because they talk less than the manic coffee drinkers ;-) Best,

B.Beehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61703884080607138462008-07-30T15:39:00.000-04:002008-07-30T15:39:00.000-04:00"I can relate very well to what you say, your coff..."I can relate very well to what you say, your coffee break description matches my experiences precisely."

Yes, me too! In the past I dealt with that by going outside for a secluded smoke or two, but having recently quit that I'm not sure what I will do next time I find myself in the conference situation. I'm toying with the idea of using it as an opportunity to corrupt the youth, by showing them how much fun it is to vilify the famous people in the field (regardless of whether they deserve it or not).email@example.com


text: This listing is not being advertised. CAMBRIDGE - CENTRAL SQUARE - FULL FEE Price: $1,650 Available: Now. 1 BEDROOM - 1 BATH Sunny 1BR Steps from #83,#91,#64,#68 Bus line & Red line Central Sq Station! Walk to MIT! Easy access to Harvard University, Massachusetts General Hospital, Downtown Boston and around the city! *Photo shows a similar unit in the building Contact us for availability! *Please call or text Yukiko O. at 8572224465 (cell) for showing NO PETS - Listing#-94749901 Click any picture to enlarge it.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Research Interests
Selected Publications
Grants, Fellowships and Honors
Work in Progress: Books
Horacio Arló Costa received his Ph.D. from Columbia University. He is a department member since 1998. He is the director of the Major in Logic and Computation and an Associate of the Center for Philosophy of Science of the University of Pittsburgh. He has been an editor of the Journal of Philosophical Logic since 2004. He is also part of the funding editorial staff of the Review of Symbolic Logic and an area editor (epistemology) of Synthese..
My research has focused on work in different branches of philosophical logic, formal epistemology, decision theory and behavioral decision theory. Recent research on philosophical logic and formal epistemology has centered on: (1) probabilistic models for conditionals and non-monotonic notions of consequence, (2) epistemic logic, (3) first order modal logic and (4) belief revision. A detailed presentation of these items and the papers related to them appears in the following section.
In 2005 Jeff Helzner (Columbia University) and I initiated a research program whose main target is the analysis (empirical and theoretical) of decision situations under indeterminacy of the sort that appear in the Ellsberg scenario. Part of his research agenda is focused on testing experimentally the psychological theories that intend to explain non-Bayesian behavior via the postulation of psychological effects; and in comparing the explanatory power of some of the normative theories that intend to rationalize non-Bayesian behavior. More recent work considers the case of decisions from experience and description. It is well known that these two types of decisions lead to dramatically different choice behavior in the case of risk. We have recently studied the case of uncertainty, verifying that the two types of decisions lead to rather different choice behavior as well in the case of uncertainty.
Herb Simon's seminal ideas about bounded rationality has recently been extended and enriched by the work of Gerd Gigerenzer and collaborators. Paul Pedersen (CMU) and I have recently studied some of these heuristics, like Take the Best (TTB) and the Priority Heuristics. In the first case we studied the choice function that characterizes the heuristic extending it beyond binary choice. In the case of the priority heuristics we proposed an extension of the heuristics to the case of uncertainty. The mathematical model of TTB is part of a general program to present an empirically grounded theory of choice in general domains.
Recent work in Formal Epistemology and Philosophical Logic.
(I) Bayesian Epistemology.
The work related to (1) is part of a larger foundational program studying the scope and limits of probabilistic strategies in Bayesian epistemology. The idea of these foundational strategies is to propose a notion of probability as the sole epistemological primitive and derive all other epistemological notions (belief, conditional belief, belief change) from this sole probabilistic primitive while avoiding some of the well-known paradoxes in this area (like the paradox of the lottery). Unified probabilism achieves this goal by positing a notion of supposition (conditional probability) as the unique epistemological primitive. Bas van Fraassen proposed the central ideas of unified probabilism in an article in 1995. In a series of papers from 1999 to 2005 I proposed slight modifications and extensions of the theory and more recently I considered applications in the area of conditional logic (in collaboration with Rohit Parikh). The theory has nevertheless important limitations. The notion of iterated change derivable from it makes sense for a notion of `matter of fact supposition', while it seems inappropriate as a general notion of belief change.
(II) Belief Revision.
My work on belief revision explores the logical and conceptual consequences of thinking of a rational change in view as a cognitive decision. The decision theoretic account of contraction that thus arises has formal properties that are deviant with respect to some of the classical notions of contraction available in the literature like AGM. In collaboration with Isaac Levi I recently provided a complete axiomatization for this type of contraction. I also studied the case when cognitive decisions are done under conditions of value indeterminacy. Finally I considered the structure of a theory of belief change where the underlying notion of rationality is bounded (in the sense articulated by H. Simon and G. Gigerenzer). Part of this work is intimately connected with recent work in the theory of choice functions in social choice. Conceptually these issues address broader topics studied in formal epistemology.
(III) Epistemic and modal logic
Work in areas (2) and (3) has focused on the study of the family of first order classical modal logics. This family of logics includes the first order normal modal logics as well as an interesting class of non-normal modal logics, like non-adjunctive logics used to model qualitative probability as well as non-monotonic logics of the type used by Nozick to model knowledge as truth tracking.
In a recent article in collaboration with Eric Pacuit, we proved a general completeness result for the entire class of first order classical modal logics in terms of general neighborhood frames with constant domains. The result shows that if one uses suitable extensions of semantical techniques first proposed by Scott it is possible to interpret the most comprehensive class of modal logics (normal and non-normal) in terms of models and frames with constant domains. This includes some notorious normal systems like FOL+K, which in the Kripkean tradition is usually studied in terms of frames with varying domains.
(IV) Conditional Logic
My work in this area is mainly related to probabilistic models of conditionals (see section (I)) and epistemic models of conditionals.
(V) Philosophical Logic and natural language interpretation
These papers reflect an interest in the developing of a notion of dynamic semantics for natural language.
(VI) Rational choice, normative and behavioral decision theory


