390 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2021
    1. Or the PIs who enjoy and excel at raising funds can do so and even re-deploy it to the right scientists, akin to founders who become angel investors and venture capitalists.

      Sounds like a Self-Organized Funding Allocation (SOFA): https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol24/iss3/art29/

  2. Oct 2021
  3. Sep 2021
    1. We need more SCOSS-like experimentation. We need initiatives with short iterations of conceptualization and execution, a sort of trial-and-error mentality as we navigate this complex issue. We need research organisations and libraries to create budget lines for open infrastructures. We need funders to start supporting the maintenance of open infrastructures like the eLife Innovation Initiative or the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation.

    1. There are two components to the Funding Rate: the Interest Rate and the Premium. The Premium is the reason why the price of the perpetual contract will converge with the price of the underlying asset.

      What determines the Funding Rate?

    2. Funding payments occur every 8 hours at 00:00 UTC; 08:00 UTC and 16:00 UTC for all Binance Futures perpetual contracts. Traders are only liable for funding payments in either direction if they have open positions at the pre-specified funding times. If traders do not have a position, they are not liable for any funding. If you close your position prior to the funding time, you will not pay or receive any funding.

      Pay funding at (7 am, 3 pm, 11 pm) +- 15 seconds UTC+7. If you close your position prior to the funding time, you will not pay or receive any funding.

    3. Funding Amount = Nominal Value of Positions × Funding Rate

      How are Funding Rates calculated on Binance?

    4. The funding rate is primarily used to force convergence of prices between the perpetual contract and the underlying asset.Unlike traditional futures, perpetual contracts have no expiration date. Thus, traders can hold positions to perpetuity unless he gets liquidated. As a result, trading perpetual contracts are very similar to spot trading pairs.As such, crypto exchanges created a mechanism to ensure that perpetual contract prices correspond to the index. This is known as Funding Rate.

      Why is the Funding Rate important?

    5. Funding rates are periodic payments made to either long or short traders, calculated based on the difference between the perpetual contract prices and spot prices. When the market is bullish, the funding rate is positive and tends to rise over time. In these situations, traders who are long on a perpetual contract will pay a funding fee to traders on the opposing side. Conversely, the funding rate will be negative when the market is bearish, where traders who are short on a perpetual contract will pay a funding fee to long traders.

      What is Funding Rate?

  4. Aug 2021
  5. Jul 2021
  6. Jun 2021
  7. May 2021
  8. Apr 2021
    1. I also sell Sidekiq Pro and Sidekiq Enterprise, extensions to Sidekiq which provide more features, a commercial-friendly license and allow you to support high quality open source development all at the same time.
  9. Mar 2021
    1. Unlike the latter, however, the neurosciences are extremely well funded by the state and even more so by private investment from the pharmaceutical industry.

      More reasons to be wary. The incentive structure for the research is mostly about control. It's a little sinister. It's not about helping people on their own terms. It's mostly about helping people become "good" citizens and participants of the state apparatus.

  10. Feb 2021
    1. Our mission is to allow people to make money via educational efforts and to dedicate the rest of their time to creating great open source products.

      What does this mean exactly? "Our mission is to allow people to make money via educational efforts"

    1. We’re now relaunching PRO, but instead of a paid chat and (never existing) paid documentation, your team gets access to paid gems, our visual editor for workflows, and a commercial license.
    1. Great thanks to Blake Education for giving us the freedom and time to develop this project in 2013 while working on their project.
  11. Jan 2021
    1. I then concentrated on my top 30. I scheduled those ranking 15 through 30 first, hoping to perfect my pitch before putting those ranked 1 through 15 for the second half of my first two-week pitch window. This ensured I pitched my top targets after I had iterated on the deck several times and felt confident in the way I was telling my story.

      k

    1. Ways will be found to make communities sustainable,

      Ways will also be found to legibilize the deliberately inscrutable. With biomed funding so centralized, forces can be applied to increase the adoption of practices like data sharing and open science.

