C'est de l'eau qui est utilisée pour le refroidissement des serveurs non ? Donc je suppose que c'est de l'eau du robinet et qu'une grande partie se vaporise ?

Indeed

Ah yes the woke agenda *checks notes* inviting women to review because they're experts in their field.

write them like the guy that always get the funding!

I am looking for ethical alternatives including environmentally. And also starting research on the use of water for servers! I really believe that when it comes to grant writing for example, LLM are helping leveling the playing field (of course not writing your grant for you but helping you

Yes I am too far along and actually a decent LLM users that this is past my thinking. I also believe that the way it is enhancing my work- ie helping me to get quicker where I want to be could eventually being beneficial for the environment. I also still use my brains for sure. But it is also why

And this is also why (with the means and access they have) IF we needed metrics and as you say more than one would be helpful then we should be consulted.

I agree 💯 with all the things you are saying here. I have a Google scholar account although now I am revisiting (thank you for calling me out!) and yes if it is for you to use absolutely ok. I am just worried for institutions taking short cut and people bullying their way into positions.

when it comes to publications unintended consequences are always mentioned even when stuff is evidence based but we will let Google impose metrics on us?

Except as @lynnkamerlin.bsky.social pointed out this really depends on discipline culture which also then messes up with interdisciplinary work. My question is who asked for a new metric? Who was consulted? We know now that it is here it will be used. When we want to make meaningful change

Who was consulted for Google to do that? There is no existing universal rules across disciplines on ordered names on paper. Who asked Google to meddle with this? The violence of this is unique. What it means is that bad actors will be retroactively rewarded for bullying their place on papers

Je regarde la carte et jaune veut dire “Au moins un polluant quantifié sans dépassement des limites de qualité” alors que vert veut dire aucun polluant quantifié. Vert ne veut pas dire qu’ils ne sont pas là mais

qu’ils ne sont soit pas là soit sous la limite de détection de la méthode de mesure(plus probable). Il ne faudrait donc pas séparer les deux. C’est exactement pour ça que la communication de tels chiffres est compliquée.

Je regarde la carte et jaune veut dire “Au moins un polluant quantifié sans dépassement des limites de qualité” alors que vert veut dire aucun polluant quantifié. Vert ne veut pas dire qu’ils ne sont pas là mais

A little busy tonight 😊. Will get back to the chat tomorrow