Frogodendron

@Frogodendron@beehaw.org

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Mornings⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Almost everyone I know in chemistry. Almost no one I know in physics. Things are weird that way.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nature is blunt.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’d say (a couple years ago) the service is also supposed to be access via DOI in perpetuity and presence in all the relevant databases, so that’s gotta cost some money for the reassurance as opposed to a pdf file “hosted” on Google Drive. But after Heterocycles fiasco I am not sure about that anymore.

  Well, and some mark that this is likely a valid piece of research if it’s at www.reputablejournal.com as opposed to this likely being half-baked something at www.somerxiv.com or this likely being absolute lunacy at www.anyothersite.com.

  Still, yes, billions in revenue vs millions spent essentially on essentially simple tasks like hosting and cataloguing (plus matching authors to reviewers I guess, though with how often I am asked to find them myself it’s doubtful) does not compute indeed.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Recognize the mother of Wifi⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s a brief five-minute Google search for me, but it seems that everyone has problems with both reading comprehension and/or causality evaluation.

  I think it’s great that such a patent exists and that the technology was invented by her. Yet, even checking the frequency-hopping spread spectrum page on Wikipedia shows that it was only one invention in the long series of discoveries and technologies, which was neither the first, nor the most crucial of them, and this particular option seems to be one of the sources of inspiration for later technologies (along with a bunch of predecessors).

  The rest of the criticisms regarding the choice of Wi-Fi over Bluetooth is already mentioned in the comments of others.

  I really don’t want to minimise the contribution of an individual towards the development of sophisticated technologies, and I have zero qualms about this individual being a woman, I just think that the presentation oversells the achievement which might cause additional mockery from those who do think that women (and actresses at that!) have no business in anything serious.

  What I actually find impressive, however, is that a woman, at the time where women’s rights were far from what they are today (just read about her first marriage, that must have been hard), could be both an actress, an inventor, a producer, all while leading quite a bitter life it seems. Not many can boast that.

  I guess where I’m going with that is that she, as many others, may be best praised as an example of a complex person that had many achievements as well as many hardships. Using her as a basis of “Didn’t think an actress could do something worthwhile? Gotcha!” statement seems a bit shallow.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A Civil Resolution⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Ah, that is a valid approach but not as entertaining as arguments consisting of “I need this more!” and “I’ve spent two years of my life for this article!” Speaking as a spectator.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Rest in Plasma⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  And if those three are mostly hydrocarbons, prepare to enter the state of war.