This comedy lost me at ‘literally’, because that’s how I know I don’t need to invest more time on it. Hey Skippy! Learn another adverb, okay?
I get that colleges are no longer failing papers with 3rd-grade spelling mistakes and comma splices at it ruins the uni’s bottom line. But I miss even when unis had just a little more pride in themselves.
I went hunting and found OOP’s blog. There isn’t much more to the story, which I will transcribe here:
until like LAST WEEK
professor B publishes a paper that casually drops the word “husband”
and obviously all the students are like “oh i didn’t know u were married!” because we read that shit like how white suburban mothers read People Magazine
and shes like “yeah, it’s Professor A”
and we all FLIPPED. THE FUCK. OUT
we thought the framed picture of the two of them on professor A’s desk was ironic because hes that type of guy
like, you gotta understand, these two have gotten into YELLING matches in hallways. these two refuse to go on trips with each other. but apparently they have a system where they quite LITERALLY leave all of their work at work and drive home in separate cars and literally NEVER work at home. it is SO funny
I really hope you’re obfuscating the real thing they are fighting over because it makes zero sense that anyone would fight over which is “better”. Like, what? You… You have to use both like… All the time. I’ve never had a project outside of a class assignment that didn’t require both.
My domain is more bioinformatics than GIS, but the way I imagined it was that if one was arguing that [thing] data is better, they’re arguing that if more people recognised the innate benefits of [thing], we wouldn’t have to rely on software that uses [other thing] so much, and that to properly utilise [thing], it would take a bit of radical reworking of workflows, but there would be significant long term net benefit.
Basically, I think arguments like this tend to be more grounded in the socio-cultural practices of a research field than the absolute technical merits of an approach. Like in my domain, a DNA sequence is just a long sequence of 4 different letters (A, T, G & C), but there’s a bunch of ways we can encode that data into a file, many of which have trade-offs (and some of which are just an artifact of how things used to be done)
What a weird idea that there is any sort of rivalry between two data types used in the same science. I have a hard time believing that any geospatial science professor is in a war over this. Analogously this would be like two carpenters having a war over saws vs hammers. They are both indispensable tools in carpentry. Sometimes you saw something and then use a hammer on the next step, sometimes you hammer something and saw something next. It’s… You use both. You’ll always use both.
But someone making about as many spelling mistakes as there are words in the post should be the first red flag. This reads like someone who slept through an intro to GIS course, or someone who hates ESRI (based?) and wanted to simultaneously send their entire board of directors into seizures.
Everytime I hear this I can’t help but imagine some researcher out in the wild taking a twig or something off of a magpie, the swoopy boi retaliates and the researcher is like “corvids understand the concept of zero?!”
science_memes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.