I've seen this scam of Principia cited a few times in historical monographs

doi.org/10.3931/e-ra...

There are two sides to this:

As scientists, being forced to word/page limits is frustrating - we want to give reviewers the "full picture" without the imposition of artificial barriers.

As a reviewer, there is no way in hell I'm reviewing 100 70-page narratives because people can't self edit.

Because people don't like learning new things - CMake is by no means a *good* option, but it's the best of the available ones. The syntax is pretty bad, it's generally verbose and backwards compatibility is a bit tedious (which is not necessarily a bad thing, but some people whine about it)

Every time you call it Linux, Stallman has to shower and trim his beard - which is why he looks like this now

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ri...

Thanks for doing your part.

I think the major problem is capex differential - industry spent 10x *last year* what it cost to stand up all current LCF flagships. Freeing up fab space is a tall (financial) order, and one that ASCR can't foot alone.

What's wild is that I'm pretty sure there is a "service" that produces these junk invites - I remember comparing a bunch a few years ago that showed its essentially ad-libs - grammer and all "we welcomes you to <conference> to present you're work on <some recent but unrelated paper>".

The Coulomb interaction is absolutely empirical #photons-are-particles-too #relativity-matters #standard-model-supremacy #no-spooky-action-at-a-distance