text:
Context Switches are Expensive
Tuesday, October 30. 2007
No computer processor can do multiple different jobs at the same time - there is no real multitasking going on. Instead a processor does one job after another.
When you see programs working in two different windows at the same time, it's just because the processor is doing a piece of work for the one program running in that window, doing a little bit for the other window in the background, doing a little bit for the operating system, again doing a little bit for that window in the foreground and so on. Suddenly a hardware interrupt requires CPU team and the current task will be interrupted.
A CPU constantly switches its context to simulate a parallel processing to the user. However these context switches cost quite some performance. The processor must load the working data into its internal memory, continue working on a chunk, store the current working data to the RAM, figure out, which chunk has to be processed next, load its data, continue working... and so on. The real computation time is wrapped by a lot of overhead.
A Human Brain is a CPU
Nothing new to computer pros - so why am I telling you that? Because humans do their work just as processors and both face similar problem: How to complete tasks while being most productive as team? This article shows some strategies on how you can deal with context switches in an engineers work environment while still being available to your team mates when they have questions and to keep them and you running. It's mostly about the right use of communication and that's what this article is focusing on.
For humans a context switch can be extraordinary expensive. For this article I am focusing on a environment like my daily work place: A cube farm full of software developers that do their best to concentrate on design and coding while battling with their IDEs. A cube farm that is more open, i.e. people are not sitting in a four walled cube and meet each other for lunch or random meetings. I am talking about team performing agile development practices, where active team communication is encouraged or even required.
Researches have found that interruptions during a task that requires a high level of concentration may cost up to 15 minutes until the same level of productivity and concentration compared to before the interruption can be achieved. This regeneration period of time is depending on the individual engineer of course. Some can cope with such situations very well, others can not. If you think you are one of the first sort of people you may stop reading here. If you are the one that suffers from context switches you may be able to get some hints from reading this posting.
Eliminate Interruptions
Unfortunately in a software developers work environment there are numerous events that do their best to keep the developer from maintaining this high concentration level.
So the answer to this is so simple: Eliminate source of interruptions. Do not start your mail program, turn off your phone then draw a red line on the floor around your desk and hang up a yellow sign reading "Trespassers will be shot". Finally no more disturbance and shortly you will be the most productive engineer in your team – and the most hated and isolated and sooner or later you won't have any problem with your personal productivity anymore: Congratulations! Mission accomplished! But you don't have a job anymore.
Seriously, isolating yourself from the team is no option. Let's face this: Your own productivity and your ego do not matter. The only factor that matters is the productivity of your team as a whole. Not you are responsible for delivering a new software product in time, but your team is. If you isolate yourself the team will just loose a team player.
The Team is Important – Not You
So work with the team and help your colleagues when they need help as you will certainly not be the genius who never needs help on your own. Your teammates do not consult you just to bug you. They have a problem and need to find a solution to be able to continue with their own work. If you don't help them, their productivity will suffer if no one else can answer their problem. This will decrease the productivity of the team. A team is only productive, when everyone can do his work as productive as possible. Therefore always be available if someone needs you as you and help as soon as possible to keep the productivity of your teammates up.
But wait... we have a serious conflict here.
If you're always available you never can plan your own work. You must expect to work like a processor on a server running on full capacity. Always be available for requests and accept context switches at a high frequency. But you are a human and as we have learned you need much longer to regenerate from a context switch. The longer your personal context switch regeneration time and the more frequent interruptions occur the less your personal productivity.
Unfortunately there are numerous of events in a modern work environment that will try to spoil your productivity:
- A new email has been received and begs to be read and answered.
- The RSS pops up and informs you of a new interesting posting by your favorite blogger or a new article on slashdot.
- A colleague wanders by and dares to ask you a question.
- A meeting starts.
- You get a phone call.
- Colleagues are discussing something at the neighbors table. You can't overhear that and suddenly you are participating in this discussion.
- You are stuck with your current task and need help from a colleague before you can continue.
Frequently I read the following tip: Reduce the time for reading and answering emails to a short period of time. Once in the morning and once in the afternoon. While this may work for old fashioned work environments, where every single individual is working on his own for the most of the time and where email is not very important and people did not yet learn to work with it this will not work for a software development team. It will even make things worse: When your colleagues notice that they will have to wait longer for an email reply from you, they will either come in person to your desk (and ignore the red line on the floor) or they will call you and you won't have a change to ignore this for more than a minute. A context switch might be necessary right when battling with an extremely difficult piece of code like trying to figure out, why the complex recursive call to your method did not work as expected.
Get Rid of Background Tasks
So forget this for email. But have a look at the list above. There is one item that will work perfect for this strategy. Turn off your RSS reader. Do not keep it running in the background. No one expects a response from you and the importance of reading news and blogs is very low. Anyway I don't say to get rid of RSS readers. RSS readers are very efficient for staying up to date. You don't have to visit web sites just to see if there is something new (especially my blog would be a waste of time, since there is not much happening here – but if you would ignore it, you wouldn't read this article). But do not keep them running in the system tray and especially turn of pop up notifications for new items.
In summary: Get rid of events that do not require your response, while you have more important work to do. In the digital world a virus scan on a server is not scheduled during service hours, when the server needs to be as responsive as possible.
The Email Problem
Let's get back to email: How can we reduce the context switches with regards to email while keeping my colleagues from wandering by or giving me a phone call? Email often takes a fair amount of time to answer. An email might be just SPAM so the context switch was absolutely useless. Sometimes email contains read only information, sometimes a colleague just needs a short answer. Another email may contain a request to send a file and then there is the email from your boss, where he need a presentation – in the worst case for the meeting in the afternoon. Welcome to the world of Dilbert.
So the problem with email is that you never know the impact of a new email on your current task: Is it just an information note that could wait until the next day or does it require immediate response within several minutes? The problem is that you have to read the email first, before you know its urgency. Therefore most people have enabled pop ups or at least an icon in the system tray that notifies the user at once an email has been received. Then these people can immediately read the mail and check how important it is.
"Hm... that mail is not very important right now, but I can read it later. Hopefully I won't forget that" - in this case flag the email (Mozilla Thunderbird has a great feature that allows to apply customizable tags to each email like Gmail) or leave it as unread. Now get back to work and don't run into the next trap:
"OK... that mail was not very important right now, but wait there is another unread email... Let's check that out" - and soon you spent several minutes on reading and answering a couple of emails, when you have planned to just do a quick check on a single new email. This is the worst case of a context switch. The longer an interruption the longer your regeneration time to get back to work on the interrupted task.
So the real problem with Email is its uncertainty. You cannot plan the impact of an email on your current work until you have read it. But then it's to late. The disturbance in the force has already occurred. The recommended solution by so called experts I explained above sounds not so bad. So let's step into that direction by just saying that email is the communication media with the slowest response time. But keep it flexible. Respond as time allows.
Do a Context Switch When You Want
When a software engineer is working on a task it is never done at the same level of concentration. There are even a lot interruptions during a task without intervention from the outside:
- You must wait for a compile to finish.
- The application server must be restarted and that takes several seconds.
- You have to update your local repository from the subversion server.
- The IDE has crashed. You have to wait until it has restarted. You may have to reopen the files you were working on. If you were in the middle of a debug task you have to restore every single step until you are where you were, when it crashed.
- You just finished a very tricky piece of code and need some minutes off to relax and work on something else.
These are perfect occasions for a planned context switch. So far I always wrote that Context Switches are bad. But you cannot afford to do no context switches at all as already described. And you are just a human, not a computer. Your brain cannot work on the same task for a long time at the same level of concentration. Face it: You cannot get rid of context switches so learn to live with them. An intended context switch is much better than an unplanned and immediate context switch, when beeing in the middle of a complex task like a phone call that requires your immediate attention.
This is like writing a Java Program. When you write multithreaded code and a method shall be exclusively executed you write a synchronized block. No other part running in the same virtual machine can take the JVMs attention and disturb the flow of the code within the synchronized bock. After the synchronize block you allow other code to continue. Until then the synchronized block is executed exclusively unless the operating system kills the JVM.
Well, how does this help us with our Email problem? In generall\ you can judge on the impact of a natural interuption very well. You know how long a compile task last or how long a subversion update lasts. If you think that you have some minutes and you feel that a context switch does not hurt much do it now and look for your email. Do what is necessary: Write replies, compose a email, react to smaller tasks as appropriate and then return to the main task you where working on previously. Handle email, when you want to. Don't let Email interrupt your work.
That said you should already have understood that any form of active email notifications is inappropriate: Switch off that nasty pop ups and get rid of system tray icons. Although a quiet system tray icon is far better than a pop up, it is always visible and sooner or later you will look at it. And when you see that a new mail has arrived you become curious and then it's too late. When you have disabled that you will automatically forget your email for a while and even can close the mail program and give some memory and performance to your IDE (your CPU can safe another context switch to download new mail and analyze it for SPAM). Soon you will answer emails just when it is right for you. It's still good enough to have a response time for emails of up to 2 hours. That should be acceptable to every email for which email was intended.
Email is intended for exchanging information that is valid for some time. Or for requesting an answer that is not needed immediately. Email is not intended for urgent questions for which answer a team mate needs to wait until he can continue his task. Or requests that need a response soon like asking someone to come to his desk or join an ongoing meeting. Your teammates can still come to your desk or give you a phone call. And the need for that is not seldom - hopefully. It may be disturbing sometimes, but be honest: If's always good to have the feeling that your team mates need you and it always gives you a good feeling, when you were able to help a team mate successfully. However phone calls and personal attentions directly at your desk are always immediate interruptions. You have to respond within a few seconds.
There is a big gap between the response time of email of up to some hours and phone calls or someone requesting your attention in person of a few seconds.
Filling the Response Time Gap Between Email and Talking
This is where Instant Messaging jumps in. IM is perfect for intermediate but unobtrusive communication. Give your colleagues some seconds to finish their current work until they feel better for a context switch until they respond.
Unlike with email, the response time should be within several minutes. So do not disable the notifications of a IM program. However you may need to play a little bit around until you'll find the right notification form for you. One that does not disturb your work for some minutes, but still a method that prevents you from missing new messages for several minutes. Depending on the IM software there are various forms of notifications. From a simple blinking icon in the system tray or a flashing task button on the task bar to flashy On-Screen-Notifications. Most IM have a couple of configuration options here. For me the calm bubble of KDEs Kopete works best. An animated system tray icon is not enough for me, while a flashing task bar is to obtrusive.
The key to using IM messages productively is to have an agreement with your colleague, when to use it and when not. In general IM should not be used for sending important information that should be remembered or for informational message that do not harm to be read some hours later. In this case email is the media of choice. You also should not use IM messages for discussions. Discussions are better done on either the phone or face to face. But IM messages are great for short questions that can be answered easily like "Where can I find the file xyz?". Or use IM to "announce" a bigger context switch like "I have a serious problem here. Can you come to my desk" or "Do you have some minutes for discussing this new feature?".
Image how would you ask for the location of a file that you need without IM? Via email the answer could take several minutes, even some hours. So you will go to your colleague and ask him. So he can tell you the URL... Oh you can't remember long URLs? OK, he will send it via email. So you showed up at your colleague desk, forcing a sudden context switch for him but he still has to send you an email, since you need the data in a electronic form. So IM has a big advantage here.
However beware of the chatting pitfall. Do not use IM as a replacement for a chat, when you need to discuss something. If you feel that a conversation takes several messages, stop the IM conversation and visit your colleague to discuss this face to face. This is much more productive plus a IM conversation always bears the danger that your conversation partner can be easily misunderstand you. And IM is not a replacement for real world social contactsSo back to the context switch: An IM client can give your colleague some seconds to finish the harder part of the task he is currently working on. As a consequence do not hesitate to contact your team mate sitting right next to you via IM. It may be much easier to simply talk to him. I am not kidding here, although this might sound as a plot for a joke where a husband sends a SMS to his wife to give him the salt shaker. It's about interrupting your colleagues workflow in a polite and respectful way. Your team mate is not eating is breakfast, he might be concentrating on a tricky part of code.
If you still think that Instant Messaging is not important for a company have a look at Gartners Hype Cycle about Emerging Technologies for 2007 and have a look on the very right. Yes, there in the area of the Plateau of Productivity.
Wrap up
To put everything short:
- Use email for sending information which is valid for a longer time or which requires a response within some hours. Do not use notifications for emails, as emails typically will interrupt you for several minutes.
- When sending a short question use IM. Also use IM, when you need to discuss something with a colleague to announce the context switch to him. Use a form of notification that is appropriate for you but allows you to respond withing a few minutes.
- Visit a colleague or use the phone after you've announced it via IM or you have noticed that IM leads you to a lenghty chat. If it is very urgent, phone or visit your team mate directly, but keep in mind that you might interrupt him in the middle of a very tricky task that requires all his attention and would mean several minutes of getting back into it after you've left.
So, that's it. Hope this can help you a little bit and I have inspired to discuss this with your team. If you have done that I would love to hear some feedback from you.
And now stop reading and continue with your work.
Trackback specific URI for this entry