  12. Dec 2020
    1. Rich likes his dayjob, but it seems likely that funding will be available to the dev team in the future, if they want it.
    2. it’s a volunteer effort There’s no full-time team supporting Svelte — its developers are part-time volunteers. Bugs get fixed, features get added, and many professionals rely on it in production, but unlike other major frameworks, nobody is being paid to work on it full-time.
  13. Nov 2020
    1. In July 2010, Microsoft let go Jimmy Schementi, one of two remaining members of the IronRuby core team, and stopped funding the project.[19][20] In October 2010 Microsoft announced the Iron projects (IronRuby and IronPython) were being changed to "external" projects and enabling "community members to make contributions without Microsoft's involvement or sponsorship by a Microsoft employee".
  14. Oct 2020
    1. This displacement is of course operative in the de-funding of public universities, effectively transforming them into non-profits rather than state institutions. The effects of this program of neoliberal1 reform run deep, not least that the dominant motivator behind these privatized institutions becomes sustainability rather than service, leaving universities, like non-profits, in an endless cycle of fundraising and budget cuts.
    1. We’ve certainly dabbled in the debate of “what is a tech company” but what we never addressed was why do companies do mental gymnastics to call themselves a tech company. It’s because venture as an asset class traditionally invested in technology because that is what presented the growth and return characteristics that matched their risk profile. So you try to call a desk rental or mattress seller a tech company.
    1. The lessons of Twitter and Facebook, other Internet-scale basic service layers that most of us use, are instructive here. After the honeymoon period is over, and disruptive returns need to be generated to pay off limited partners or satisfy public shareholders, the tensions that these monetization efforts create ultimately seem to separate the motivations of management from those of users and the broader ecosystem. How will Rap Genius–and Marc Andreessen–navigate these questions?

      This is probably the question of the past two decades which many companies are only beginning to realize.

    1. Almost every major technological advance of the last two hundred years has taken place with the aid of large amounts of public money and under a good deal of government influence. The technologies of the computer and the Net were invented with the aid of massive state subsidies.

      examples of government (public) funding for research and it's effects

  15. Sep 2020
  16. Aug 2020
  17. Jul 2020
  18. Jun 2020
  19. May 2020
    1. Holmes, E. A., O’Connor, R. C., Perry, V. H., Tracey, I., Wessely, S., Arseneault, L., Ballard, C., Christensen, H., Silver, R. C., Everall, I., Ford, T., John, A., Kabir, T., King, K., Madan, I., Michie, S., Przybylski, A. K., Shafran, R., Sweeney, A., … Bullmore, E. (2020). Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: A call for action for mental health science. The Lancet Psychiatry, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30168-1

    1. Third-party delivery platforms, as they’ve been built, just seem like the wrong model, but instead of testing, failing, and evolving, they’ve been subsidized into market dominance.
  20. Apr 2020
  21. Dec 2019
    1. The funding and staffing restrictions Cormann’s Department has imposed on Home Affairs has not only led to a reduction in immigration integrity and massive long-term costs but it may have also driven Home Affairs into the foolishness of visa privatisation.
  22. Nov 2019
    1. public money isnot used to create or perpetuate disability-related barriers, and regarding training of front-linepersonnel.

      This component of the Bill may help other disciplines other than our own to take this seriously.

    1. The first indication of a change in weather was the sudden collapse of the market for specialized AI hardware in 1987. Desktop computers from Apple and IBM had been steadily gaining speed and power and in 1987 they became more powerful than the more expensive Lisp machines made by Symbolics and others. There was no longer a good reason to buy them. An entire industry worth half a billion dollars was demolished overnight.
  23. Oct 2019
    1. I launched the open textbook project over a summer, and because I teach at a public university where I had no easy access to graduate assistants or funding,

      I think that this is one of the biggest barrier for changing course materials; if our institutions are not supplying incentives to faculty, what are creative ways to effectively promote OER to faculty?

  24. Aug 2019
    1. The Urban Institute estimates 10-year spending of $32 trillion, only about half of which would be covered under Sanders’ funding options Mercatus Center’s Charles Blahous estimates a 10-year $32.6 trillion increase in federal spending. Even “doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan.” Economist Kenneth Thorpe of Emory University estimates $24.7 trillion in additional federal spending, and also estimates an average deficit of $1.1 trillion per year. The Center for Health and Economy estimates a 10-year net cost of up to $44 trillion, and an annual deficit of $2.1 trillion.

      The estimated costs given by the institutes proved that the "Single-payer" system could not work properly, and it also made the United States a heavy loss.

    1. have an allocation of funding for those that are achieving the best results.

      The school which are already successful don't need additional funding. The schools that are not being successful need additional targeted funding.

    1. Construction businesses need working capital to bridge the gap between cash payables and cash receivables. SMB Compass offers construction business loans to contractors in the United States. One of our reliable lending advisors will help you find the best construction business loan specific to your needs.

      Construction business loans options for small business owners.

  25. Jun 2019
    1. The term first appeared in 1984 as the topic of a public debate at the annual meeting of AAAI (then called the "American Association of Artificial Intelligence"). It is a chain reaction that begins with pessimism in the AI community, followed by pessimism in the press, followed by a severe cutback in funding, followed by the end of serious research.[2] At the meeting, Roger Schank and Marvin Minsky—two leading AI researchers who had survived the "winter" of the 1970s—warned the business community that enthusiasm for AI had spiraled out of control in the 1980s and that disappointment would certainly follow. Three years later, the billion-dollar AI industry began to collapse.
  26. May 2019
    1. Funding organizations like universities and foundations can get in touch with authors to back their future work, or spot trends of where breakthroughs are being made so they can funnel resources correctly

      Essentially GoFundMe or Patreon for the science set! This is nearly laughable and unlikely to really happen.

