Showing posts with label link. Show all posts
Showing posts with label link. Show all posts

Thursday, August 31, 2017

New personal page, and a review of new Google Sites

Google has being slowly promoting their new Google Sites for about a year now, and recently I've moved most of my website to this new platform. Behold:

https://sites.google.com/view/khakhalin

Pros:

  • It looks really pretty, with these large sliding images on top and everything
  • Looks perfect both on a wide screen and a mobile phone (old google sites couldn't cope with a phone screen at all). I was critical of this feature at first, as I thought they were pushing the phone layout a bit too aggressively, but it turns out that I was just formatting it wrong. If you just add one block of text below another, sure, it will look poor, kind of like mobile wikipedia, when opened on a computer. But what you should do is add columns, or put images on the side. Create a matrix. In a mobile format it will nicely reshape into a column-vector, so that's the best of both worlds.
  • Intuitive interface: it totally feels like Google was inspired by the recent development of Paper by Dropbox (which is awesome by the way), as the interface is clean, clear, and easy to use. It may be a bit harder to move large blocks around, but still possible.
  • If you know html, you'll appreciate that the blocks you add follow <div> mentality, and there's a logic behind div-embedding. While it is not shown to the user explicitly, if you ever worked with divs, you'll immediately recognize the structure (and beauty) of it.
  • I like the little magic thing they do when you put images behind text (they adjust the color of the font and the lightness of the image)
Cons:
  • For now they don't support tables, and I need tables to publish protocols. But I think the Google team promised to eventually introduce them.
  • For now they only allow 1 level of subpages, but this thing they explicitly promised in one of their blog posts, so it should, theoretically, come live within about a year.
  • Very few styles for now, and it's impossible to create your own styles, but then again I think it will be changed in the future.
  • Impossible to attach files to the page, which was a very nice feature in old sites, both for hosting large-resolution images, and for uploading pdfs. I'm not sure whether they plan to implement it; I hope they would, otherwise I'll have to use external ftp storage for files.
But overall it definitely wins over Wordpress and Weebly, in my opinion, and hey it's free!

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Teaching scientific critique

A very nice text on teaching how to critique scientific literature:

Main idea of the text: too many teaching assignments we use essentially encourage students to "bullshit"; to generate some plausible-looking, but empty rambling about the topic, or post-hoc interpretations of their results. It's hard to grade, it does not teach students real scientific thinking, it's just generally bad. The author then gives some good pieces of advice about how not to fall into this trap:
  1. Be more specific: offer a critique yourself, evaluate the paper, and, potentially, vindicate it. Send a clear message that our goal is not to find a flaw, but to be able to asses whether there's a flaw in the study. 
  2. Clearly separate critique of methods from critique of results. I fully agree here; students tend to conflate hypothesis-building, experiment design, and results interpretation; they somehow combine it all into one horrible bezoar ball in their heads, and then try to describe it all at once. For example, they tend to perceive negative results as failed studies. Being very clear about what aspects of the study we are actually trying to critique should help here.
  3. My favorite: instead of discussing papers, talk about pop science (post-press release articles that appear in the press). I think that's the most productive idea of all.

Saturday, October 25, 2014

Crowdsourcing science

When I first heard about this project, I thought it can't be real: it just sounded too good. But it seems to be happening in reality: people are crowd-funding small research projects for postdocs and graduate students:

https://experiment.com/discover?order=funded

I am not sure how scaleable this model is (it could benefit from some reddit-style crowd-filtering for example), but at least it looks nice, and seems to be working!

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Google decided to close the Google Reader service

Wow, bad news. Just half a year passed since I started reading Neuroscience-related blogs on a regular basis, and now Google takes from me the way to read them. I almost can not believe it. Google Reader seemed to be such a great, sane alternative to all these attention-snatching noisy services like Facebook and Twitter... Slow, careful, thoughtful environment. And now it is there no more. What a shame!

Here's a nice discussion about the whole affair. And, well, I don't yet know what to do. Maybe I'll find another RSS aggregator (maybe this one, or this. Or maybe this.). But just in case, let me list here some key blogs I read. Just as a reserve copy (even though this blog platform is also owned by Google... oh screw it!)

