Les bookmarks de Clem
2353 shaares
Semble assez utile
Sur l'introversion en science.
Intéressant: il utilise la loi gamma pour simuler une quasi-poisson. Malheureusement, ses liens ne marchent pas. Mais je trouve l'idée intéressante, je me la garde sous le coude.
Connaissais pas.
Super tutos sur R, sf et ggplot2, de Mel Moreno et Mathieu Basille. Transféré à tous les collègues.
Oh mais il y a des choses ici !
Intéressant, sur la difficulté de communiquer de façon impartiale en journalisme et science. Extraits choisis. Le gars bossait dans la section communication scientifique à la BBC, et a commencé à remettre en question sa façon de bosser en bossant au Winston centre:
"Officially we were supposed to ‘inform, educate, entertain’ and we thought we knew how to do all three. Now, though, I am beginning to question what exactly science communication is doing.
(...) Evidence presented purely to inform — balanced and not trying to persuade a person to agree or disagree — does not make for entertainment, almost by definition.
(...) in order to make a good decision, researchers believe that we first need to make ourselves imagine more than one potential future scenario. We need to open our minds to the possibility that things could turn out well or badly. We need emotion.
(...) We all have a right to be ‘informed and not persuaded’ — an ethical right and often a legal right. And yet training in communication focuses almost entirely on how to grab attention and how to manipulate emotions to tell a story — how to be persuasive. There is very little training on how to use emotions more subtly, in a way that opens minds to possibilities constructively, but is not designed to persuade (I’m certainly still learning how it might be done).
Of course in a competitive environment it is important to get your voice heard, and I often hear people say their objective is to persuade people to ‘do the right thing’. But who is defining ‘right’? If you as the communicator are — if you are defining the story — then you are not simply informing.
When people are making really important decisions — decisions about their health, their finances, about policies that will affect millions, or about someone’s guilt or innocence — I would now argue that a different kind of communication is needed: the skill to engage and be clear and to allow the audience to form their own story through the information, and to make their own decision at the end as to how to react to it."
"Officially we were supposed to ‘inform, educate, entertain’ and we thought we knew how to do all three. Now, though, I am beginning to question what exactly science communication is doing.
(...) Evidence presented purely to inform — balanced and not trying to persuade a person to agree or disagree — does not make for entertainment, almost by definition.
(...) in order to make a good decision, researchers believe that we first need to make ourselves imagine more than one potential future scenario. We need to open our minds to the possibility that things could turn out well or badly. We need emotion.
(...) We all have a right to be ‘informed and not persuaded’ — an ethical right and often a legal right. And yet training in communication focuses almost entirely on how to grab attention and how to manipulate emotions to tell a story — how to be persuasive. There is very little training on how to use emotions more subtly, in a way that opens minds to possibilities constructively, but is not designed to persuade (I’m certainly still learning how it might be done).
Of course in a competitive environment it is important to get your voice heard, and I often hear people say their objective is to persuade people to ‘do the right thing’. But who is defining ‘right’? If you as the communicator are — if you are defining the story — then you are not simply informing.
When people are making really important decisions — decisions about their health, their finances, about policies that will affect millions, or about someone’s guilt or innocence — I would now argue that a different kind of communication is needed: the skill to engage and be clear and to allow the audience to form their own story through the information, and to make their own decision at the end as to how to react to it."
Tiens, ça a l'air marrant.
Spécial stats au tribunal. M'a l'air intéressant...
À voir, via Mathieu.
Un regard intéressant sur la notion d'espérance. Très axé math statistique, mais effectivement, ça donne une intuition de l'espérance comme différence de deux surfaces, que l'on peut calculer de deux façons différentes.
L'eau en poudre existe. Via sebsauvage.
Une pointure en maths, un nommé Atiyah, aurait démontré l'hypothèse de Riemann, mais les matheux restent sceptiques :
"Atiyah has produced a number of papers in recent years making remarkable claims which have so far failed to convince his peers. While his latest proof has yet to undergo the rigorous peer review process necessary to test its validity, the initial reaction has been one of cautious scepticism. Most mathematicians contacted by New Scientist declined to comment on the work."
Sur twitter, les commentaires étaient "we have homework". J'imagine qu'il doit falloir quelque temps pour digérer la preuve, et savoir si c'est du lard ou du cochon... À suivre !
"Atiyah has produced a number of papers in recent years making remarkable claims which have so far failed to convince his peers. While his latest proof has yet to undergo the rigorous peer review process necessary to test its validity, the initial reaction has been one of cautious scepticism. Most mathematicians contacted by New Scientist declined to comment on the work."
Sur twitter, les commentaires étaient "we have homework". J'imagine qu'il doit falloir quelque temps pour digérer la preuve, et savoir si c'est du lard ou du cochon... À suivre !
Article intéressant sur les accidents de chasse traités par la presse au XIXème et début XXème siècle.
À lire absolument. Aussi.
C'est dingue le nombre de bouquins de qualité, gratuits, qui sortent en ce moment.
C'est dingue le nombre de bouquins de qualité, gratuits, qui sortent en ce moment.
À lire absolument.
Marrant
Comment extraire les champs d'un formulaire pdf dans un fichier texte.
pdftk my-pdf-form.pdf dump_data_fields
Pratique
pdftk my-pdf-form.pdf dump_data_fields
Pratique