Is there any way to read this with a gift link or something...

What line of work was she in? How awful

Product management

So do you mainly use this on your laptop?

I was curious if you incorporate the mobile version too, I try to with git based syncing between the two.

Is git-based syncing something that's built into Obsidian? I'd imagine it's awkward setting up git management on a smartphone outside of Obsidian?

There is a git sync community plugin and it works well on phones.

Is it the plugin « Obsidian Git »?

https://github.com/Vinzent03/obsidian-git

Yup! Thats the one - works great.

I use Working Copy on my iphone to push / pull from my git repo

Same on laptop

Obsidian vault is just the directory where the git repo is

"Science of Science" is a good book / overview of this field!

Research should require pre-registration like clinical trials so others have visibility into failed outcomes

As a researcher that does mostly numerics, I really hope not. This would be a huge bureaucratization of scientific exploration and would slow down progress. I understand why it’s necessary in some fields like medicine, but I don’t think it’s worth the trade off in say theoretical physics.

Imagine the corresponding concept for programmers: you are not allowed to sell or share any software you create unless you pre-register a detailed plan for what code you will write and how it will be used before you write the first line of code. Pretty sure that would reduce the innovation going on in public GitHub repos a lot :)

I think that not knowing the null results of others also slows down innovation, because you never know if an area of interest / whitespace in a field is 1) because there's something there or 2) because others tried, failed, and didn't publish.

Maybe pre-registering isn't the right answer; I'm sure there are practical hurdles, but the problem to be solved still remains the same (visibility into the graveyard of failed experiments to improve the rate of innovation).

Who would track this registration and would it require approvals now?. Then what if you changed your current research because you have personal reasons, change of plans, didn't see it fitting....etc. How would you handle these situations? And why are you introducing MITMs.

In basic level, maybe some publications that print these papers would take the registrations, as a precondition to publishing them?

It's not like it couldn't be gamed, but maybe it would incentivize people to also publish null results.

>incentivize people to also publish null results

This will hardly achieve this goal as you basically make things harder, and now you are introducing more overhead. The main reason why people don't like publishing null results is that it hurts them in funding applications. The current system works with mentality, we shouldn't fund someone who don't get positive results. It is better to allocate this somewhere else. Most of the problems with research can be tracked down to funding issues and practices. But these are political issues, so people try to argue about other things because it is easy.

All good points- I was imagining that from a funder's perspective, knowing null results is actually important to guaranteeing future positive results / being strategic about what is worth funding in (versus what is destined to fail because others failed and they just didn't know). Not sure how it would work in practice; might be bumpy but certainly seems worthwhile / not impossible.

Is this similar to single threaded owner (sto) models? I'm curious how they handle things like career management and promotions but this structure overall seems great

Check out https://www.booklet.group/ (my friend is working on it)!

Publishers did indeed help create this mess, although it's not just them. Funding, tenure, hiring etc. is all driven by things like citation counts.

We've come full circle. Now do RAG on this!

There is "memory" now available. And agree with you