text:
Healthline Blogs
Reader Uses Fitness Fixer Advice to Shovel Snow Painlessly and Beat Mother Nature
Reader Peg S. put healthy bending to work in real life, wrote in with this success story, sent a title for it, took photos and sent them with captions. Thank you Peggy for great work:
"Dr. Bookspan, your emphasis on squats and lunges in place of unhealthy bending has saved my back during long hours of snow shoveling.
"Lots of snow has fallen in far western Maryland - over 265 inches so far this season - with three back-to-back blizzards (22 feet of snow, or 673.1 centimeters).
"All that snow needed to be moved. I avoided unhealthy bending and had no back discomfort after hours of lifting snow-laden shovels.
"When I took a break, I emailed my yoga class students reminding them of the healthy movements such as squat and lunge in their snow removal efforts. They later thanked me for the reminder.
"Thank you for the information on back health!!!"
- Peggy S
Peggy, her colleague Patty, Reader Paul J, and I have been working on Peg and Patty's project of using human powered devices like bicycles, to make electricity. More on this to come.
- Reader Success - Using Good Bending For Shoveling Snow
- How to teach this to your groups - Fast Fitness - The First Group Functional Training Exercise, Good Bending for Back and Knees
- How to do this for yourself during all daily life - which means Fitness as a Lifestyle - Bending Right is Fitness as a Lifestyle
- How often should you use this technique? - How Often Should You Be Healthy?
Recent Blog Posts
Copyright © 2005 - 2016 Healthline Media. All rights reserved for Healthline. Healthline content is strictly informational and should not be considered medical advice. See a certified medical professional for diagnosis and treatment recommendations. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy


