Aquaphor's the best thing I've found so far. Just takes a tiny bit, so whatever's left over on my fingertip gets rubbed into my knuckles which are probably also chapped.
Netflix's _How to Change Your Mind_ (based on a book with same name, I believe) has been a nice digestible look at psychedelics' uses in various therapies, now and in the past, if you're interested in that kinda thing.
(And, off-topic, but the scrollbar on the left here is interesting. Looks like it's a LTR block overflowing a RTL block. I don't think I like it, but, interesting!)
Ah, in that case: Still seems kinda risky? Like, what if someone else submits a solution for the ticket I'm in the middle of? What if my solution is valid, but not accepted? What if it's incorrect, but in some subtle way that won't be discovered until next week?
Production work on an unfamiliar project warrants some discussion. I think in general I wouldn't make any significant contributions to a project before talking with the people running it and making sure we're on the same page.
And apologies for the initial curt reply—asking people who are looking for a job to work for free sets me off a bit. Algora looks like a really nice platform!
Thanks for your comment and reply! Very valid points.
> what if someone else submits a solution for the ticket I'm in the middle of?
You're right, the bounty should display the number of people working on it and when they started. That should be a feature - thanks!
> What if my solution is valid, but not accepted?
Very valid point again. I'd say it depends on the specification. When we did it https://algora.io/algora/challenge/bounties/1 we specified that we will reward the best submissions and not all of them. And we did only reward 3/5 PRs. Another early user chose to award all submissions. As long as it's specified and clear, people can decide accordingly.
> Production work on an unfamiliar project warrants some discussion
The past few months a recent graduate has been contributing to Algora before starting her job at Snap this summer, and we never actually spoke! Of course, there's plenty of discussion in issue & PR comment threads. The same goes for most open source software contributors around the world. But I see where you're coming from! It might come down to sufficient documentation.
ISeeChange is looking for a back-end developer to own our API (Node.js and PostgreSQL) and devops (AWS and Kubernetes) work. Upcoming features will involve machine learning, GIS, and setting up more robust access to our data for clients.
We're a small but growing company; the dev team is myself on the front end, a data scientist working on machine learning and analysis, and some part-time support from the devs who initially built the platform, so there's a lot of opportunity to help shape the company. Our broad mission is to connect folks with their environments, specifically with regard to climate change.
Disappointing that all the images are built on the same shade of white skin. You're leaving out a whole lot of folks who are already underrepresented in a whole lot of research. I think it'd be helpful to vary the skin tones shown, or stick to a medium-tone (enough to be ambiguous) grayscale.
Thank you very much for your feedback and time! We know that we do not cover aspects like skin tone - and we would love to somehow implement that. The problem is that to get the best statistical results, the "decision-influencing" differences between images ideally have to be reduced to just the exact condition (e.g. different breast size). Every other additional variation (e.g. skin tone) would "blur" the data.
As we need 88 picture pairs to cover all required breast conditions anyways, it is practically impossible to take any other aspects into the survey (e.g. skin tone) without completely exploding the number of pictures and blurring the data. So we apologize for that "inconvenience" - but we haven't found a better solution.
Thank you very much for your support and feedback!
I wouldn't even call it white skin, actually. It's not really a flesh color; breaking out the Digital Color Meter, it's slightly warmer than a grey.
Then there's the way light reflects off of it, some of it looking rough or dirty in a way skin usually doesn't, with some parts brightly lit as if by one very bright source. (I think glare explains some of it.) The breasts themselves often look brighter, and sometimes cleaner, than everything else; occasionally they do match the surrounding skin, which naively looks a lot better until I realize I have to abstract out the lighting.
Even if you can't vary the skin tones, I think that using more uniform lighting would help. And maybe something dumb like spraypainting the main body a mono-color would work, although that might make it more complex to show scars.
Another option is to have a 2-4 skin tones and just randomly select one for each respondent. It's introducing another variable but presumably you could collapse over it.
Giant thanks for making this. A suggestion, though: the "remote" switch should probably imply "or". A search for jobs in Chicago OR remote would be more more useful than Chicago AND remote. The latter currently returns Chicago-based companies that hire remotely.
Personally I prefer the AND approach. For example, if I'm interested in working for a company in CA but in a remote position.
I could see the argument for OR, but it would be confusing to me that flipping on the remote switch included non-remote positions when a city is included in the query.
Nice! I worked out a little proof of concept a while back for a pan-and-zoom wrapper around any ol' HTML, if that's of any interest: https://github.com/brian-c/react-zoomable
I haven't tried it with SVG, but I imagine it'd work fine.
You can probably use 90% of React's functionality with like, four or five functions and four or five component lifestyle methods. What's not minimal about that?
I've had one of my package names transferred away from me with no warning, presumably after some period of inactivity. Npm as a repository seems to have gone totally insane, and I don't think I'll be publishing there anymore. I'll recommend people install my modules from a tag in the repo.
`curl ... | sh` installations don't really bother me. The scripts tend to be short and commented, or at least readable. Sure beats running an opaque .pkg installer, which invariably asks for your password (presumably for no reason) and installs god-knows-what all over your hard drive.
Yes, but if you're doing curl ... | sh then you're not vetting the script you're running before you run it. If you were, you'd be running curl and sh as separate commands.
