Current status http://status.fireden.net/ Hidden site now up at http://ydt6jy2ng3s3xg2e.onion/

Threads by latest replies - Page 14

(27 replies)
No.10494788 ViewReplyOriginalReport
>"For too long, many scientists’ careers have been built around the pursuit of a single statistic: p<.05."

>"In many scientific disciplines, that’s the threshold beyond which study results can be declared “statistically significant,” which is often interpreted to mean that it’s unlikely the results were a fluke, a result of random chance."

>"Though this isn’t what it actually means in practice. “Statistical significance” is too often misunderstood — and misused. That’s why a trio of scientists writing in Nature this week are calling “for the entire concept of statistical significance to be abandoned.”"

>"Their biggest argument: “Statistically significant” or “not statistically significant” is too often easily misinterpreted to mean either “the study worked” or “the study did not work.” A “true” effect can sometimes yield a p-value of greater than .05. And we know from recent years that science is rife with false-positive studies that achieved values of less than .05 (read my explainer on the replication crisis in social science for more)."

>"The Nature commentary authors argue that the math is not the problem. Instead, it’s human psychology. Bucketing results into “statistically significant” and “statistically non-significant,” they write, leads to a too black-and-white approach to scrutinizing science."

What does /sci/ think about the proposal?
22 posts and 2 images omitted
(152 replies)

What's Your Major? - Is This Image Accurate?

No.10487473 ViewReplyLast 50OriginalReport
147 posts and 13 images omitted
(14 replies)
No.10497228 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Facts are human arrogance, we barely know a fraction.
list of facts:
guns go bang
necks snap easy
people die when I hit them with my car
9 posts and 1 image omitted
(10 replies)

Chemical "grenade" filler

No.10497485 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Chemistrybros needed. /k/ here, but that's irrelevant
HYPOTHETICALLY, how would one go about *SAFELY* creating a solid, toxic chemical compound that disperses from a metal canister in a gaseous form when activated, akin to the filler inside an M18 smoke grenade? Kinda like making Chloramine gas with bleach and ammonia, but in solid form.
I'm not actually gonna do it, but I wondered what the most efficient "recipe" would be if I were to hypothetically make one.
5 posts omitted
(10 replies)

Shit and piss on simulation theory here

No.10496421 ViewReplyOriginalReport
seething schizos incoming
5 posts omitted
(5 replies)
No.10496323 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Are Max Tegmart and Jerry Nadler the same person?
https://youtu.be/bJpIclDmi2M
https://youtu.be/6XzIuF_NdlE
(29 replies)

Nootropics

No.10494610 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Feeling tired, can't focus, feel unmotivated, but have to study for a Master Degree admission exam.

Given that I work Monday to Friday from 8 AM to 6 PM and spend additional 3-4 hours in transportation, I need to be efficient with my free time on nights and weekend. Currently, I feel unable to do so.

I have read about Nootropics. Are they good? Have you personally tried them? Are their benefits worth the secondary effects? Which one do you recommend that you can buy easily without a prescription?
24 posts omitted
(5 replies)
(261 replies)
No.10471979 ViewReplyLast 50OriginalReport
How true is the "smart but lazy" meme?
256 posts and 22 images omitted
(27 replies)

unsolvable math problem

No.10494448 ViewReplyOriginalReport
*blocks you're path*
22 posts and 2 images omitted