(cups his hands around the mouth and shouts) - Google, if you hear me, don't be evil!

Anyway. Here's the list.

http://isisthescientist.com/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/proflikesubstance/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/bridgeblog/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/drbecca/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/neuropolarbear/
http://drtheron.com/
http://neurodojo.blogspot.com/
http://sciencebysummer.com/
http://babyattachmode.blogspot.com/
http://academic-jungle.blogspot.com/
http://persistentastonishment.blogspot.com/
http://mindfulhack.blogspot.com/
http://rxnm.wordpress.com/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/trainingprofessor/
http://thetightropeblog.wordpress.com/
http://scientopia.org/blogs/science-professor/
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/blog/the-loom/
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/blog/not-exactly-rocket-science/
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/blog/only-human/
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/blog/laelaps/
http://mikethemadbiologist.com/
http://calnewport.com/blog/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/
http://blogs.nature.com/actionpotential
http://neurologicalcorrelates.com/wordpress/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/neurophilosophy
http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/
http://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/
http://getalifephd.blogspot.com/
http://theprofessorisin.com/
http://bjoern.brembs.net/

Friday, December 21, 2012

Links 2012-12-21

A great summary: What advice would PhD people give to their former grad-student self.
More than a dozen people shared their thoughts. The result is both thought-provoking, and inspiring.

You are having a TT job interview, and they ask you if you have any questions. A nice list of questions to consider. And also - what to say if they ask you "tell us how you think you will fit here" (or rather how to prepare for questions like that, and what they really mean).

How reading random stuff, and not being too busy, are both so important for scientific success.

Monday, November 26, 2012

Introductory Neuroscience Links

Here I'm posting my collection of links that may be useful for teaching introductory neuroscience at a freshman level. I collected them last year, when preparing for my summer course, and while this year I'll try to update it, the core is likely to remain the same.

One major change in my attitude this year is that I grew somewhat tired of TED talks, as I've simply lost trust in them. TED is just not peer-reviewed enough, which is quite of a problem for science topics. In a popular science talk a presenter has to oversimplify the facts, and also to explain them in some way, even if scientifically speaking these "explanations" are still at a stage of being highly speculative theories. And the audience will never know that. The situation is kind of awkward, because both the simplification, and the "explanation" are required part of the packaging that make the talk popular, and the information - digestible. They have to be present in a good talk, because you have to explain to people why your research is important, and what all this stuff could actually mean. The problem however is that the world of science is so vast and specialized that even scientists themselves often have a hard time distinguishing a mainstream scientific star from a passionate but weird marginal, unless the talk hits on the listener's immediate field of research.

But still I'll provide at least some links to the TED talks, because I want my student to improve their presentation skills, and TED talks I've selected are rather good in this regard.

So:

Free neuroscience textbooks:


My favorite series of lectures by Robert Sapolsky (playlist of 25 hour-long videos):

Some TED videos:

Youtube case presentations:

Transient global amnesia:

Bipolar
Manic:
Bipolar, both phases in same patient:

Split brain:

Aphasia
Broca's aphasia:
Wernicke's aphasia:

Schizophrenia:
in childhood:

Autism:
mild:
moderate:
severe:

Absence seizures in children:

Parkinsonism + Deep Brain Stimulation (before and after in each video):

Dystonia and Deep brain stimulation:


Tourette

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Two links

An alternative abstract browser for SfN 2012:
http://www.hacksfn.org/


A great motivational blog about how to become successful in science. And I mean it: it really seems to be useful.
http://calnewport.com/

Here's one nice post / picture, as an example of what can be found there:



Friday, August 24, 2012

Insane in the Chromatophores

Well, this is probably the best neuroscience video of the year =) Guys from the Backyardbrains went to the Woodshole Marine Laboratory, and there connected to a motor nerve in a squid. And squids can change color, you know. So what would happen if you now play some music into the nerve? Well, check it out!



This is a modification of their original demonstration with a cockroach leg:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mKen7tCDCs&t=2m

And is reminiscent of this dancing hair cell video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo9bwQuYrRo

But this time it is also beautiful. Not just freaky, but also really beautiful!