Obviously, I'm always really excited about the conversations that I'm having. What are you most excited about for this season? I am going to start pairing back my solo episodes around my podcasting tips, so I'll be doing those every other week. So those types of topics you'll see a little bit more of that is wonderful.Īre there any other changes or updates that you have made for this season? And actually what's more important is how much you believe in yourself, how much growth you're going through. And I really felt like you can get the tactics, you can implement any sort of strategy. In a way, through my own experience, I realized that there's no one right way to grow your business. I'm excited to uplift those voices that are so important to me.Īlso, for this season, I realized that I liked business tactics and sharing content around that, but the personal development side was so much more important. So between September 15 and October 15, you're going to hear interviews from some really fantastic Latino business owners and people really having an impact who are just like, killing it out there. She was also a client and I worked with her to upgrade her podcast.įor the beginning of the season, I'm bringing back my interview series for Latinx Heritage Month, where I solely bring on Latina business owners and women in the personal development space for that month. So, I asked Carla Santa Maria who was on the show in season one and talked about becoming your own best advocate in business. I don't know the first thing about the person OP is talking about, but if you're going to run someone down, you should at least try to not look like a tool when you do it.I thought that it would be really fun to change it up and to invite someone on to interview me about Season 3 of Podcast & Amplify. I'm going to ask what other kinds of psychology are there? I'm not going to defend psychology as a science here. Brains, it turns out, are really complicated. So much for hard science.ĭoesn't get much harder than neuroscience. You might be surprised to learn that there's more to journalism than just writing stuff.Īnd lastly: She's a neuro-BIOLOGIST and nero-PSYCHOLOGIST. Journalist - Also, but with writing instead of sound and video. Yeah, well that's shit I'll agree with you there. The trick is in doing it properly, over and over, without killing anyone. The trick is in knowing what to tell them. Reddit seems to have a huge hardon for people like Degrasse-Tyson and Nye and it isn't because they're great scientists, it's because they're great communicators. Being the interface between exceedingly complex concepts and an exceedingly simple audience is no mean feat. :PĪctually, communicating science well is surprisingly difficult. You should get some experience in the field before you start making claims of how it works. You certainly don't seem to know what you are talking about. Consider for a moment that your ambitions don't make you better than other people. Also, why are you talking about students? PhD candidates have about the same schooling and experience as a someone who has received their masters. Seriously? I think that people who are working on their Master exist for a lot of reasons beyond testing your ideas. MSc students exist only to serve as testers for ideas generated by the profs, lab directors and phd candidates Figuring out how to test hypotheses is the threshold of the state-of-the-art in any mature field. It's fucking hard and that's why we train for so long. That's not QA, that's the application of the scientific method. Took people a long time to test the hypothesis that the Sol is made of the same stuff as earth - it's not. I just got back from flying out to a major US university to give an invited talk.Īny idiot can tell you how to test something. I travel to ~6 conferences per year and publish 2-3 papers per year. I do organizing work for a few big journals and I review for a lot of small ones. (caution h-index is a super imperfect measure, but it's the one we've got.) How many of these people do you recognize? They are all rockstars that have made significant impact in Computer Science. Most professional scientists won't do anything that gets them known outside of their field. If you publish in peer reviewed venues and you do science, then I'd call you a "research scientist" or just a "researcher". If you publish in peer reviewed venues, you're a "scholar". Once you start publishing, I'm going to judge you for your work. Anyone in the field who will judge you based on the letters after your name is being lame. You don't need to have any particular degree. If you do science professionally then you are a scientist.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |