What made your day today?
- nausearockpig
- Posts: 3907
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:03 pm
Re: What made your day today?
I saw two Regurgitator gigs last week and at both they played 7'10". That song hasn't been played since (about 4 January?) 1997... It was fucking rad. Recordings came out stellar too....
Here's an audio only youtube of the song back in 1995:
Here's an audio only youtube of the song back in 1995:
Re: What made your day today?
Cuba --> Colombia --> Peru for 6 weeks in the spring.
Looking very likely!
Too bad I can't sing, dance or play an instrument....... I'll bring the fun though!
That beat is contagious.
Looking very likely!
Too bad I can't sing, dance or play an instrument....... I'll bring the fun though!
That beat is contagious.
Re: What made your day today?
The price on Roomba 870s finally came down enough that I could afford to replace my old retrofitted 530 (3 years old, and the battery is basically toast -- replaceable, but the newer models are much better). I'm living in the future with a robot vacuum that runs on a schedule and returns to its dock on its own. More time for writing.
Re: What made your day today?
Just got a ticket for tonight's screening of of Keith Richards:Under the Influence.
Following the movie there will be a Q&A with Keith Richards and the director, Morgan Neville(20 Feet from Stardom).
http://tiff.net/festivals/festival15/pr ... h-richards
In case anyone is interested, there will be a press conference today at 3PM(EST).
You can watch live here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vsbqld4EIM
Following the movie there will be a Q&A with Keith Richards and the director, Morgan Neville(20 Feet from Stardom).
http://tiff.net/festivals/festival15/pr ... h-richards
In case anyone is interested, there will be a press conference today at 3PM(EST).
You can watch live here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vsbqld4EIM
Re: What made your day today?
fuck that's cool, really looking forward to seeing this doc
Re: What made your day today?
It was really good, Matz! The director really captured Keith's essence. He conveyed Keith's love and passion for music and the joy it brings him. I think he would die if he had to stop playing for some reason.Matz wrote:fuck that's cool, really looking forward to seeing this doc
Some funny bits with Tom Waits too. He tells the story of the first time they jam together and how Keith turns up with a van full of guitars and a "guitar valet". He described it like a dessert trolley, but instead of choosing a cake, you choose a guitar.
The Q&A afterwards was good too.
A few pics I took. Not very good, but it's something.
The guy on the left of Keith is the director and the guy on the right side is moderator.
Keith signing a few autographs before leaving.
- nausearockpig
- Posts: 3907
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:03 pm
Re: What made your day today?
saw a guy today driving his early 2000s model BMW that had the number plate of BRO 666
I bet he thought he looked super cool in backwards cap and sunglasses, blaring R&B....
I bet he thought he looked super cool in backwards cap and sunglasses, blaring R&B....
Re: What made your day today?
glad you had a good time, Artemis, fun follows this guy around it seems
Re: What made your day today?
Matz wrote:glad you had a good time, Artemis, fun follows this guy around it seems
Re: What made your day today?
new Adele single!! .......FINALLY!! All this waiting has been killing me...
kiddin, calm down
kiddin, calm down
Re: What made your day today?
I didn't know you were a fan of her. I like her, but I was more a fan of Amy Winehouse.
Re: What made your day today?
Grats! That must be a hell of a feeling. I'm currently working up the nerve to submit a paper for a fourth time... It's gone through substantial revision and I think it's got a solid shot... but it's nerve-wracking...perkana wrote:
- nausearockpig
- Posts: 3907
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:03 pm
Re: What made your day today?
nice!!!perkana wrote:
Re: What made your day today?
¡que asombroso perkana!
I hope I said "How fantastic!" and not "What a hat!"
On a serious note, do you sense it's more they mostly disagree with you, or they are positive about it but think there is a stronger argument?
I hope I said "How fantastic!" and not "What a hat!"
Are they saying it's logically and causally necessary to not accept your paper?Hype wrote:........... I'm currently working up the nerve to submit a paper for a fourth time... It's gone through substantial revision and I think it's got a solid shot... but it's nerve-wracking...perkana wrote:
On a serious note, do you sense it's more they mostly disagree with you, or they are positive about it but think there is a stronger argument?