text:
James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine
Department of Stomatology: Division of Periodontics
Predoctoral Courses
STOMA 802 - Periodontics 1
This lecture course teaches basic dental terminology, structures of the oral cavity, principles of hand instrumentation, periodontal examination procedures, review of medical and dental histories, instrument sharpening and fundamentals of patient plaque control. 1.5 s.h. Fall, 1st year, Gellin
STOMA 803 - Periodontics 2
A series of lectures in which the fundamentals of the nature of diseases of the periodontium, their etiologic backgrounds, prevention, histopathology, clinical recognition, and non-surgical treatment are covered in logical sequence. Prerequisite Stoma 802. 1 s.h. Fall, 2nd year, Krayer
STOMA 804 - Periodontics 3
A series of lectures in which the rationale, objectives and techniques of different types of periodontal surgical therapy, and principles of healing are presented to prepare the student for clinical periodontics. Other topics include antimicrobial periodontal therapy and the relationship between periodontics and removable prosthodontics. Prerequisite Stoma 802, 803. 1.5 s.h. Fall, 3rd year, Gellin
STOMA 805 - Periodontics 4
The lecture portion of this course discusses occlusal examination procedures, fabrication of an occlusal nightguard, bruxism, and temporomandibular disorders. The laboratory/clinical portion involves performing a detailed occlusal examination and fabrication of an occlusal guard. Prerequisite Stoma 802-804. 1.5 s.h., Fall 3rd year, Gellin
STOMA 806 - Periodontics 5
A series of lectures and seminars in practical case presentation and treatment planning for the periodontal patient in which periodontist-general dentist relationships will be stressed. Prerequisite Stoma 802-805. 1 s.h. Fall, 4th year, Krayer


