Agree that's probably the way to go, especially if you want to reduce gender/socioeconomic/other inequalities.

In principal funding an individual rather than a project seems good, but it might reinforce some of the worst aspects of the current system.

Sadly, I think Academic careers are designed to make us feel that way.

There's always another deadline looming, or a task that's not finished and you're constantly exposed to other people celebrating their grants, papers, awards etc etc

Content moderation and toning down the addictive design features would be the best place to start.

Sounds very reasonable. A blanket ban seems quite reactionary to me - I think the type of content accessed is the most important factor in influencing mental health.

Of course, it's also possible to have expertise in the analysis of various data types.

I think both things can be true. We can seek to answer questions in the best way, but also become experts in the nuances of using specific types of data.

People who are used to clean survey-based data (longitudinal or not) may not be au fait with administrative data for instance.

There needs to be some kind of revenue sharing agreement between the race organisers and the teams overseen by the UCI (of they had any teeth/balls)

In the current situation, if sponsors lose interest or the price becomes too high, the sport will slowly crumble.

Trying not to sound defeatist, but the oil barons are propping up the sport already.

Context.

Ghostbusters 2 is also a Christmas movie.

Slimer is actually representative of the holy spirit.

My wife and daughter both dislike custard. Son enjoys both jelly and custard, but has joined their bandwagon.

Oh well, more for me!

"I haven't seen as big of a prick as the honourable gentleman since that time I....."

I love this. Their test set is in a quantum superposition.

Maybe I'm weird, but I actually kind of like it.