Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: Busy with the PhD 43

Journal by smittyoneeach
Finally convinced the advisor that I need an ESRI server license to take the approach he recommended. Figured out how to do a distance raster in https://gdal.org/. Bite me, Jack Dangermond!

Politically, props to damn_registrars for recommending DailyKos for my RSS. Unlike the BablylonBee, DK is unconsciously funny. News to the loons about J6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjqR_rcucRE

Anyway, do participate in the election next month. You're a paying customer. Choose wisely to minimize cost.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Busy with the PhD More

Busy with the PhD

Comments Filter:

  • Soon we can call you Doctor Smith? Cool...

    Cheers

    • It gives me a lot to be humble about. One is confronted with the reality that, sure, we can pile up data and throw statistics at it, and possible be repeatable with the null hypothesis: however, actually *meaning* anything with all that noise is another discussion entirely.

      • Yeah but, that's what the machine is supposed to do, right? Display the furlongs per fortnight in a meaningful fashion?

        Did you mention the PhD in a previous journal?

        • Yeah. I ran a script all night that produced a 12Gb table of points in my state at 100m resolution and the FM radio station power received at those points. The next step is to compare that to precinct data for election results.

          But I probably need to produce individual tables on a per-precinct basis, so that the data show up in the GIS somewhat reasonably.

          • If you bury yourself in details you might cloud the big picture.

            What are you building? An odds maker machine?

            • This is a look at FM radio station footprints [fcc.gov] vis-a-vis precincts in my state. The effort will be to compare station formats to election results.

              Which is sort of daft in general, but highly interesting. How do you attempt to quantify the amount of talk radio reception at a certain point?

              These station footprints are like some mad pancake buffet. How to manage the problem is more interesting than the problem itself. I fancy open source tools like Spatialite, but the advisor is an ESRI type.
  • And as I said before I really hope you show vastly better techniques of data analysis and source mining in real life than you have shown here. What you have routinely tried to pass off as factual here would be quickly and resoundingly shot down in any academic defense. It's not at all a left/right matter, it's a matter of facts versus conspiratorial bullshit.

    I don't wish for you to fail. I wish for you to start understanding how to interpret data.
    • One does not take /., or social media in general, seriously.

      I'm nearly interested in the general field of your dissertation, though not at any resolution that would risk the anonymity.

      What you have routinely tried to pass off as factual here would be quickly and resoundingly shot down in any academic defense.

      Please flex and puff out your chest and give yourself 50 victory laps for this observation.

      I don't wish for you to fail. I wish for you to start understanding how to interpret data.

      I hope your coping mechanisms are in place for the election in just over two weeks.

      • One does not take /., or social media in general, seriously.

        Perhaps you have a similar view to Fusta's, in assuming that people do not post here what they actually mean. I'm sorry to counter your assumptions if you are in that camp.

        I'm nearly interested in the general field of your dissertation, though not at any resolution that would risk the anonymity.

        Let's just say I'm from a compound STEM field (ie, the intersection of two disciplines), and one that often when I tell people the fields of my degrees they often say "wow" and worry that they'll have nothing at all to discuss with me.

        What you have routinely tried to pass off as factual here would be quickly and resoundingly shot down in any academic defense.

        Please flex and puff out your chest and give yourself 50 victory laps for this observation.

        My point is that one cannot defend a thesis with statements of "in 6 years Michael Jackson will rise

        • assuming that people do not post here what they actually mean. I'm sorry to counter your assumptions if you are in that camp.

          I've told you exactly what I mean: Jesus is the meaning of life. Pretty much your entire output has underscored that for me in the negative [wikipedia.org].

          A thesis needs to be defended with actual facts, which are the opposite of all the arguments you have put forward for the past few years.

          Once, I may have afforded your troll more than a yawn.

          on your team everyone running for office has already established that they will

          You have gone, in the space of a single reply, from an insistence that ideas be "defended with actual facts" to sweeping prophetic claims about "on your team everyone".

          Now, like I was saying: this is social media. If I did not pray for you, and took both you and social media seriously, then I would be at risk of di

          • A bonzai tree serves only as decoration, produces no fruit or shade

            We just have to make the government serve the public

          • assuming that people do not post here what they actually mean. I'm sorry to counter your assumptions if you are in that camp.

            I've told you exactly what I mean: Jesus is the meaning of life.

            I have never doubted that you believe that. It is hard to square the circle of you believing that while also whole-heartedly following the first non-believer POTUS of our nation, but that doesn't seem to bother you.

            A thesis needs to be defended with actual facts, which are the opposite of all the arguments you have put forward for the past few years.

            Once, I may have afforded your troll more than a yawn.

            No thesis committee worth its salt would accept that as a response from a candidate who has been asked to provide support for an argument.

            on your team everyone running for office has already established that they will

            to sweeping prophetic claims about "on your team everyone".

            While "everyone" does seem to be a sweeping statement, I have yet to hear of a single GOP candidate answer in the affirmative when asked if they would acce

            • It is hard to square the circle of you believing that while also whole-heartedly following the first non-believer POTUS

              It is both (a) impossible to know the ultimate state of another soul, and (b) really lame to pretend otherwise.