text:
60beat Blue Bathroom Scale
**THIS REQUIRES 60BEAT BLUE SCALE TO FUNCTION** The 60beat Blue Bathroom Scale App is designed to wirelessly interface with with the 60beat BLUE Bathroom Scale. A simple to use tempered glass scale with an LCD readout. It also updates your weight measurements via a Bluetooth Smart Connection.
Features: Read more...
60beat Blue Bathroom Scale is a Health & Fitness application, developed by Oban US LLC and released last
This application has a content advisory rating of 4+ (Application contains no objectionable material ). This application has an average rating of 2.5 based on 20 Votes. This version 1.3 has an average rating of based on 3 Users.
Your device must have atleast 2.6 MB of space to download and install 60beat Blue Bathroom Scale. This application does not have game center . 60beat Blue Bathroom Scale is Free to download and install on your mobile device
If you have any problems on in-app purchase, found bugs, questions, comments about this application,
you can visit the official website of Oban US LLC at http://www.60beat.com


text:
Oct 13, 2012From Buyer: Yuceka
I bought an Ibasso D12 from detoxguy. He was extremely helpful and quite fast in shipping. I highly recommend him for further transactions here. Great seller.
Oct 5, 2012From Buyer: kjoh
Great seller! Easy to talk to and took great care in ensuring the item arrived safely. Highly recommended!
Jul 13, 2012From Buyer: liyi1012
perfect Hi-fier, good communication and fast ship. The MAD ERA+ HD is truely beautiful, and I love it. highly recomand!!!
Mar 24, 2011From Buyer: MarkJnK
First class transaction. Item is clean, as described and shipped in a well packed condition. Thanks very much, highly recommended.
Feb 10, 2011From Seller: ovrclkd
Sold my AKG K702's to Tom (detoxguy). Immediate payment, great communication.
Item: FS AKG K702 ; SOLD!!!


text:
Discussion in 'This Cesspool We Live In' started by Ozzy Bon Halen, May 28, 2013.
You fight "islamophobia" with building huge mosques where assorted muds will congregate in overwhelming numbers and present an obvious image of invasion. Are towelheads so dumb not to realize that becoming invisible is the best way to avoid irritating the white man even further?
This last weeks news ought to answer that.
Well, given that cutting some guy's head off in broad daylight (praise be to Allah) provokes nothing more than weak-kneed protests in front of mosques and even has the local authorities arresting anyone who criticizes you, can we really say the Moose-limbs are the dumb ones?
If someone is around Maryland, go and bury some pig in the construction site. That would make it an unholy place. Then when it is finished, email the imam and tell him there is some pork carcass in the mosque. All those millions down the drain.
Yep, back when I did concrete work, I put bacon in a sin-agogues front steps and those pukes ripped up the whole sidewalk too. I'm sure that if there is a hell, there's a special place for me there. ;P


text:
I spent two days reading another bite your nails love triangle romance… I am such a glutton for punishment!
Of course, I cheated before starting. When it comes to Love Triangles, Jennifer Haymore changed my tune about spoilers. Now I am all for reading the last chapter to find out who gets with whom. Are you the same way or do you like to be spoiler free? Don't worry I won't share who wins the girl.
So once I knew who the ultimate hero was I started the book and immediately liked both heroes. Oh no! Like with the rejected man from A Hint of Wicked, I hope the rejected man from a Summer of Two Wishes gets his story too!
What's fun about the Summer of Two Wishes, is that it's a contemporary love triangle with a similar set up to A Hint of Wicked only this time the laws surrounding the situation are known. Even though they're known, our heroine is still in for a hard decision!
Macy was desperately in love with her husband Finn Lockhart. She begged him not to join the army and go fight in Iraq but he was adamant that he would. Macy waited on tenterhooks for his safe return, but that was not to be the case. When officers came to her door with charred dog tags and their condolences, Macy's world fell apart.
It takes a strong secure man to pull her out of her grief. His name is Wyatt Clark. They fall in love, get married and are celebrating their newlywed status (seven months) by trying to get pregnant and start their family. Life is good and Wyatt believes he's the luckiest man alive until…
Finn Lockhart is recovered by Coalition forces and on his way home to reclaim his land and his wife. It's a miracle, a dream come true and a nightmare all rolled in one.
Macy is now in what is called a putative marriage. She must dissolve one marriage by divorce (her's and Finn's) or by filing suit to declare one void (her's and Wyatt's). How is she ever going to pick between her past love and her new love?
Julia London does an absolutely incredible job putting together this contemporary love triangle. I love the settings, the heroes, the heroine, and the peripheral characters… yes even Finn's mom!
Rating: 4.5 Stars.


