Seamus
@scmbradley
Former academic person, current computer person, future old person. He/Him.
You might like
I didn't quit academia, I simply recognised that desire (for a job) inevitably causes suffering (admin, grant writing) and perpetuates the endless cycle of death and rebirth (moving cities for postdocs). I transcended academia.
and Nadine Dorries, who did NOT get a peerage
my strongest and most correct typographic opinion is that instead of making part of an italicized passage roman for emphasis, you should italicize it harder
I'm working on an unbiased article on dogs for the New York Times. I'm not looking to speak to dog owners or veterinarians at this time but if you hate dogs and think dogs are controlling your mind and that they should all be launched into the sun I would like to hear from you
Hello. I am (1) a former academic (2) now working in a non-academic job and (3) someone who works in the tech sector (4) with a non-traditional background. If you are a (1) or a (4) and want to be a (2) or a (3), and would like some advice or support, get in touch.
I'm so behind on sleep. I'm going to have to pull an all-nighter.
How's everyone's impostor syndrome doing today?
francis fukuyama seems to think that "deontological" means "not ontological" ???
The rational strategy is for everybody to say 0 and then Hamkins owes us infinity dollars each. But you all messed it up. Jeez.
OK, logic twits, we're holding the Largest Tweetable Number contest! Respond to this tweet with a tweet describing a specific natural number. Largest number wins. What have you got? Prize: One million dollars* *prize will be divided by the value of the winning number
Ongoing thread of unusual party ideas I've heard lately (some great, some terrible). 100 beers of solitude: the party starts with 100 beers on a table in the middle of the room, and nobody is allowed to talk until all of them are finished.
the ideal peer review process involves searching the entire planet for the 2-3 people that know the absolute most about a very niche topic and then *they* ignore the email for several months and eventually some grad students do it.
It's not peer as in social status obviously but the ideal peer review process involves searching the entire planet for the 2-3 people that know the absolute most about a very niche topic and then *they* review the work for publication.
It might do more for human knowledge if donors paid new unemployed PhDs to contribute to Wikipedia for a year, instead of funding fancy named-chair professorships. We could probably get 3 or 4 work-from-anywhere wikipostdocs for each year of named chair funding.
11472: Dwarf gains no good thoughts from attending meeting, constantly tries to attend meeting.
My work with @sdessai @climatehat and @scmbradley has been featured in the print edition of the bulletin of @ametsoc . Very honored to be in this issue, and grateful for the great editorial team. We need more interdisciplinary work!
![lastpositivist's profile picture. Aspiring philosopher; tolerable human; "amusing combination of sardonic detachment & literally all the feelings felt entirely unironically all at once" [he/his]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1064478691068137473/NnNlroSU.jpg)
United States Trends
- 1. #WWERaw 48.4K posts
- 2. Purdy 23.5K posts
- 3. Panthers 30.5K posts
- 4. Mac Jones 4,463 posts
- 5. Penta 7,990 posts
- 6. 49ers 31.7K posts
- 7. Canales 11.4K posts
- 8. Gunther 12.8K posts
- 9. Jaycee Horn 2,411 posts
- 10. #KeepPounding 4,781 posts
- 11. #FTTB 4,371 posts
- 12. Niners 4,532 posts
- 13. Melo 17.5K posts
- 14. #RawOnNetflix 1,783 posts
- 15. #CARvsSF 1,064 posts
- 16. Mark Kelly 163K posts
- 17. Rico Dowdle 1,300 posts
- 18. McMillan 2,272 posts
- 19. Kittle 3,191 posts
- 20. 3 INTs 2,105 posts
Something went wrong.
Something went wrong.