      Maybe VC culture can invade science research and screw that up too!

  27. Apr 2019
  28. Mar 2019
  29. Jan 2019
  30. Sep 2018
  31. Jul 2018
    1. The reason Mr. Wonderful loves royalty based funding is because it is a big win for both businesses and investors. Investors see a return on helping businesses succeed. Experienced investors will even offer guidance to help business owners avoid the pitfalls that many entrepreneurs stumble into. On the business side, entrepreneurs get the financing they need without debt or sacrificing ownership of their companies in any way. Additionally, since repayment of royalty based financing is structured around revenue, there are no rigid payment schedule. Royalty based funding provides financing and flexibility, which gives businesses the freedom to reach their potential, while simultaneously providing healthy returns to investors.
  32. Jun 2018
    1. Further, the lack of clear development funding methods in Bitcoin is often seen as problematic. The core network software exists as open source code on Github, but it is difficult for developers to directly monetize their contributions to the codebase. Funding for Bitcoin Core developers was entirely donation driven until 2014.
  33. May 2018
    1. The Open Education Tools Symposium, hosted by Hypothes.is in January 2017—with the support of the HewlettFoundation—for the express purpose of identifying the gaps and needs in OER technical infrastructure foundthat “even with the close focus on OER technical infrastructure, the conversations over the two-day event were wide ranging and often lingered on broader questions facing the OER movement: who exactly are we building for; is it really working?....no complete picture of the gaps in OER tooling became apparent during the symposium...”.

      Referencing and linking to the 2017 Open Educational Tools Symposium convened by Hypothesis.

  34. Mar 2018
    1. Most do not contribute anything back to PKP

      Consider working with the 2.5% Commitment group. They are leading a movement to organize libraries to direct some of their funding to support open infrastructure.

  35. Oct 2017
    1. The WWARN experience suggests that truly useful data sharing platforms must be thought of as long-term, infrastructural investments; they cannot be thrown up as rapid, project-based responses to funder or journal demands.
  36. Sep 2017
    1. We spend a lot of public and private money chasing silver bullets in education. I propose we would be better served by investing that money in providing educators with the training, support, and incentives to participate in the work of advancing the sciences of learning.

      for teachers as "citizen scientists"

  37. Jul 2017
  38. Jun 2017
  39. Nov 2016
    1. YCombinator funds nonprofits and now, research. OATV launched indie.vc last year. Peter Thiel created Breakout Labs. Elon Musk created Open AI.
  40. Sep 2016
  41. Aug 2016
  42. Jul 2016
    1. to increase attainment of high-quality credentials through expanded use of the DQP and Tuning to build a learning-based credentials system.

      What role might h play in such an ecosystem?

      • facilitate communication between disparate teachers and students
      • allow teacher to monitor student independent work
    1. Instructional processes must begin and end with students ― with “learners and what they learn.” This idea—of shifting the focus away from an institution-centric construct and toward understanding and meeting the needs of students—is absolutely central.

      Very much aligns with the NGDLE movement at EDUCAUSE.

    2. Instructional Processes

      Focus on pedagogy

    1. They invest in tools, esp early stage.

    2. Direct Investments We make a limited number of grants outside of our challenge efforts to nonprofit entrepreneurs developing breakthrough tools and services that can strengthen the design and implementation of innovative school models and have the potential to achieve scale and sustainability.

      They make direct investments in innovative tools

  43. Jun 2016
    1. Of course, they will most likely all be co-authored pieces, but the significant point is that the REF rules, except in special cases, impose no penalty on genuinely co-authored work; they explicitly state that it is welcomed. In most cases, there is no disadvantage in submitting a co-authored item to the exercise (although there is some complication when co-authors submit in the same return); it is not as if it counts as half an output or less.

      The REF does not discount coauthorship

    1. In some domains, path-breaking work is nec-essarily the outcome of collaborative activity rather thanindividualistic scholarship, a fact reflected in the modestproportion of federal research funds which is allocated toindividual investigators rather than teams. Collaborationsare a necessary feature of much, though by no means all,contemporary scientific research.

      in some domains, collaboration is necessary. Hence the preference for team grants

  44. Apr 2016
    1. . Referees ofgrant proposals agree much more about what is unworthy of support than about what does have scientific value. In

      Grant referees are better at agreeing on inadequate work than adequate

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. A system that assumes a "quite good" institution is unable to get better, and thus denies them the funds that would enable them to get better, is probably not an optimal system for promoting merit. A system that rewards in proportion to merit would at least be able to recognise and reflect the dynamism of university research; research groups wax and wane as people come, go, get disheartened, get re-invigorated.

