Here's how the settings should look. And here is an example item from our library that has a PDF attached & accessible to members (open on a desktop computer, not mobile) - you can see the PDF in "Attachments", but it's greyed out and you can't access it: www.zotero.org/groups/48771...
There's a freely accessible version here: www.fouirnaies.com/s/fouirnaies... (the paper is fairly technical, though, depending on your background might also not help much).
The core logic is in these two paras, more details later in the paper
The core logic is in these two paras, more details later in the paper
It has always had one. Note that the quota is for syncing files to their servers. You can use a Zotero library of any size locally for free
FWIW, you can make a group public & closed and share PDFs with members and have the library minus PDFs visible to anyone
Yeah, bad example. NYC mayoral primaries used to have a 2nd round runoff and eliminated it via ranked choice (i.e. instant run off) this time around.
Yes, sorry, my post wasn't well phrased. I agree that's what the paper does.
The abstract includes that: divisive is defined as competitive, here, in the sense that there's a runoff election is triggered (like in the NYC mayoral election though it doesn't matter there bc the D candidate wins anyway)
Reposted by Sebastian Karcher
I'm writing a grant application to fund features and improvements to Literature Mapper, a plugin for QGIS that makes maps of Zotero citations. Has anyone out there used it in it's current state? Or would you use it if only... ?
micheletobias.github.io/maps/Literat...
#gischat
micheletobias.github.io/maps/Literat...
#gischat
Maps by MicheleTobias
micheletobias.github.io
I really enjoy mine. Also useable in traffic & when you need to hear what kids are doing while cooking/exercising etc
IMO they are mostly for speech -- music isn't much fun given lack of bass. And definitely not for airplanes
IMO they are mostly for speech -- music isn't much fun given lack of bass. And definitely not for airplanes
Yeah, it cannot be overstated how common it is for academics to look at a GS profile and go "ooh, 5k citations, nice!" I think most HTP committees are (much) more diligent, but wouldn't be surprised if it happened even there as a first cut.
by Sebastian Karcher — Reposted by Veli‐Matti Karhulahti
There are very little norms about this in social science IME. At least in my areas of it, industry funding is, comparatively, so rare, that it doesn't figure prominently in training or guidance, so people literally don't know whether to disclose affiliation or funding source twice.
I honestly don't know enough about industry research in engineering to have an opinion on that, but I'd guess the intuition that it's laxer in social science is probably correct.
Depends on the nature & timing of funding (did they fund my lab the last 5 years or did they give me 10k in 2018) & content of paper (does it affect company interest) but beyond that I'd disclose & check with handling editor.
I think A and B are about comparable levels of COI, C is less severe.
I think A and B are about comparable levels of COI, C is less severe.
A question of perspective, though, no? I'd argue that the more relevant QRP here is evaluating a researcher by looking at their citation count. Authorship definitions are arbitrary and vary significantly by (sub)field already.
Fascinating story -- I'd add that the issue here is breaking bibliometrics in fields that otherwise care about them. Physicists have been writing papers with 1000+ authors for years and no one is bothered by it.
I wrapped up my scattered comments on IHME into a blog post
🔗 ikashnitsky.phd/2025/ihme-bibl
tl;dr: avoid getting unwarranted co-authorship recognition and do apply some sort of contribution-weighted thinking when evaluating someone's publication record based on bare numbers
🔗 ikashnitsky.phd/2025/ihme-bibl
tl;dr: avoid getting unwarranted co-authorship recognition and do apply some sort of contribution-weighted thinking when evaluating someone's publication record based on bare numbers
Beyond Fraud: How IHME Distorts Academic Metrics
Dr. Ilya Kashnitsky is a demographer @ Statistics Denmark.
ikashnitsky.phd
The evidence for bike helmets for kids is actually hugely stronger because of the types of accidents they tend to get into.
I actually agree that wearing a helmet is a good idea. I wear one 99% of the time. I do think a culture where people feel entitled to tell cyclists to wear a helmet (and they absolutely do, also for non-mayoral candidates) is bad, though.
I agree with that. Part of the reason of course is that Americans don't grow up cycling nearly as much, especially not in traffic. That's of course mainly due to infrastructure, but I absolutely think the culture of fear mentioned in the TED talk plays a role, and helmet emphasis is part of that.
Just putting the obligatory Utrecht before & after photo here... against a politics of hopelessness 😉
I'd add to that, legally passing cars on the right and legally driving past parked cars... but yes, that's mostly my point. People here talk about helmets WAY disproportionate to their actual role in bike safety. Even if you take individual actions by bikers, helmets aren't top 3, prob not top 5
Right, but that's also not a casual story -- it's undoubtedly true that bikeshare riders (esp on ebikes & scooters) are much worse drivers & that they tend to not wear helmets, but one doesn't cause the other.
2/2 There's also evidence that emphasizing helmets decreases cycling which in turn decreases safety & political will to improve infrastructure.
T
Qualitatively, the architects of bike friendly cities support that view, e.g. Copenhagen: youtu.be/07o-TASvIxY?...
T
Qualitatively, the architects of bike friendly cities support that view, e.g. Copenhagen: youtu.be/07o-TASvIxY?...
TEDxCopenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet
YouTube video by TEDx Talks
youtu.be
It's certainly not a simple story, but there's good evidence for trade offs of all kinds. This is one of my favorite articles e.g. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
1/2
1/2
It's individually rational to wear a helmet, but there's good reason to believe that systematically the emphasis on helmets (which have a relatively small effect) is counter productive. It's not a coincidence that major cycling cities w low fatalities have low % of helmet wearing.
The number of people (supporters!) telling him to wear a helmet in replies is insane. By all means people, wear a helmet (you _are_ biking, yes?) but FFS leave other cyclists alone.
What other cities are you comparing MPLS to? Obv NYC is in a different league, but other places w some walking - SF, Philly, Chicago - all have better infra & higher density.
You can't look at neighborhoods in isolation, imo: e.g., can't take light rail btw many of the ones you mention
You can't look at neighborhoods in isolation, imo: e.g., can't take light rail btw many of the ones you mention
The only university slogan I remember is Warwick's "This is Beyond" and that's because everyone here was trashing it (& not just for the typo in their banner ad), so that's got to be up there.
bsky.app/profile/mich...
bsky.app/profile/eve....
bsky.app/profile/mich...
bsky.app/profile/eve....
The difference great flour makes took me way too long to figure out. I rolled my eyes at this New Yorker piece www.newyorker.com/magazine/202... until I found the local small farmer operated mill (Farmer Ground)