|
crabrock posted:if google scholar ever went away i would be sad. it's good at finding papers. I’ve used the gently caress out of google scholar. handy for not only finding material, but also for generating citations in a way that isn’t utter poop from a butt.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
crabrock posted:if google scholar ever went away i would be sad. it's good at finding papers. imagine if there was seo for academia [given google its impossible for me to imagine to that people aren't gaming those results when sending off things to peer review]
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
given that afaik google scholar is basically some goodwill/tech demo project it’s rankings might actually be “honest”
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:41
|
|
|
lancemantis posted:given that afaik google scholar is basically some goodwill/tech demo project it’s rankings might actually be “honest” if algorithms exist to be gamed u'd be dumb not to game them in the name of tenure
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
i mean just somebody finding your paper isn't gonna get you a citation. when it comes to that stuff who you know in the field, journal impact factor, etc, matter way more than "does this paper show up in search results." plus all the big names just do a press release anyway
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
crabrock posted:if google scholar ever went away i would be sad. it's good at finding papers. google scholar has gotten shittier exponentially over a decade gently caress that id rather ask an actual librarian irl
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:ask an actual librarian irl 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:01
|
|
|
I’m et al, I think I know a thing about impact
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:05
|
|
|
you know youre right id feel weird about asking the same librarian for stacks of local news for weeks on end. that librarian would thing like "wtf, that rear end in a top hat must be really into researching whatever bullshit"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:you know youre right i just envision long, frustrating, ultimately futile interactions, likely involving numerous people, possibly via telephone in different parts of the country. e: full disclosure, I’ve never in my adult life had to ask a librarian for help, so i may be unreasonably prejudiced. President Beep fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Feb 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
Dixie Cretin Seaman posted:i suspect there are other tech companies capable of providing webmail its not so much providing mail, in that rather someone else scooping up gmail accounts/service in liquidation or whatever buyouts would be loving awful
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
Bulgakov posted:imagine if there was seo for academia there is but its its own enclosed system its called tomson-reuters or smth
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
President Beep posted:i just envision long, frustrating, ultimately futile interactions, likely involving numerous people, possibly via telephone in different parts of the country. "oh no, speaking to a human that has literally studied how we systematize and access information including research methodologies for help doing something squarely in their wheelhouse, can't i just mash butan on computer??"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:"oh no, speaking to a human that has literally studied how we systematize and access information including research methodologies for help doing something squarely in their wheelhouse, can't i just mash butan on computer??" i don't know how to do this, so there is literally no chance anyone else does either, why would i waste my time - a computermans
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
Xaris posted:its not so much providing mail, in that rather someone else scooping up gmail accounts/service in liquidation or whatever buyouts would be loving awful im sure there are ways that gmail data can be exploited for profit which are more invasive and creepier than what google currently does with it. but in a scenario where goog is liquidating gmail i would assume they have already wrung out as much cash as they could from it themselves, in many terrible ways
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
yeah, that whole post was kind of dumb and exaggerated. i guess I’ll just say this, and hopefully end this lovely derail: in school i was always able to find what i needed without soliciting the help of a librarian. for hard-to-find stuff, I’m sure they can be helpful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:"oh no, speaking to a human that has literally studied how we systematize and access information including research methodologies for help doing something squarely in their wheelhouse, can't i just mash butan on computer??" some of them are women too, oh noooo
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
President Beep posted:yeah, that whole post was kind of dumb and exaggerated. i guess I’ll just say this, and hopefully end this lovely derail: in school i was always able to find what i needed without soliciting the help of a librarian. for hard-to-find stuff, I’m sure they can be helpful. and thus youve learnt that being clever in grade school does not translate to yospos
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
wait is there a librarian that will read hundreds of journal articles, critically analyze them to only give me the most relevant ~50 or so and then add them to a reference manager for me? cause if so then gently caress yeah I'll give up a tech-based approach to lit review
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:30
|
|
|
I always knew where the best richard scarry books were. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
President Beep posted:yeah, that whole post was kind of dumb and exaggerated. i guess I’ll just say this, and hopefully end this lovely derail: in school i was always able to find what i needed without soliciting the help of a librarian. for hard-to-find stuff, I’m sure they can be helpful. idk be proud of trudging through extra drudgery instead of asking a human for help crabrock posted:critically analyze them
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
lancemantis posted:I’m et al, I think I know a thing about impact post your favorite chunky asses on toilet seat journals then, thx
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 04:35
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:do you even know what journals your school granted you access to? I don’t remember, tbh. being a non-traditional student, i didn’t spend much time working in the library or even on campus for that matter. I absolutely used their online article databases though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
Dixie Cretin Seaman posted:well? did u say it was good?? I disagreed of course, faecebook is not a force for good in the world Zuck fuckerberg probably just wants to see if he can still run for President
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