Re: What made your day today?
This is the third journal I sent it too. And the last reviewer was the fourth (think the editor was the third). One of the original reviewers had to be changed so I had to wait another three months. Just need to do some really minor corrections, but not my method. So yeah, I'm relieved after a rather stressful year. You'll do fine!Hype wrote:Grats! That must be a hell of a feeling. I'm currently working up the nerve to submit a paper for a fourth time... It's gone through substantial revision and I think it's got a solid shot... but it's nerve-wracking...perkana wrote:
Re: What made your day today?
Thank you, guys!
This calls for a beer
This calls for a beer
Re: What made your day today?
Wonderful news Perkana! How exciting. GO YOU!perkana wrote:
Re: What made your day today?
I think it's a little bit different in the humanities than in the sciences, though I'm not totally confident about that. (How can research findings be rejected by peer review a few times and then accepted? Other than issues of writing/presentation. It's not like you redo the entire study before submitting again...)mockbee wrote:¡que asombroso perkana!
I hope I said "How fantastic!" and not "What a hat!"
Are they saying it's logically and causally necessary to not accept your paper?Hype wrote:........... I'm currently working up the nerve to submit a paper for a fourth time... It's gone through substantial revision and I think it's got a solid shot... but it's nerve-wracking...perkana wrote:
On a serious note, do you sense it's more they mostly disagree with you, or they are positive about it but think there is a stronger argument?
In the humanities, a lot of it comes down to picking the right journal at the right time for the kind of work you're doing. Some journals aim at a "generalist" academic audience rather than specialists in your narrow area, so a paper that develops highly specialized technical nitpicking will tend not to be looked upon favourably for acceptance in a generalist journal even if there's nothing actually wrong with what you've done. Sometimes it comes down to reviewers deciding that the work just isn't at a level that they want papers to be at for that journal. This is where the peer review process can break down, because it's supposed to be blind, but it's often very easy to tell who is an established name just from their writing style and topics that they're writing on. A lot of times, there are only a few possible people who could review a paper, and they all know each other, and may even have heard the paper at a conference already. The assumption is that conflicts of interest will be self-policed, but there's no guarantee that this happens. Sometimes it could even be as simple as googling a concept and accidentally turning up an earlier version of the paper (or a presentation based on it), thus breaking anonymity.
To answer your question more directly, and in my case, all the reviewer comments I've ever received have been pretty positive (though there is some editor discretion for not sending comments that are overly harsh or stupid, or whatever). This might even make it more difficult to figure out how to modify a paper before submitting it elsewhere, since positive comments don't really help suggest places to improve the paper.
I've heard stories of it taking upwards of seven submissions before some famous papers were accepted, though... so I guess you just learn to get over it. But at the early stage of a career (that may or may not even be a career in the end), every submission feels do-or-die.
Re: What made your day today?
Sounds like any new professional endeavor.... prior cachet and extended social network is often required, and a substantial amount of luck is mandatory.Hype wrote:
To answer your question more directly, and in my case, all the reviewer comments I've ever received have been pretty positive (though there is some editor discretion for not sending comments that are overly harsh or stupid, or whatever). This might even make it more difficult to figure out how to modify a paper before submitting it elsewhere, since positive comments don't really help suggest places to improve the paper.
I've heard stories of it taking upwards of seven submissions before some famous papers were accepted, though... so I guess you just learn to get over it. But at the early stage of a career (that may or may not even be a career in the end), every submission feels do-or-die.
Re: What made your day today?
True. But the article review process in particular is supposed to be 'blind', and the main way for academic disciplines to make claims about objective evaluation, objectivity, real knowledge, and progress... If that system becomes too corrupted (a certain amount of corruption is tolerable, as in a democracy)... we're in real trouble.mockbee wrote:Sounds like any new professional endeavor.... prior cachet and extended social network is often required, and a substantial amount of luck is mandatory.Hype wrote:
To answer your question more directly, and in my case, all the reviewer comments I've ever received have been pretty positive (though there is some editor discretion for not sending comments that are overly harsh or stupid, or whatever). This might even make it more difficult to figure out how to modify a paper before submitting it elsewhere, since positive comments don't really help suggest places to improve the paper.