text:
Date: November 29, 2011
Contact:Andrew Jones—(800) 875-6467 ex. 5195
Web: www.logos.com
New Software Integrates Scripture and Tradition: Logos Bible Software Releases Catholic Packages
Bellingham, WA—November 29—Logos Bible Software has released two Catholic library packages: the Catholic Scripture Study Library and the Catholic Scholar's Library. Integrating the Scripture with the Tradition, these new releases are ideal for Catholic Bible study.
"Logos provides a treasure trove of insights both on Scripture and on countless other faith-building resources, including the Church Fathers, Church councils, and the great saints and doctors of the Church," said Jimmy Akin, senior apologist for Catholic Answers. "I use Logos Bible Software constantly; I am convinced of its value, and I enthusiastically recommend it to others."
These extensive Logos libraries run on Mac and PC, and are compatible with the iPhone, iPad, and Android devices. Hundreds of essential works are included, such as the documents of Vatican II, the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the works of Cardinal Newman, as well as the tools needed to study the Scripture in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin.
"This is more than software. It's a respectable theological library that fits easily onto an iPad and goes everywhere you might have to go," said Mike Aquilina, author of more than thirty books on Catholicism. "In some ways, it's better than the bookshelves of a theological library, since it's searchable."
To learn more, please visit http://www.logos.com/catholicpress.
About Logos Bible Software
Logos Bible Software is the leading publisher of multilingual Bible software on Mac, Windows, and mobile platforms. Logos partners with more than 130 publishers to make over 15,000 electronic books available to customers in more than 180 countries. The company serves church, academic, and lay markets, bringing the best in software innovation to Christians worldwide. http://www.logos.com


text:
This post contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our Advertising Policy, visit this page.
Update: Some offers mentioned below are no longer available. View the current offers here – Hilton HHonors Surpass Card from American Express
American Express is now offering a fairly lucrative bonus (at least, compared to past offers) of 60,000 points for its Hilton HHonors Surpass card.
The Past Offer
I wrote about the Hilton HHonors Surpass card in a Sunday Reader post from this summer. At the time, the card offered a bonus of 40,000 points after the first purchase, and 2,500 bonus points for each of your first eight eligible stays at Hilton when the stay was paid for with the Surpass card within the first 18 months of membership. Eight stays just to earn 20,000 HHonors points was a bit onerous if you ask me, but the card carried other perks for Hilton loyalists that might have made it worth it (I'll get to that below).
The Current Offer
Those who apply for the card now:
-Earn 40,000 HHonors bonus points with their first purchase.
–20,000 more HHonors points when they spend $3,000 or more within the first three months.
In my opinion, meeting a general minimum spend requirement is a lot easier than the conditions of the previous offer where you had to specifically use the card to stay at Hilton properties.
Cardholders earn:
–9 points per dollar on Hilton spend.
–6 points per dollar on grocery stores, drugstores, gas stations, home and wireless phone, cable and satellite TV, and Internet service providers (less returns).
–3 points per dollar on all other spend.
–500 bonus points when the card is used to make Hilton bookings online..
–Complimentary Gold status (room upgrades, free internet, 25% point bonus on Hilton stays) for the first year, and each subsequent year with $20,000 in annual spend.
–Diamond status (upgrades, club access, free internet, room guarantee, amenities) if you spend $40,000 in a calendar year.
–Priority Pass membership valued at $99 (but you still have to pay for lounge visits at $27 per person)
–PointStretcher reduced awards, elite-only access awards.
-The card carries a $75 annual fee, which is not waived for the first year.
-It also charges foreign transaction fees, and I find Hilton awards to be expensive and that their award chart is highly skewed towards expensive categories -There are very few low category hotels I'd want to stay in, versus Hyatt and Starwood, which have some real gems.
With the full 60,000-point bonus, per the chart below, that's enough to stay in any non-Waldorf Astoria property for a night like the Hilton San Diego Del Mar (Category 5, 35,000 points) or the Conrad Maldives (Category 7, 50,000 points), and two nights in hotels up to category 4 like the DoubleTree Atlanta Galleria (30,000 points per night).
It's also enough to stay at any Waldorf Astoria except the Grand Wailea on Maui for a free night in low season, and any Waldorf Astoria except the Grand Wailea and the one in the Maldives in high season.
The Spend Scenario
Let's say you spend $20,000 on the card the first year (so you have your gold status extended) with the following breakdown:
-$4,000 at Hiltons on ten stays: So 4,000 x 9 points each spent at Hilton, plus 10 stays x 500 bonus points each = 41,000 points
-$12,000 on gas, groceries and utilities like phone and cable: 12,000 x 6 points each = 72,000 points
-$4,000 on other things: 4,000 x 3 HHonors points on all other spend = 12,000 points.
So your spending earned you 125,000 HHonors points. Add in your 40,000 point first purchase bonus and the extra 20,000 points from meeting your minimum spend, and you've got 185,000 HHonors points.
You could use those for a free three-night stay at a Category 7 hotel, which costs 50,000 points for a free night redemption, like the Conrad Tokyo where rates start at $475 in March saving you $1,425, or the Hilton Bentley Miami South Beach where rates start at $499 in March saving you $1,497, and still have 35,000 HHonors points left over.
If you wanted to take the family to Disney World or Universal Studios Orlando, you could redeem those points for 6 room nights at a Category 4 hotel like the Embassy Suites Orlando Downtown for a total of 180,000 HHonors points, where rates start at $215 in March, saving $1,290.
With this latest offer, it seems like Hilton and Amex are upping their game in a few ways. First of all by matching more lucrative recent bonus offers from competitors like Marriott, and second, by playing around with the minimum spend requirements to find the right sweet spot to attract both more customers, and more high-yield customers.
There are some definite drawbacks to the card, like the lack of great low-level redemption properties, but the bonuses cardmembers earn with Hilton stays, as well as the general spend categories bonuses might make it worth it to Hilton loyalists.
Hat tip: TPG reader Britt.
Citi® Hilton HHonors™ Visa Signature® Card
|Intro APR
|Regular APR
|Annual Fee
|Foreign Transaction Fee
|Credit Rating
|15.49% - 19.49%* (Variable)
|Excellent Credit


