Is it just me, or do the Russians seem to have really good intelligence since Ratcliffe visited Moscow?
- munitions depot in Kyiv
- office of SBU chief
- Johnson's and Patraeus' train
Remote
Boris Barbour
@BorisBarbour@mastodon.social
mastodon 4.8.0-nightly.2026-10-06Neuroscience (CNRS, ENS); pubpeer.com; referee3.org. Views my own. This is my only social media account.
1429 Followers
2785 Following
31 Posts
Joined October 30, 2022
Personal website:
Work website:
PubPeer:
Dems should bring a bill to distribute $5000 to everybody now. Make it budget neutral with a one-off tax on billionaires.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/10/trump-5000-midterm-cash-dividend-response
Oui, mais encore mieux, faites que la sécu couvre tout pour tout le monde... [Edit: c'est à peu près le but de la pétition.]
Test your browser's fingerprint and weep.
https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
In my case, "at least 18.2 bits of information", but that seems to be an underestimate based on being unique amongst the recent visitors (~300k = 2^18). If they were independent, the information sources available on me would sum to about 75 bits).
Less than 8 bits of information with the Tor browser.
Browser manufacturers should offer a reduced fingerprint option (rather than only trying to block fingerprinting sites).
RE: https://mstdn.social/@hkrn/117233960506961536
Requiring the possiblity to opt-out of algorithmic feeds is a lot more interesting than forced identification of everybody.
Replying to
@StefanEJones@dice.camp
Velociraptor = Distanceraptor/Time...
Otherwise the "raptors" would cancel.
Replying to
@jschauma@mstdn.social
Instead of being routed through Substack and Google and God knows where else.
Donc la peine d'iinéligibilité c'est injuste si on devient inéligible ?
My pundits are synchronised in thought and deed.
Just abolish all political donations and fund parties publicly.
Replying to
@dsilverman@mastodon.social
I tried to reply as if I had been taken in, but what/whoever is running them is not really up to holding a conversation.
Replying to
@kc@social.coophttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2002845
(I haven't provided logs because of concerns about leaking sensitive data and the difficulty of catching it before a bunch of sensitive tabs get opened.]
Restarting Firefox seems to solve it temporarily.
Replying to
@dginev@mathstodon.xyz @briannosek@nerdculture.de
Not bad.
(I don't much like the common "sleuth" either).
Expert analyst? Forensic analyst? Forensic reviewer? In-depth reviewer?
Replying to
@richvn@mastodon.social
Anyway, just one more reason for journals to know who their authors are.
Replying to
@richardsever
Is there public information indicating roughly how much is needed and how much you'd like institutions to contribute?
A traitor in the White House. Incredible.
https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/midweek-update-17-the-most-dangerous
Replying to
@saltywizard@beige.party
"Your browser has a nearly-unique fingerprint"... Likely "Vivaldi" would suffice to identify you.
Replying to
@steveroyle@biologists.social @richvn@mastodon.social @ScienceSurf@mastodon.social
Many different types of comments are allowed on PubPeer. However, there are a lot of fake and dumb papers out there and they mostly end up on PubPeer. Just take a look at our "firehose" page:
https://pubpeer.com/recent
So for a quick and dirty analysis, @richvn@mastodon.social's suggestion of comment=problem is not so unreasonable. One could refine by estimating the proportion of serious comments and maybe even looking for different proportions across journals.
Replying to
@pvanheus@mstdn.science @drsimevans@mastodon.energy
It says TWh in the title. If it's exploitable energy, that still raises the question of what else is rising (nuclear, hydro?).