But also different title and authors 🤔
Well crap.
And a different doi than in the tattoo. But without a paywall!
You know what doesn’t have a paywall either? THESE girls!
Awww basket void
Tortie, actually, but yeah, she DOES love baskets, as does her sister 🥰
Good for her, well done! Not as pretty of a tattoo as a well-drawn organic molecule, IMO, but publishing is hard and worthy of celebration when you succeed.
Add a citation counter below it to keep track of how far you’ve come.
Citations: ||||| ||||/ ||||| ||||\ ||||| |||
To really go hardcore, the counters should be brands, not tattoos.
Not only the first paper but it apparently was published in nature:
And it is actually published by OP (in the image), finally, a meme that is not a repost.
I also hope one day bio community can move away from paywalled platform like nature and science to more reasonable publishers.
Wow that’s a cool way to celebrate
That’s pretty dope.
“Recruit and retain a diverse workforce” https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-0214-z
Only 24,99 € / 30 days, what a steal
i like that “open access” label just below the paywall
Why is this (I presume scientific) paper written like an opinion piece?
What will it take to make our undergraduate and graduate researchers, our postdoctoral interview candidates, our faculty and our academic leaders reflect local and global populations — and why should we bother?
Because modern day social scientists have legitimately lost the plot and think it’s more important to for careers to be built by ethnicity rather than merit, and call any alternative a matter of facilitating and furthering “privilege” with no data to back up their claims.
I know people who have been pushed out of labs and bullied into quitting their degree programs just because they were hetero white males. I am unfortunately not kidding, not exaggerating, and the details I am leaving out only make the circumstances worse.
Academics have quietly acknowledged that academia itself is dying because of this and other issues that call the validity of modern science literature into question.
I have a friend who is published in Nature, and I’m very tempted to send them this article. They have already stated that being published in Nature means nothing these days to anyone who actually pays attention to what they publish, and this is just further proof of it.
For all who digress: I welcome all downvotes. I am not trolling, I am not inciting, I am laying out the honest truth as it has been illustrated to me by credible academics over the past five years. I don’t care what you learned in social sciences. I don’t care who published what. You seek to undermine academia by making merit moot and for that I respect you less than I even respect Silicon Valley-- that is to say, dismally little. And idgaf what you label me because if you are on the other side of this, your words mean absolutely nothing to me and never will.
Let me just point this out- this was the exact same argument by many intellectuals back in the 1950’s about segregation/integration and blacks in science. Why should we care about their color? If they are good scientists with great original ideas and experiments, then surely they will get published and get their positions commensurate to their merit. This is also ignoring their segregated schooling being underfunded, not being welcomed into higher ed unless at specific ‘negro’ universities, and the crippled career paths because of it. But sure, even with their second rate primary education due to their skin color, and their second rate secondary education due to their skin color, and then their crippled career prospects due to their skin color- why don’t we then measure them on merit? The black man never amounted to what out nice ivy league educated white man has done, so why take a risk on them? And again, should we not just judge them on merit? Ignore that if a black man has a novel idea then they must then have the idea reviewed into perpetuity while one of the white reviewers just so happens to come up with the same idea then publishes before the black man.
So to sit here and still argue that merit alone while disregarding the person is only progress is actually quite regressive.
Now, beyond that- modern publishing is blind in most every respectable journal because of this issue. It is only after being accepted is the author identity revealed to the reviewers.
This is also ignoring their segregated schooling being underfunded
I attended an underfunded public school system. It was intentionally underfunded by the state because of class/income segregation, not racial segregation. Caucasians were a statistical minority there.
not being welcomed into higher ed unless at specific ‘negro’ universities
I was denied my father’s “transferrable” GI bill by the federal government and received no substantial tuition assistance, had to work full-time through college to pay tuition. The tuition assistance I did receive was specifically established to empower disadvantaged households regardless of race, and was minimal.
their crippled career prospects due to their skin color- why don’t we then measure them on merit?
I am 100% self-taught in all technology and computer topics I’ve mastered. All I had was Google and 5Mbps. My parents did not encourage my exploration, and even dissuaded or hampered it often.
Ignore that if a black man has a novel idea then they must then have the idea reviewed into perpetuity while one of the white reviewers just so happens to come up with the same idea then publishes before the black man [ . . . ] modern publishing is blind in most every respectable journal because of this issue. It is only after being accepted is the author identity revealed to the reviewers.
Am I having a stroke or did you just contradict yourself? Why exactly would a black man’s publication be reviewed “into perpetuity” if the reviewers know nothing of their race? Furthermore, I am clearly arguing that their race means absolutely nothing and therefore would not be considered in review.
yes, dispense upon us your second-hand, bitter expertise. i’m certain you have the Truth, the Facts, and the Data.
commenting before I go to bed to point out you have contributed nothing to this discussion, instead using the opportunity for an attempt at being offensive.
let me be more direct then - i find it difficult to take your view on the whole of academia seriously when its basis appears to be the “experience” of a “friend,” particularly keeping in mind you have already wholly dismissed social sciences. i understand that statements such as yours are not invitations to actual conversation.
good night.
