For those who truly embrace that they're on social media only for the likes? Programming ethics == building in a reminder that "you're real."

Ahh... the old mythos of individual agency strikes again.

This doesn't seem outrageous at all to me. Does one vote matter? Not at all, provably. Would it be a problem if everyone stopped voting? Very yes.

Once had this logic used to entice me to apply for a job at [big tech], arguing that if I didn't apply because of moral qualms, someone else with lower ethical standards would. But (hypothetical) conundrum would be, if I then did apply, wouldn't I be the type of person with different standards?

Oh I'm 💯% here to encourage your epistemological theory kink.

Not only is this applicable to LGBTQ+ rights, but also to disability rights -- "Undergirding it is the unspoken but clear judgment that this identity is regrettable but in a civilized country must be tolerated."

A liberatory diversity does not only tolerate the existence of those who differ.

Our findings of gender differences and similarities in network positioning provide insight into the international and interdisciplinary structure of scholarly collaboration. More descriptives, literature review, and cool graphs in the #openaccess paper!

We find substantial similarity in interdisciplinary reach and international reach between men and women. Men and women tend to have co-authors with similar average productivity levels across subjects and regions. These findings contradict arguments that men have higher-status collaborators.

The most dramatic gap we find is that of gender homophily in the tendency to collaborate. Homophily operates across all regions and all subject areas, with implications for women’s downstream research productivity, especially where the representation of women is limited.

We use network analysis of Scopus from 2009-2013 to look at first- and second-degree ties among 1 million+ co-authors. While second-order collaborations look similar, men have greater first-degree ties.