Steve Schaffner
@glipsnort.bsky.social
Senior computational biologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT. I've worked in population genetics, human genetics, evolution, and now mostly epidemiology. Former high energy physicist and current Episcopalian.
As a description of the practice of science, including science when it is done best, falsification theory has never had more than a very tenuous connection with reality. It's not how most scientific reasoning works.
December 31, 2025 at 10:41 AM
As a description of the practice of science, including science when it is done best, falsification theory has never had more than a very tenuous connection with reality. It's not how most scientific reasoning works.
Why would they need to leave the country when they can be comfortably pardoned here?
December 21, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Why would they need to leave the country when they can be comfortably pardoned here?
The obvious conclusion would be that women aren't vertebrates
December 13, 2025 at 9:01 PM
The obvious conclusion would be that women aren't vertebrates
Why do people say "Let me say this..." instead of just saying it? Or "No offense" instead of just being offensive? Or that something is very, very bad? Intensifiers abound and they can be stacked on one another.
December 7, 2025 at 1:28 PM
Why do people say "Let me say this..." instead of just saying it? Or "No offense" instead of just being offensive? Or that something is very, very bad? Intensifiers abound and they can be stacked on one another.
11 out of the first 12 days
December 4, 2025 at 3:49 AM
11 out of the first 12 days
How many slicks could a city slicker lick if a city slicker could lick slicks?
December 2, 2025 at 1:10 AM
How many slicks could a city slicker lick if a city slicker could lick slicks?
If you can't lick your licks, what can you lick?
December 1, 2025 at 8:37 PM
If you can't lick your licks, what can you lick?
Which will turn public opinion even more strongly against them.
November 8, 2025 at 10:45 AM
Which will turn public opinion even more strongly against them.
I'm also puzzled by the choice to lump factors we can study as causal variables and those we can't into a single term.
October 18, 2025 at 11:21 AM
I'm also puzzled by the choice to lump factors we can study as causal variables and those we can't into a single term.
If these studies mean 'non-genetic', why not call it that? It would be much confusing to anyone who thinks of genetics in terms of evo/pop-gen, in which 'environment' has a different meaning (and who are used to treating some non-genetic effects as random)
October 18, 2025 at 11:20 AM
If these studies mean 'non-genetic', why not call it that? It would be much confusing to anyone who thinks of genetics in terms of evo/pop-gen, in which 'environment' has a different meaning (and who are used to treating some non-genetic effects as random)
To me environmental suggests something external to the organism, which need not be the case here. Physics (e.g. fluid mechanics) sometimes treats variation as simply stochastic without invoking QM
October 17, 2025 at 11:56 PM
To me environmental suggests something external to the organism, which need not be the case here. Physics (e.g. fluid mechanics) sometimes treats variation as simply stochastic without invoking QM
Since our measurement resolution is never going to be good enough to determine (nondestructively!) the position and velocity of every molecule in a zygote to arbitrary precision, I have no qualms about calling this source of randomness 'inherent stochasticity', regardless of whether it involves QM.
October 17, 2025 at 8:04 PM
Since our measurement resolution is never going to be good enough to determine (nondestructively!) the position and velocity of every molecule in a zygote to arbitrary precision, I have no qualms about calling this source of randomness 'inherent stochasticity', regardless of whether it involves QM.
Some of us have no idea what semafor is
October 1, 2025 at 8:03 AM
Some of us have no idea what semafor is
The bags for my current (and soon to be former - turns out it leaks) tent are dark brown. Not an improvement.
September 28, 2025 at 10:44 AM
The bags for my current (and soon to be former - turns out it leaks) tent are dark brown. Not an improvement.
Did NYT settle the cases?
September 23, 2025 at 8:47 AM
Did NYT settle the cases?
English sentence that not is.
August 29, 2025 at 3:42 PM
English sentence that not is.
Shouldn't there be two 🏀🏀s in the abstract?
August 17, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Shouldn't there be two 🏀🏀s in the abstract?
I'm pretty sure he's a pond
August 5, 2025 at 10:12 AM
I'm pretty sure he's a pond
They've just moved to another app but they're not going to tell us what it is - we're too old
July 16, 2025 at 2:44 AM
They've just moved to another app but they're not going to tell us what it is - we're too old
That would be preferable to continuing their pattern of being so afraid of their own shadows that they never do anything.
July 15, 2025 at 11:56 AM
That would be preferable to continuing their pattern of being so afraid of their own shadows that they never do anything.
In New York, the channels were 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 (all still there, I see).
July 14, 2025 at 8:49 AM
In New York, the channels were 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 (all still there, I see).
No, I avoid sidewalk cracks for sound technical reasons.
May 4, 2025 at 12:01 AM
No, I avoid sidewalk cracks for sound technical reasons.
We're more like at Midway or El Alamein here -- maybe the end of the beginning, with lots of destruction still to come. But seeing that ultimate victory is a realistic possibility makes it a lot easier to face the fight.
April 29, 2025 at 9:46 PM
We're more like at Midway or El Alamein here -- maybe the end of the beginning, with lots of destruction still to come. But seeing that ultimate victory is a realistic possibility makes it a lot easier to face the fight.
So you mean that 200 years from now, our science will still be crippled by the cuts being made today? Or what? The future is a long time.
April 29, 2025 at 9:38 PM
So you mean that 200 years from now, our science will still be crippled by the cuts being made today? Or what? The future is a long time.