text:
Are we all sure we are using Twitter to provide value in conversations? Sure enough I learned a lot from just reading what other people are saying, or the links they share.
But from the Twitter stats at Twist it looks like we don't have a lot of valuable things to say on Twitter. Almost on any given day of the week, the name of the day is the top word Tweeted on Twitter...
The Tweets range from;
Now, I won't ever bore you with those kind on Tweets, I'm looking to get into a good conversation on Twitter. Exchange thoughts, value or ideas. I seriously don't care how much you like it that it's Friday or almost weekend!


text:
Home: www.packetnexus.com
Postfix as bastion smtp mail gateway. How to configure Postfix on a machine so that it relays mail for example.com to a mail server on the internal network. A common problem with SMTP daemons today is they are not secure. Postfix was built with security in mind. So, it is very easy to install a box just to handle mail to and from the Internet, while you can use your own mail software on your internal server. It will also accept mail from the internal host and deliver it to the Internet. This How-To refers to the most recent version of postfix. First thing to do is create a user named postfix. We will need to set the shell for this user to false so it can't login. useradd -c "postfix user account" -s /bin/false postfix This user account will be used by postfix for all actions, except binding to port 25, for that it needs root. One of the big security problems with sendmail is that everything runs as root, so any exploits give the attacker root access. Postfix is several small programs that work together....and they don't run as root. Next, get postfix from www.postfix.org Untar it tar -xvzf postfixXXXXX.tar.gz Next, cd into the postfix directory and type make Then run make install. A script will automatically be run after the install and it will prompt you for some input, the defaults should be good. Something that I found when I installed postfix over an existing sendmail install, was the main.cf was pointing to /etc/aliases for the aliases file. It needs to be pointing to the /etc/postfix/aliases file. Double check to make sure yours is correct. Reality is, that it doesn't matter, I just prefer to have all the config files in the /etc/postfix directory. You might want to delete or rename the unused aliases file. Now, let's edit some files so our postfix install just acts as a gateway and forwards mail to our internal mail server. Postfix can be used as an SMTP server right after install, if you had a POP3 server running you caould use it as your mail server. I run Exchange internally so this install needs to just relay mail. Postfix files exist in /etc/postfix Make the following changes to route mail to an internal host and NOT to the local machine. Don't include the comments in parentheses. /etc/postfix/main.cf: mydestination = (so no mail is routed to the localhost) relay_domains = example.com (so mail is relayed to your domain) transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport /etc/postfix/transport: my.domain smtp:internalhost.example.com (forwards [email protected]) .my.domain smtp:internalhost.example.com (forwards [email protected]) /etc/postfix/master.cf: Comment out the local delivery agent (so no mail is delivered locally) That line is the similar to the one below # local unix - n n - - local Execute the following command whenever you change the transport table. postmap /etc/postfix/transport Execute the following command after a configuration change. postfix reload That is it, now test it out. I usually do the following to test things out. tail -f /var/log/maillog - this command will open the log file and actively update it so you can see what is happening. Use an external mail account to send mail. Watch for when the external server connects, you should see status=sent somewhere in the log. If not, it is time to troubleshoot. I have a few things below that may help with other configs. Ok, so now you want this box to also relay other domains. It is easy. Postfix supports virtual domains. Make the following changes. /etc/postfix/main.cf: virtual_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual /etc/postfix/virtual example.com [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] In the virtual file, you can add as many email addresses as you like. After making the above changes, run postfix reload.


text:
An innovative new project operating out of a shipping container will enable consumers to access the internet, do their banking and buy bread or a lotto ticket in one go. It's also expected to create about 9 000 new jobs.
A recently launched website "hotline" is seeing the South African government lead the rest of Africa in the fight against child pornography.
South Africa is in the process of switching from analogue to digital broadcasting, and soon the country will join many other parts of the world in enjoying better sound and picture quality, more channels and language options, and interactive services.
Something happens when a new newspaper, magazine, website or television channel is launched. It is a bit like a child being born. We hold our breaths. We wait for that first edition or that first broadcast and pray for all of it to go well, writes Justice Malala.
The flourishing South African film industry has landed another coup with the announcement that a film based on the hit television series 24, starring Emmy winner Kiefer Sutherland, is to be shot in Cape Town.
The 2008 International Media Forum South Africa brought together journalists, marketing specialists and government officials to discuss ways to improve media relations and the branding of South Africa.
An innovative new campaign using animated characters to communicate the HIV/Aids message to young South Africans promises to be both educational and entertaining.