              No thesis committee

              Social media is a feces committee. Not the same thing.

              While "everyone" does seem to be a sweeping statement, I have yet to hear of a single GOP candidate answer in the affirmative when asked if they would accept a loss at the ballot box in November

              Stay pitiful. https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/10/25/hillary-clinton-delivers-blueanon-rant-saying-republicans-are-going-to-literally-steal-the-election-n648659 [redstate.com]

              Here's this weird idea: clean poll books; living, legal voters; securely casting one (1) valid ballot each; promptly & properly counted; with chain of custody at all points. Now,

              • It is hard to square the circle of you believing that while also whole-heartedly following the first non-believer POTUS

                It is both (a) impossible to know the ultimate state of another soul, and (b) really lame to pretend otherwise.

                You provide that defense uniquely for just one individual. When individuals who are not from your team claim to be Christians you question and doubt them instead. Your partisanship is showing very plainly there.

                No thesis committee

                Social media is a feces committee. Not the same thing.

                Cute response there. I'm pretty sure you started this JE saying you're working on your PhD; I was actually being topical here.

                While "everyone" does seem to be a sweeping statement, I have yet to hear of a single GOP candidate answer in the affirmative when asked if they would accept a loss at the ballot box in November

                https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/10/25/hillary-clinton-delivers-blueanon-rant-saying-republicans-are-going-to-literally-steal-the-election-n648659

                That's not a meaningful response. I stated I have yet to hear of a GOP candidate for anything, anywhere, who has said they would accept a loss at the ballot box as the

                • You provide that defense uniquely for just one individual. When individuals who are not from your team claim to be Christians you question and doubt them instead. Your partisanship is showing very plainly there.

                  So, we must focus microscopically on spiritual matters, but, as your response [slashdot.org] on the Fetterman post shows, medial matters seem to be off-limits?

                  One might have once been confused, but then the consistent principle became clear: your task is to silence dissent.

                  I'm pretty sure you started this JE saying you're working on your PhD

                  As an aside to explaining my absence, yes.

                  You're also conveniently overlooking the fact that the only people to date to have been convicted of fraudulent voting in the 2020 election

                  I really think that the word "convicted" needs an award for its level of effort in that sentence. Bravo for constructing a formulation that isn't untrue, while reeking to heaven. You win a zombie President and

                  • You provide that defense uniquely for just one individual. When individuals who are not from your team claim to be Christians you question and doubt them instead. Your partisanship is showing very plainly there.

                    So, we must focus microscopically on spiritual matters

                    You brought up your spirituality. I didn't really see it relating to your thesis but you wanted to discuss it so I mentioned how it is another thing you apply with great partisan precision.

                    as your response on the Fetterman post shows, medial matters seem to be off-limits?

                    I will presume you meant medical here, rather than medial. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

                    On the topic of medical matters I will point out that this is another thing you are happily applying vastly different rules depending on who is - or is not - on your team. Trump had very questionable medical records, as was po

                    • What a field of red herrings. Not engaging with any of this mess, sorry.
                    • While you may use your incontestable and boundless wisdom to claim otherwise, never once did I seek to silence you. Similarly no pride will I take in you opting to retreat from the discussion.

                      All I sought here was to encourage you to think about how you apply rules around here. I pointed out multiple cases in just this thread where you intentionally and happily apply different rules for those on your team and those who are not on your team. If we circle back to then talk about what a thesis defense c

                    • never once did I seek to silence you

                      I would qualitatively rate ~90% of your replies as "variations on the theme of silencing". Very much a broad-spectrum assault. From a Nietzschean perspective, a not unhelpful experience.

                    • never once did I seek to silence you

                      I would qualitatively rate ~90% of your replies as "variations on the theme of silencing".

                      You're entitled to your opinion of my writing but I will tell you that unfortunately your opinion has led you to an incorrect conclusion. I have not once sought to silence you, in spite of your claim to the contrary. I have asked you to show examples of where you thought I did this and not once have you shown an example of me actually doing that.

                      At that you could not even find a case of a "variation[s] on the theme of silencing", as not even when you stretch it that far can you find an actual example

                    • I have asked you to show examples of where you thought I did this and not once have you shown an example of me actually doing that.

                      In this particular thread, for example, you brush aside my point that this social media is not to be taken seriously and start acting like you're the Monkey Fighting PhD committee.

                      To which I say: you're so totally in character, to, and through, your denials about attempting to silence pretty much everyone.

                    • I have asked you to show examples of where you thought I did this and not once have you shown an example of me actually doing that.

                      In this particular thread, for example, you brush aside my point that this social media is not to be taken seriously and start acting like you're the Monkey Fighting PhD committee.

                      In so doing I asked you for more discussion and information, not less. That is very much the opposite of what you are accusing me of. If you for some reason incorrectly interpreted that to be a request for silence, that was your misreading of the statement.

                      I'll be as clear as I can now. When I ask you for more information - including when I point out that your conspiracies are lacking supporting information - I am asking you for more information. That is not in any way, shape, or form a request for

                    • In so doing I asked you for more discussion and information, not less. That is very much the opposite of what you are accusing me of.

