tiago lobo

Physicist with a PhD in materials. Researcher working mostly with computational mechanics and nonlinear optics.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@aramh @SheriefFYI To make things worse, just rephrase the argument to: was it acceptable, prior to LLM/AI, to fabricate a reference to prove a point?

That’s malpractice/fraud. There is no way around it. It is the basis of a research, to know what has been done and why you are doing it.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@zdeborova @eiszett So, you are admitting to exchange citing whoever the reviewer SUGGESTS to have your paper published? What if, instead of compromising your work, you actually read the suggested papers and check if they warrant a citation and could make your work better?

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@CodeRed_dev @skaterite_ And output doesn’t scale linearly with number of people. The managerial overhead is a bitch. Even if everything aligns, just the meetings needed to keep everyone updated… Also, the loss of “agency” in place of well defined process is frustrating.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@maxnotwork @dumbassngl @DanielcHooper I hate these statements (jblow as well) because it is just as fast write two “codes” and show your point. Most of it should not be an opinion, but an easily benchmark-able claim (c vs rust). The rest is just a rant about modern software development and its performance disregard.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@sharno3 @_Volodian_ @dpc_pw @DanielcHooper I mean, this statement is exactly what he is arguing against. 🫠

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@hmfaigen Does his extension gets bigger if he makes all nba or all star?

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@Cardoso Não faço ideia. Eu só não tenho coragem de pedir HDD via transportadora. Última vez que pedi veio embalado em um envelope com um pouco de plástico bolha. Nem liguei…

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@danliu Wait, I thought they were a monopoly after XD death. What happened?

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@yunta_tsai Hasn’t OpenAI already done this (but with dota 2) in 2019? https://t.co/vO0yLQ1eRh

If anything changed is that grok should be way better now and easier to train.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@Cardoso @JCFerranti @Zoppa15 Sobre o só publicam se quiserem: revistas “que prestam” possuem um filtro inicial do revisor e depois peer review (double/single/no blind). Os revisores normalmente nem ligação com a revista tem, são pesquisadores da área convidados. Dificilmente artigo é recusado por “birra”.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@Cardoso @JCFerranti @Zoppa15 (2/2) revistas conceituadas tem migrado pra open access, principalmente por causa da União Europeia. Algumas áreas ainda possuem revistas pagas sem ser open access.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@Cardoso @JCFerranti @Zoppa15 To achando uma certa confusão nos comentários.
(1/2)
Open access é uma modalidade de artigo/revista que não paga pra acessar. Várias revistas são híbridas (só paga pra publicar se for open access). No geral, revistas pagas são open access (depende da área e da revista).

[CppCon @CppCon]

On Friday, we had the final CppCon 2025 Plenary

C++: Some Assembly Required - Matt Godbolt

Watch Now! https://t.co/cYoUbxuCtW

#cpp #cplusplus #programming #coding

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@Cardoso tem certeza que é fake? Video https://t.co/lCUEnf4aKZ parece ser literalmente o msm local e com distribuição de comida.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@kareem_carr https://t.co/Xr7d5KlA0i There are plenty of other examples like this. But I understand your feeling. The hype is way "bigger" than its actual achievements.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@HoegLaw Are these patents really enforceable?

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@danliu Sorry if I am explaining a joke, but just in case:

When accepted for publication, papers are usually immediately available online, but the official edition is often some months ahead. So, most of papers accepted in nov/dec/2024 will be "published" in 2025.

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@shinobi602 Finished warhammer already? How long it was?

[tiago lobo @t14g0]

@SheriefFYI can't find this username there. Was there a typo?