text:
Welcome to the Calendar by DaySee what is happening on the day you are planning your Zoo trip! Or visit the Events Calendar Listing.
Here are some tips to help you use the Calendar by Day:
Zoo Open Daily, Admissions 10 am to 4 pmZoo grounds open until 5 pm. Hours & Prices
Keeper Chats Sponsored by
Join Autism Speaks at the Sacramento Zoo for our 'Zoos Go Blue' autism awareness day. Free admission to all individuals on the spectrum with the purchase of one adult admission. Visit the Autism Speaks awareness table to learn more about how Autism Speaks is dedicated to improving the lives of those who struggle with autism spectrum disorders.
The Sacramento Zoological Society // 501(c)(3) nonprofit3930 West Land Park Drive, Sacramento, CA 95822 // 916-808-5888© 2016 Sacramento Zoo, All Rights Reserved


text:
Last weekend a family I have grown up with and considered a second family the majority of my life, lost their son in a tragic way. The details are still hard for me to comprehend, but you can read a little about the incident here. I'd just like to first and foremost ask for all your thoughts, prayers, and love to be sent to the Hallmans during this time. I know blogging about this is a little out of context to what I normally share, but I have the feeling that David's life and death is going to have a significant impact of how I go about the rest of my journey here on Earth. He was such a bright and fun-loving kid, and I can't even begin to understand why he was taken at a time like this. I know that everyone involved in the situation has come out of it stronger, more thoughtful, and more appreciative of life than ever before.
With this, I want to share a little part of myself that I've been keeping quiet about for the past couple years. This week has showed me the importance of saying what you feel when you have the time to do so, and it just seems right. Thanks for the courage David! This sounds all scandalous, but I promise you it's not ;)
I grew up in a Christian household, going to Christian and Catholic schools until graduating high school, and I had considered myself agnostic throughout all of these experiences. When I was making wrong choices at home, I was punished by going to youth group Saturday afternoons — I never felt like I fit in with the kids there, and I honestly never really gave them a chance. When I went off to Iowa, faith was something that I rarely thought of. I had these years of my life to explore on my own terms, I made some good decisions, and I made even more wrong choices. All-in-all, these choices led me to Savannah to pursue my masters degree, and this is where I started to feel a pull towards exploring a Christian faith on my own for the first time. I met a good friend who opened up to me about her faith in a way that I never thought was possible for myself. She was a passionate, artistic, caring, and fun. There was a part of me that envied her ability to trust in God, go to church, and still live this amazingly fun life full of her personal passions on her own terms. My background made me feel like I had to be one way, or the other. I could be Christian, and follow all the rules, or be agnostic and live the way I wanted to. Meeting her, and becoming her friend sparked a new interest in faith that I have held inside of me for the past couple years. Those close to me knew I was exploring a relationship with Jesus more recently, but I still felt a little weird talking about this is general. It just didn't seem like me, you know? I was still living my life the way I always had, breaking 'rules', and going on my own path — but suddenly, I had a little guidance. I had my faith to lean on a little more, to help me through some of the tough times, and to rejoice with me when things were working out. I always thought I needed to have someone to talk to about for all the little things going on in my life. With this new found faith in Jesus, I feel like He has been taking over, guiding me to where I was meant to be next.
I'm still the same old Kelsey, but I have a little more pep in my step, and I know that I have a wonderful support system behind me now. Serendipitously, I met Katie a couple months ago, and she has been re-inspiring me to live out my faith in an out-loud way. She does this so well, and is an inspiration to me in that sense. For the first time on my own accord, I went to church with her last Sunday. I've been struggling with feeling at home in a lot of ways in my life recently, and I can honestly say, I felt at home there that Sunday. Being back in my hometown this week, with so many close friends and family for the preceding events and funeral for David, was truly a lesson in life and faith in a way I can't even begin to express. I'm so proud of how the Hallmans have been dealing with this tragedy, and how they have been leaning on their faith to make it through. It's seriously inspiring, and I am forever changed by this experience. Even from the other side, David is using his gifts to share faith, love, and laughter. With these passing events, I thought it was about time to just throw this out there and be proud of my journey. Again, thank you for the courage David, love you buddy.


text:
Episode #64 – A Little Bit Shady
It's time to paint the town red! Or is it Evil Sunz Scarlet? Whatever the colour, we're sure to be discussing it in this episode as we catch up on one of the most monumental changes in recent years for the discerning miniature hobbyist – the release of the brand new Citadel Paint range!
Luke & Mike also launch a new segment this episode – discussing some of the tougher listener questions on the state of play for various game systems, community trends, or the gaming industry in general.
Intro & Show News (00:43)
- - Episode sponsors: BattleFoam – Protect your army! & Defiant Gaming – More bang for your buck! (For details on how to sponsor an episode, check out the "Show Support" page here.)
Hobby Update (54:28)
- - New Warhammer 40,000 Necron 2nd wave. <Link>
- - Trollblood Gargantuan revealed for Hordes. <Link>
- - Heresy era Marine gear from Forgeworld. <Link>
- - 4.2 Vassal mod released for Warmachine & Hordes <Link>
- - Steamforged Warmachine & Hordes Vassal video resource <Link>
New Citadel Paint Range Review (01:31:22)
- - From shades to textures, from layers to glazes, we open the lid on the new citadel colour paint range and discuss our findings on what's good, what's bad, and what's changed.
Deep Strike! (New Segment) (02:35:09)
If you'd like to leave us some feedback on this episode, please drop us a line at email@example.com
Thanks for listening, and we hope you enjoy the show!


text:
David McNew / Getty Images
Apple had been suing Amazon over its use of the term "App Store" to describe its Android-based app store.
Apple calls its app store, "App Store," and therefore believed it held an exclusive right to the name.
According to an alert from Bloomberg News, Amazon won a dismissal of Apple's claim against Amazon.
This is probably for the best. Trying to trademark App Store seems silly.
Disclosure: Jeff Bezos is an investor in Business Insider through his personal investment company Bezos Expeditions.