crabrock posted:wait is there a librarian that will read hundreds of journal articles, critically analyze them to only give me the most relevant ~50 or so and then add them to a reference manager for me? cause if so then gently caress yeah I'll give up a tech-based approach to lit review 100% no there also isnt a googlebot neither so idk what the comparison would be
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
my point was that using something like google scholar to find shitloads of papers isn't what you'd use a librarian for, so equating the two is loving dumb. The critically analyze part was that you have to read a bunch of papers to know what the relevent ones are. I can't just go to a librarian and say "give me everything on forebrain ischemia" because that'd be literally thousands of articles, not that I think google does that for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 06:25
|
|
|
crabrock posted:my point was that using something like google scholar to find shitloads of papers isn't what you'd use a librarian for, so equating the two is loving dumb. The critically analyze part was that you have to read a bunch of papers to know what the relevent ones are. I can't just go to a librarian and say "give me everything on forebrain ischemia" because that'd be literally thousands of articles, not that I think google does that for me. you can totally go ask for ischemia articles or books, and you can totally search for same if you just write ischemia into goog youll probably get "literally thousands" of articles. the librarian found thousands as well but filtered them into research/idiocy/etc and gave what you wanted no diff except you get to not speak to a person which is a huge plus imo
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 09:56
|
|
|
I visited FB this week to drink at their happy hour event. One of my buddy’s work friends came over and started talking about the Splitsider article that has a guy from Funny or Die saying FB is making it pretty much impossible to make money on the internet with comedy. Their take was ‘lol okay whatever go back to reviewing SNL episodes’ and ‘who the hell do these people think they are??’ I brought a tote bag and filled it with snacks and the better part of a case of Red Bull with the goal of zeroing out the money that FB has made off of my account over the years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:00
|
|
|
i hate facebook but i dont understand how facebook kills comedy... both old & new media comedy has lost a lot of territory but not to facebook specifically, more to the internet in general. also Funny or Die was awesome 5 years ago but theyre newer than facebook so i dont think they can claim to be killed by them reiterate: death to fb
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
lol i cant this, it talks about freakin homestar runner which was the poo poo if you were 20 years old 15 years ago. is the whole article just old dudes who cant figure out how to be funny online anymore
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:old dudes who cant figure out how to be funny online anymore please stop making vague references to me. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:24
|
|
|
President Beep posted:please stop making vague references to me. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
crabrock posted:if google scholar ever went away i would be sad. it's good at finding papers. it is okay at it (and getting worse), microsoft academic shows more promise imo. it actually respects proximity operators and will return zero results when there are zero results instead of just silently deciding that you must have really meant "funny" AND "near" AND "computer" instead of "funny" NEAR "computer" like scholar has a really nasty habit of doing. the new gimmick is that it uses machine learning to classify the documents so that you can prevent your results from being gunked up with documents from some random field which just happens to also use the same term and it seems to work decently well. neither are anywhere near as good as Proquest or even IEEE XPlore qirex posted:I think they're trying to show more of what actual humans post over the 100000 identical lovely procedural dessert videos people like or share but there's no way to know for sure because facebook refuses to tell people what they're doing and also refuses to let users customize their own feeds because that might interfere with promoted content i could see people being mad at that because for some people 90% of what their real people contacts post are MLM ads
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
the scholar discussion is either way tainted a fair bit by the fact that academic publishing really needs to change more in response to the new realities that people actually get at a much broader set of often worse papers in the small whenever i have a paper at some small conference and then write it up into a full journal version for e.g. theoretical computer science, where the historical logic would be that that is a fine journal which people subscribe to and read, the fact is that the (usually then flawed and outdated) paper at the conference will keep racking up the citations while the tcs one will get one now and then slowly, simply by virtue of being less accessible and therefore less searchable etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:15
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:the scholar discussion is either way tainted a fair bit by the fact that academic publishing really needs to change more in response to the new realities that people actually get at a much broader set of often worse papers to me, that speaks of the need for proper instruction so that students early on know what a good source is. i remember taking a lower-level course on research methods where we were introduced a hierarchy of material types. at the top was reputable journals that published only rigorously peer reviewed research, all the way down to stuff like newspaper articles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:22
|
|
|
people love arxiv
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Conference is fine wrt journals in cs land, tho?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:it actually respects proximity operators and will return zero results when there are zero results instead of just silently deciding that you must have really meant "funny" AND "near" AND "computer" instead of "funny" NEAR "computer" google basically ignoring operators has made search in general a huge pain in the rear end. i'm not sure what it is about their amazing natural language search that required them to completely depreciate that functionality, but it sucks
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
having an option buried under a menu to enable "search for what i actually typed" is also some amazing loving UX design
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:the scholar discussion is either way tainted a fair bit by the fact that academic publishing really needs to change more in response to the new realities that people actually get at a much broader set of often worse papers the most extreme example of this is dissertations. a bare bones conference paper will get cited all over the place but the 200 page tome explaining in meticulous detail every aspect of the research and subjected to an extreme version of peer review will just gather dust because it is impossible to stumble across.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:38
|
|