I just want to run some spike detection code I made a while ago.
Instead of spikes I get a weird error. So now I need to update package 1, which requires updating package 2, 3, 4, 7, and 28, which in turn want a newer version of python (except package 9 which refuses to work now of course), so I also need to reinstall anaconda completely (fuck knows why the upgrade button never works)...
And of course none of that actually runs, so I need to figure out how to make things go in a docker container that is in turn wrapped in whatever the hell a singularity is?
We're having a bit of a problem with assembling our #neuropixels assembly rig (specifically with the docking holder for the Apollo implant for NP1):
When we try to heat-insert the
brass threads, the walls of the holder holes keep cracking and breaking.
We use a 350C soldering iron, but we have one with a pretty small tip.
Are our brass inserts still too cold? Are we inserting too fast? Any ideas what we might be doing wrong?
I'm not really able to explain to students why I think that using generative AI (e.g. chatGPT) for writing is bad. At least, not in a way that convinces anyone.
My argument is basically this: writing is thinking.
In order to write about research clearly, you need clear thinking. The act of writing a paper/report helps you think about it more clearly, because all those fuzzy gaps that your mind can just jump over show up very clearly on paper. So, writing is a way to figure out your own thoughts and not only a way to tell others about them.
I think that’s an essential part of doing science and something that you cannot and should not outsource to a machine.
I don't know how to express this in a way that makes sense to my students. Sigh.
I've been wondering if we can make a regular (neuro) sciency movie night series at the department and have come to the sad conclusion that I do not have a long enough list of films that I like :(
So, what are your favorite (neuro) sciency films/documentaries?
So even in that latest c-fos paper, from the year 2023, the apparently gold standard antibody is still the discontinued santa cruz polyclonal? Are you kidding me?
It's of course possible that they saw a to-be-discontinued notice and thought "yikes, let's buy a few liters just in case", but the way this ghost Ab just keeps haunting the literature is really something else.
So my friend asked me to download a paper for her class, and it is so silly that I had to check that it wasn't published in the 'funny issue' (1 April or Christmas or something).
And I don't think so? The 10 October 1990 issue of JAMA doesn't seem to be a very silly one on purpose.