      On the importance of funding middle-ground

    2. it could be argued that we don’t just need an elite: we need a reasonable number of institutions in which there is a strong research environment, where more senior researchers feel valued and their graduate students and postdocs are encouraged to aim high. Our best strategy for retaining international competitiveness might be by fostering those who are doing well but have potential to do even better

      capacity requires top and middle.

  45. Mar 2016
    1. Marsh, H. W., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Daniel, H. D., & O’Mara, A. (2009). Gender effects in the peerreviews of grant proposals: A comprehensive meta-analysis comparing traditional and multilevelapproaches.Review of Educational Research, 79, 1290–1326
    1. You submit the first grant, youpropose the novel thing. You know damn well any study section that’s evenmildly conservative is going give you, ‘‘Well, it sounds promising.’’ Theymight give you a good score, you hope for a good score, but it’s not going toget funded, because it’s too novel, it’s too risky, it’s too blah blah. But youalready have the damn data. You know on the second resubmit, you’re goingto say, ‘‘Good point! We took that to heart. Oh, what a wonderful suggestion!We will worry about this too. Guess what? Here’s the data!’’ Shove it downtheir throat. And then it’s funded. Because, wow, you flagged them, yousucker-punched them. They said, ‘‘This is really novel, blah, blah. Boy if youcould only do that, that would be a great grant.’’ Well, you alreadydiddo it,and that’s the point. And you basically sucker-punch the study section intogiving you the money by default. They have to at that point. They don’t havea choice.

      On the need to have results before funding is given.

    2. Analysts differ as to the reasons why competition has intensified. Some see thesituation in terms of money. Tempering the effects of competition is not a primeimpetus behind calls by the National Science Board [26] and by a recent coalition of140 college presidents and other leaders [27] for more federal funding for scientificresearch; however, some scientists see such advocacy movements in terms of easingcertain aspects of competition that are worsened by tight dollars. More money, morepositions, and overall expansion of the research enterprise would improve thesituation

      role of funding

    3. here are indications, however, that the natureof competition has changed in recent years. Goodstein [25] argues that this shift islinked to negative outcomes:Throughout most of its history, science was constrained only by the limits ofits participants’ imagination and creativity. In the past few decades, however,that state of affairs has changed dramatically. Science is now held back mainlyby the number of research posts and the amount of research funds available.What had been a purely intellectual competition has become an intensestruggle for scarce resources. In the long run, this change, which is permanentand irreversible, will probably have an undesirable effect on ethical behavioramong scientists. Instances of scientific fraud will almost surely become morecommon, as will other forms of scientific misconduct (p. 31)

      relationship of negative aspects of competition to change in funding model that promotes scarcity. See Goodstein, D. (2002). Scientific misconduct.Academe, 88, 28–31

    1. The role of external influences on the scientific enterprise must not be ignored. With funding success rates at historically low levels, scientists are under enormous pressure to produce high-impact publications and obtain research grants. The importance of these influences is reflected in the burgeoning literature on research misconduct, including surveys that suggest that approximately 2% of scientists admit to having fabricated, falsified, or inappropriately modified results at least once (24). A substantial proportion of instances of faculty misconduct involve misrepresentation of data in publications (61%) and grant applications (72%); only 3% of faculty misconduct involved neither publications nor grant applications.

      Importance of low funding rates as incitement to fraud

  46. Nov 2015
  47. Jul 2015
    1. Applicants will be a sustainable entity with an ongoing and operational commitment to improve community health and/or wellbeing.

      I'm not sure we fit this description.

  48. Jun 2015
    1. Extrapolating from 2012 data, an estimated US$114.8B in the United States [18] is spent annually on life sciences research, with the pharmaceutical industry being the largest funder at 61.8%, followed by the federal government (31.5%), nonprofits (3.8%), and academia (3.0%) [20].

      I think this would surprise most people, although when one thinks of the cost of developing a drug, it is always stated in the billions. So give that NIH's budget is around 30 billion, it would make sense that pharma would dwarf that number.

  49. Feb 2014
    1. As long as the income was incoming, we were happy to trade funding our institutions with our money (tuition and endowment) for funding it with other people’s money (loans and grants.) And so long as college remained a source of cheap and effective job credentials, our new sources of support—students with loans, governments with research agendas—were happy to let us regard ourselves as priests instead of service workers.
  50. Aug 2013
    1. Please donate to keep the law free.

      Good pitch. Make larger, don't hide in the footer