I dismiss modern social sciences because they have made it impossible not to dismiss them by making absurd claims that are easily refutable and arguably do nothing to better society-- how the fuck is hiring or granting tuition assistance based on applicant’s identity equate to social progress, when their identity makes up so little of their effectual background?
If race is a social construct, then tell me why the fuck they insist on making things about race more than it ever was before instead of embracing objective equality?
This incongruence is the exact reason extremist groups have no trouble finding new members-- anyone embracing these half-cooked, bad-faith movements is actively driving neutral parties into the arms of the extremists. By treating the neutral party as the enemy, you make them your enemy. I affiliate with no social groups because of how awful they are, but I assure you I will always undermine DEI however I can in my day-to-day job duties simply because those behind the movement threw the first punch.
I see humans as humans. And I don’t give a flying fuck what anyone else says they are. They are humans, they will be treated like humans the same as all other humans are treated, no better, no worse, and their identity means zilch.
It sounds like a Lemmy post
As the world erupts with demands for racial justice, the chemistry community has the obligation, opportunity and momentum to drive for diversity and inclusion in the sciences. Efforts towards that end must begin by allocating opportunities for success on the basis of potential, not privilege, and follow through by soliciting and acting upon feedback from the scholars we have recruited.
It looks like an opinion piece because the article is a comment. It indicates that at the top of the article. Scientific journals often solicit a small number of commentaries that address issues in their field.
IM JUST ASKING QUESTIONS GUISE
QR code for the DOI would be better IMO
Might be obsolete after a bit though. A QR code only points to a URL and that might change (unlikely, but after 20 years…)
A QR code can also just contain plain text. It’s just usually used for URLs.
Wonder what an appropriate error correction level would be for QR tattoo
Probably loads less then you would need for signage. I reckon you could get away with no redundancy if you went with a large enough base size on the grid.
You can go as far as replacing the square “pixels” with circular dots and it still reads fine, qr codes are kind of amazing.
Awesome!
Plain text can also encode plain text. Why are we complicating this?
because a qr code containing the ~15k characters of the paper would be a full back piece of tiny dots. Probably unreadable anyways.
Because you can’t read the article by reading it’s number, and there isn’t enough room for the whole article on normally visible parts of the body (not to mention the cost of that tattoo).
The QR code would give you a way to copy/paste the id so you can actually give and, you know, read the thing.
You can make QR codes that copy text to a clipboard right? Can’t you just make it a DOI search term? Or pay $2/yr for a redirect domain that you can point to where you want later
Sure, but that $2/yr company goes out of business after 10 years and the QR code stops working.
I guess making the number just copy into your clipboard would be a decent option, but you can also just copy/paste text from images now, so why go through the trouble of QR coding it when that only makes sense to a computer?
Even if your registrar goes out of business ICANN will help you restore the domain with a new registrar.
Source it happened to one of my customers.
A numerical .xyz domain costs less than a dollar a year, and you can make as many redirect links as you want.
It costs less than a dollar for the first year. After that, who knows.
The plain text is much more reliable than any url.
Use the search tool below to innovate on the affordable class of .xyz domains made up of 1.111 billion possible 6-digit, 7-digit, 8-digit, and 9-digit numeric combinations, between ‘000000.xyz’ through ‘999999999.xyz,’ now 99¢ per year, every year.
This is from the registrar itself back in 2017.
Where are you getting domains for $2 per year?
Namecheap xyz domains are less than $3 after tax for the first year. Subsequent years are around $10.
That’s not really $2 per year. Info domains used to be dirt cheap, but even those are pretty expensive after the first year now.
You can get word-vomit domains that are made for QR/imbedded links. No human is typing those out and they do nothing for SEO, so they’re a pittance.
QR codes can contain just about anything, including the URI (
doi:foobar) form that the tattoo uses. QR codes themselves will probably go the way of USB: In a million years there’s going to be someone looking at the driver code saying “you sure we can’t get rid of those early versions” just for someone to chime in saying “your keyboard still uses USB1”.A QR Code encodes a string of text. In can be a URL, or anything else. Like the DOI string above, a quote, or whatever. You can’t do full Unicode I think, it’s 8859-1, or something like that, although there’s also an Asian variant.
But your camera phone can already copy text. If it’s a tattoo about the first paper you wrote, whatever you make needs to work for 60+ years. Text is always going to be valid, who knows when QR codes will become obsolete. 60 years ago you’d be getting a tattoo of a punch card, and that would be mostly meaningless today.
My camera phone can’t copy text :(
(Original iPhone SE, so not recent, but not ancient or a flip phone or anything)
I was just addressing the fact that QR Codes were only for URLs. As for whether they’ll be around in 60 years… Barcodes have proved to be fairly resilient.
DOIs are forever. It’s why they exist.
