Submitting to the ERC with full confidence

i like it

@odedrechavi.bsky.social the meal to end all meals!!

Progress in academia

IMO, the real cost of low success rates is not the time wasted on reviews but the time researchers collectively waste developing grant proposals that will not be funded. 1/2

This is really bad. The ERC is the lifeline of many labs. The letter from the ERC says “the only way is to reduce applications” No! It's the wrong direction.
Use AI to assist review. It’s not perfect, but it allows more proposals to be evaluated, and it should support, not replace, human reviewers.

This is really bad. The ERC is the lifeline of many labs. The letter from the ERC says “the only way is to reduce applications” is the wrong direction!
Use AI to assist review. It’s not perfect, but it allows more proposals to be evaluated, and it should support, not replace, human reviewers.

BTW there's now a prize: coller-dolittle-24.sites.tau.ac.il

including Laurence J. Peter, whose version “Competition in academia is so vicious because the stakes are so small” I used above.

And, by the way, it’s somewhat poetic that when Henry Kissinger claimed he had “formulated the rule that the intensity of academic politics is in inverse proportion to the importance of the subject,” he failed to reference Sayre (it’s known as Sayre’s law), as well as others who had said it before,

Lately I introduced @qedscience.bsky.social to colleagues who asked me "don't you fear sending your papers and research projects to an AI?!"
To which I answered "I've been doing so to anonymous humans, potentially badly intentioned for 20 years so NO"

The fate of academic careers is decided in the dark, and the process is political, not based on merit or reason (“so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small”).
AI is a black box? Come on... I’m a million times more afraid of humans than I am of AI, and in academia that’s doubly true.

Their journey was much shorter and ended much better than the journey a typical paper goes through before getting published

Indeed! Thanks!

All the forensic linguistics needed to reveal my identity as a reviewer reduces to counting how many times I write “however”

When it's your time to present in lab meeting and you don't have new results to show

“I did everything” “We’ll figure authorship later”

What's the physiological relevance?

Nice! I am willing to pay good money for one of these shirts :)

nice :)

How did I miss this interview? @aemonten.bsky.social also memed it already in 2023. Replication means its true :)

🤟

absolutely :)

😅

i knew it! 😅

The singularity is near

I wonder if this reflects your experience @ardemp.bskyverified.social @carolynbertozzi.bskyverified.social

Nobel laureate at a poster session

Every PI

Reviewer #2: “The aims are not well defined and the impact is unclear, what specific question is being addressed?"