Thread: A look back at the top 10 most-read @undarkmag stories published in 2020, starting with…

#10: I had not personally heard of the Voynich manuscript — a cryptic, centuries old “text” that still baffles researchers — until super-smart @jillianefoley brought this story idea to us. If you don’t know about this puzzle, prepare to be fascinated:

#9: A riveting review by @Svobodster of @jameshamblin's book "Clean" and our collective obsession with "surface notions of cleanliness."

#8: My personal favorite headline of the year, which I continue to argue contains a gift to any budding garage band looking for a name. (You’re welcome). Story by the always excellent

#7: Written all the way back on April 16th, @kategammon’s smart look at the anti-vaxx community’s then-percolating suspicions around the hunt for a Covid-19 vaccine seems eerily prescient as vaccine roll-outs get underway now.

A serious reasoning error that is particularly common among educated people is to argue that if a study hasn't been done on a particular question we have 'no data', and therefore no basis on which to form beliefs or act.

This is incorrect and dangerous. 1/

There is almost always a reference class we can use to make a sensible prediction, and often we can reason about the causal mechanism directly.

To see how this is clearly wrong, consider these two extreme cases: 2/

a. Before a vaccine trial is conducted we have 'no data' on how likely it is to work.

But we can estimate the likelihood just fine! To start with we can just check the base rate of all vaccine trials.

What fraction of all vaccine trials in history have had +ve results? 3/

That gives a much better estimate than pure agnosticism.

b. Imagine now that the vaccine trial results have come back positive. But by chance all the vaccines were given in a blue room.

So, will the vaccine still work if given in a red room? I guess we have 'no data'.

4/

So can we say nothing about about whether vaccines work in red rooms?

That is plainly ridiculous — we understand the causal mechanism and it doesn't involve room colour, so in fact we can give a near definitive answer to that question. 5/

It has been instructive to look back at our tweets re' the pandemic from early in 2020. So here are the questions we have today as we start in 2021. Feel free to add to the list. Let us see how these age a year from now:
1/n👇

1. Getting the world vaccinated -
How can we get the vaccine to everyone? First, we must make enough, then overcome the hesitancy, solve the problems of logistics of distribution and administration. We are struggling in all these areas.
2/n 👇

2. The dosing regimen-
Is it better to give 1 dose of 2-dose regimen to more people vs. give both doses to few?
Data from both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that if you look at the cases after 12 days of 1st shot to the second shot, the efficacy may be in 80-90% range
3/n 👇

3. Vaccine prioritization:
Should we first give the vx to younger HCWs to keep hospitals open or to all the elderly who are likely to be sicker and the reasons hospitals will be overwhelmed?
Israel is doing a fantastic job getting all the elderly vaccinated first.
4/n 👇

4. Variant strains:
RNA virus tend to mutate. Vx are targeting the Spike protein of the Sars-Cov-2. Will there be enough mutation at critical points to make the virus resistant to the Vx?
This will require regular sequencing/monitoring. Besides the UK, who will do this?
5/n 👇

An important part of growing as a researcher is developing research taste. But it can be hard to explicitly work on. So I wanted to share some concrete exercises for developing research taste.

(Take my advice with a grain of salt! Note version: https://t.co/2BhyxOKy3q )

Exercise 1: Write down a list of research ideas. Have a mentor you respect rate each idea 1-10. Discuss ideas where you disagree with them after reflection.

It often takes several months of work to truly test an idea. Asking a mentor is a cheap proxy.

Exercise 2: Pay attention when other people try ideas you’ve had. How did the results compare with your expectations?

If you’re investing in brainstorming, you’ll have tens or hundreds of research ideas for each one you try. It can be emotionally uncomfortable when someone publishes an idea you had, but it’s an opportunity to get precious feedback for free.

Exercise 3: Interview researchers around you on their taste. Why do they work on the problems they do? How do they pick problems? What’s their “big picture” of research?

Bonus: If you have a great interview, you might consider writing it up with their permission.

I don’t know if anyone else out there is feeling this, but the more I think about the whole Phil Spector situation — and the more I read about his abusive behavior — the more enraged and depressed I become. If you’re feeling this way too, I just want you to know you’re not alone.

I’m no expert on this topic. But from the little I have read in the past 24 hours—mostly from digging into previous reports, and not the obituaries—Spector “surprised” his wife, Ronnie, with two adopted children as a “Christmas gift.” He reportedly imprisoned them, and Ronnie...

..and two of Spector’s three adopted sons have accused him of sexual abuse.

“Donte Spector, 33, said he was forced to perform simulated intercourse with his father's girlfriend. When he was 9, he was handcuffed and blindfolded for her amusement, he

From the same story:

“I was blindfolded and sexually molested," said Gary Spector, 36. “Dad would say, 'You're going to meet someone,' and it would be a 'learning experience.’”

There are many details that have been reported about Phil Spector’s abuse of Ronnie. His total control over her life — over her career, her contacts with the outside world. He even hid her shoes, so that when she finally did manage to flee, she did so barefoot. And years later...

1/ Have you ever heard the expression of, "Wolf in Sheep's clothing", or when someone mentions a, "False Prophet"? All referring to someone being fake.

I like to use those pointing out politicians, also saying they have a "Straw Tail".

Me: “Ugh, I really need to clear this area but there’s so much shit on it that all needs to be put 40 different places. This too much.”

Adderall Me: “I ain’t got time for this shit.” *Uses arm to knock everything not breakable onto the floor* “Clear.” 🤣🤣🤣 #ADDcheckin

Now for someone who doesn’t have #ADHD you might find what I did odd. All I did was move the mess from one spot to another.