I've heard stories of it taking upwards of seven submissions before some famous papers were accepted, though... so I guess you just learn to get over it. But at the early stage of a career (that may or may not even be a career in the end), every submission feels do-or-die.
Re: What made your day today?
I found this article useful and comforting while I was waiting for my reviews (it's in Spanish but you can google translate the page): http://conacytprensa.mx/index.php/socie ... ientificasHype wrote:I think it's a little bit different in the humanities than in the sciences, though I'm not totally confident about that. (How can research findings be rejected by peer review a few times and then accepted? Other than issues of writing/presentation. It's not like you redo the entire study before submitting again...)mockbee wrote:¡que asombroso perkana!
I hope I said "How fantastic!" and not "What a hat!"
Are they saying it's logically and causally necessary to not accept your paper?Hype wrote:........... I'm currently working up the nerve to submit a paper for a fourth time... It's gone through substantial revision and I think it's got a solid shot... but it's nerve-wracking...perkana wrote:
On a serious note, do you sense it's more they mostly disagree with you, or they are positive about it but think there is a stronger argument?
In the humanities, a lot of it comes down to picking the right journal at the right time for the kind of work you're doing. Some journals aim at a "generalist" academic audience rather than specialists in your narrow area, so a paper that develops highly specialized technical nitpicking will tend not to be looked upon favourably for acceptance in a generalist journal even if there's nothing actually wrong with what you've done. Sometimes it comes down to reviewers deciding that the work just isn't at a level that they want papers to be at for that journal. This is where the peer review process can break down, because it's supposed to be blind, but it's often very easy to tell who is an established name just from their writing style and topics that they're writing on. A lot of times, there are only a few possible people who could review a paper, and they all know each other, and may even have heard the paper at a conference already. The assumption is that conflicts of interest will be self-policed, but there's no guarantee that this happens. Sometimes it could even be as simple as googling a concept and accidentally turning up an earlier version of the paper (or a presentation based on it), thus breaking anonymity.
To answer your question more directly, and in my case, all the reviewer comments I've ever received have been pretty positive (though there is some editor discretion for not sending comments that are overly harsh or stupid, or whatever). This might even make it more difficult to figure out how to modify a paper before submitting it elsewhere, since positive comments don't really help suggest places to improve the paper.
I've heard stories of it taking upwards of seven submissions before some famous papers were accepted, though... so I guess you just learn to get over it. But at the early stage of a career (that may or may not even be a career in the end), every submission feels do-or-die.
My dad sent me a paper about peer review fraud. It's interesting and kinda stupid at the same time, but some people do it because of being pressured to publish in high impact journals, even editors are involved. I'll leave you the link to the article: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1512330
Or if you want I can e-mail you the doc.
Re: What made your day today?
Thanks, Squee!Squee wrote:Wonderful news Perkana! How exciting. GO YOU!perkana wrote:
Re: What made your day today?
A friend of mine had a Roomba years ago and I wasn't that impressed, although I imagine they've come a long way since then. I bought a Dyson Fluffy the other day. I don't want to get too anal about a vaicuum cleaner but this is incredible. Previously I have always bought shit cheap ones. Now I realise why these are so expensive. The only downside is that it only lasts 20 minutes (which I'm not too bothered about as the house is small) and there is no indication as when it is about to cut. However, it's incredibly powerful, has a load of attachments, it's cordeless and very well designed. Plus I can use it for the car.Hype wrote:The price on Roomba 870s finally came down enough that I could afford to replace my old retrofitted 530 (3 years old, and the battery is basically toast -- replaceable, but the newer models are much better). I'm living in the future with a robot vacuum that runs on a schedule and returns to its dock on its own. More time for writing.