                      If you want some discussion, your attention is drawn to a newer JE. Perhaps you missed it: https://slashdot.org/journal/3502787/from-the-purely-intellectual-viewpoint-im-an-extra-special-pleader [slashdot.org]

                      You have yet again completely and utterly failed to provide even a single example of me doing that. You chose to misread my statements, for reasons that are not the least bit clear.

                      I have provided you a specific, proximal example, and you explicitly tell me that I did not do this, and that any misinterpretation is 100% on my end. You have succeeded in underscoring my point. Thank you.

                    • You have yet again completely and utterly failed to provide even a single example of me doing that. You chose to misread my statements, for reasons that are not the least bit clear.

                      I have provided you a specific, proximal example, and you explicitly tell me that I did not do this, and that any misinterpretation is 100% on my end.

                      Your "example" is based on your own faulty assumption. You assumption includes you assuming that you know my intentions, and I am telling you that your assumption is wrong because the intentions you are trying to place on me are not accurate.

                      I then followed up specifically asking you for more information. That could hardly be further from asking for your silence.

                    • and I am telling you that your assumption is wrong because the intentions you are trying to place on me are not accurate.

                      And I am telling you that I am:
                      * placing no assumptions on you (mind-reading being something of an impossibility); rather,
                      * describing what arrived at the receiver; * feeding back to you (and I'll venture that I'm not alone in this) that interactions with you have all the charm and appeal of an IRS audit.

                      One finds oneself hoping that your in-person charm excels that of your /. persona.

                    • Your description of

                      what arrived at the receiver

                      Is based on your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. I have in times past incorrectly interpreted your writing, and when you have corrected me I have apologized and accepted your correction for it. For some reason here when you have incorrectly interpreted my writing you have refused to do the same; rather you have insisted that for some reason your interpretation should be accepted over the statement of the author himself.

                      This rather soundly discredits your claim of

                      placing nor assumptions on you

                      As you

                    • It seems pretty clear that you don't appreciate humor from people who don't agree with your philosophy

                      Beg pardon, sir: have you been attempting humor? If the character you're attempting to portray is a sort of academic version of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_M*A*S*H_characters#Frank_Burns [wikipedia.org], then we really need to get you in for an Oscar. #NailingIt.

                    • You conveniently passed over

                      Your description of

                      what arrived at the receiver

                      Is based on your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. I have in times past incorrectly interpreted your writing, and when you have corrected me I have apologized and accepted your correction for it. For some reason here when you have incorrectly interpreted my writing you have refused to do the same; rather you have insisted that for some reason your interpretation should be accepted over the statement of the author himself.

                      Which as I pointed out rather soundly discredits your claim of

                      placing nor assumptions on you

                      As you very plainly are doing so.

                      It does leave me to wonder why you would ever expect me to take your writing seriously when you insist that you have license to twist my words to mean whatever you want them to mean, while denying any such license to anyone who is not on your team.

                    • To review, it appears that we both feel our meaning is ignored, and our words twisted by each other.

                    • To review, it appears that we both feel our meaning is ignored, and our words twisted by each other.

                      I have demonstrated where you have ignored the meaning of my words and applied your own. This is not about my feelings, this is about you disregarding the meanings of words and inserting what you want to see.

                      Can you show a single time where I did that with your words? I have asked you for clarification before, and any time that I misread your words I accepted your clarification. You have repeatedly refused to extend the same courtesy back to me.

                    • Oh, yes, obviously: all friction is 100% on my end.

                      [chef's kiss]
                    • You could actually respond to the question I asked before.

                      To review, it appears that we both feel our meaning is ignored, and our words twisted by each other.

                      I have demonstrated where you have ignored the meaning of my words and applied your own. This is not about my feelings, this is about you disregarding the meanings of words and inserting what you want to see.

                      Can you show a single time where I did that with your words? I have asked you for clarification before, and any time that I misread your words I accepted your clarification. You have repeatedly refused to extend the same courtesy back to me.

  • Due to my manager having an overdeveloped sense of humor, I've spent the last 6 years working on the Project health Dashboard- an internal tool at Intel that tracks change requests, requirements, test plans, test executions, and defects for validation teams and their customers, about a third of Intel consumes data from my poor overloaded SQL server (not even clustered).

    • I use spatialite <url:https://www.gaia-gis.it/fossil/libspatialite/index> extensively. I was using <url:https://gdal.org/> to compute a distance raster, and then convert the pixels back to power intensity. Worked fine for one transmitter. Then, trying to do the run of ~650 in my data for my state, it completely barfed.<br/><br/>
      The database connection has to be treated somewhat reverently, and it was needful to go back and load up the goods for the calculation in a careful, serial ma

      • I was already doing that- the current problem is our customer base has grown and we've lost control over scheduling of ETLs. It doesn't help that we have a 1 hour ETL SLA. A service level agreement that I'm currently breaking for one customer whose ETL takes over 2 hours.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with a lot of self-made men is that they worship their creator.

Close