And you’re right.

But my brain *really* wants to organize this area. So because of that I will actually do it. I can tackle the mess later... #ADDcheckin

I’ve learned one particular hack for my brain but it still needs adderall to kick it off. Once the feeling overwhelms you of focus—a need to get shit done—I don’t let my indecisiveness slow me down. Non-adderall me will try to brainstorm a solution for 6 weeks & get nothing done.

When I was young one of the reasons why I was berated & called lazy so often was because on occasion I would do some Herculean feat w/ ease but wouldn’t do my homework or clean my room for weeks.

Because I didn’t *WANT* to. It’s a key issue in the ADD brain. A want is needed.

And to the uninitiated all that sounds like is “You just wanna do what you wanna do. You aint slick.”

But its not that simple. We can desperately want to get something done, know we need to & still can’t do it. Maybe under extreme pressure of a deadline but often not even.

I’ll write a letter for each ❤️



Thank you for always being the best person I talked to. U made me laugh and things like that hope na sana we can still be friends love you💗😚

Horn is linked to the root KRN, and the same applies to crown, which is another symbol of the same idea, both placed at the head, conveying summit, ornamented by rays. Horns, in their symbolic use, take two main forms: the ram's, which are solar, and the bull's, which are lunar

And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar.
Leviticus 4:30

☀️🦄
🌙🐂

And Joshua the son of Nun called the priests, and said unto them, Take up the ark of the covenant, and let seven priests bear seven trumpets of rams' horns before the ark of the LORD.
Joshua 6:6

Our term horn as in the instrument has a literal root 🐑🎺

Horn is also the same root as thorn, both signifying a protruding ray, thus luminosity, the symbol of solar power, but also weaponry a symbol of physical power, and pointedness signifying summit or elevation.

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings...
Rev 17:12

@HenningStrandin @davidpapineau I mean, like I said, I basically do agree ‘the problem of induction is a pseudo-problem, because we don't reason inductively in science’. I think attempts justify induction are a dead end, and it’s to Popper’s credit that he took that seriously & worked on alternatives

@davidpapineau (And it’s not like Popper didn’t write a whole bunch on auxiliary hypotheses and ad-hoc falsification as well...most of people’s concerns like this he raised himself and discussed, whether or not you agree with his resolutions)

@davidpapineau My general position is that all attempts to define scientific method ultimately fail, but Popper is generally more interesting and useful than most. Confirmation/inductive logics are among the most naive and, aesthetically, are gross 🤮

@davidpapineau Here’s the naive view of a well-known Bayesian statistician on induction and deduction, who believe Popper was basically correct. There’s certainly some naive philosophy bits, but the important thing to me is that it’s *interesting*:

@davidpapineau In terms of the screenshot of what I wrote, here’s the basic idea. You can tell me if it’s Popper or Bacon or whatever:

#Arsenal re: rebuilding | I know we all want this club to be successful again. In that light, there is work to be done in terms of how we build-out the squad moving forward. But for me, that cannot be all about buying every single player (1/12) #AFC

We are undoubtedly going to be linked to a lot of names from now and running through the summer...but what truly makes the most sense? Where in the team are - right now - the biggest questions? For me it's CM, CB, and long-term at CF. Most of the spine (2/12)

Yes Auba extended and we still have Laca, but both are on the wrong side of 30, and long-term, it's unlikely they'll be here and performing. The only question we don't have at CB is around Gabriel. The CM debate continues about a number of players & if they're good enough (3/12)

Arguments can easily be made for a CM purchase in the summer, as well as a CB depending on how things shake out with Mavropanos, Chambers, and Saliba's loan at Nice. What there should not be questions on, is our attacking options (4/12)

I am always adamant about the necessity in finding a balance between veteran pieces, a core of prime players, and a sprinkling of young talent that have unquestionable futures. You need all three to be a club that can sustain itself both financially and in terms of results (5/12)

So that every single one of you precious souls are prepared and are calm and not panicked ❤️:

It is likely that we will be hearing from our fearless leader tomorrow, January 11th, 2021 or sometime early on this week. I give you a time table as something of the magnitude.......

It’s time for T+2 to go. (1/9)

Last week we saw the impact the two-day trade settlement period has on investors and ultimately the entire American financial system. Clearinghouse deposit requirements skyrocketed overnight. (2/9)

People were unable to buy some securities they wanted. Investors were angry and concerned, an unintended byproduct of the antiquated settlement process. (3/9)

The 2-day period to settle trades exposes investors and the industry to unnecessary risk and is ripe for change. (4/9)

Investors are left waiting for their trades to clear, and the clearing brokers have their proprietary cash locked up, until the settlement is final days after the trade. (5/9)

There is a distinction between what is something you ought to do and what is legal. It is legal to drink yourself to death. It is probably not a good idea. The distinction is not a small one. Let's apply it to the social norms many people suggest we adopt on silencing others.

I hear quite frequently arguments to the effect that private platforms are legally _allowed_ to silence people. And yes, they are, and yes, they should be. Is this a good idea, though? Let's have a quick look for a moment.

It's possible to imagine a society where every restaurant refuses service to people of the wrong political background, every supermarket checks to see if people arriving match a particular political affiliation before selling them groceries.

We can imagine neighbors only talking to other neighbors of the correct political tribe, jobs refusing to allow people with the wrong political beliefs to apply, etc. This is probably a thing that is legal or at least ought to be legal.

Is it, however, a recipe for a peaceful society? Or would it ultimately lead to something more bloody than the wars of religion during the Protestant Reformation?