mynewtb

Careful, this might only apply to professors, not the rest of the staff.

Or simply have local, quick, regular and tested backups.

Why would you cite a paper on the technical details of your data source in linguistics?

Geospatial anything. Geomatics, GIS, geodesy, surveying, photogrammetry, optics, whatever is related.

Before anyone clicks the bait:

> What is this TWO KILOMETRE long secret city unearthed by melting ice in Antarctica? > A TWO kilometre long series of 22 sinister-looking structures have been revealed by thawing ice in Antarctica - prompting claims the installation is a World War 3 fall out shelter for the global elite or even a landing pad for incoming aliens.

'Discovered' on Google Earth. My bet is on simple data processing artifacts.

Sample size of 18 and 'on average'. Scienceclickbait, you don't miss anything spectacular by skipping this article.

How can data be retracted from a blockchain?

Both those sites are also subject to laws and can easily retract information if necessary.

You could just use any free kind of canary instead, access to traps is easy to notice without any need for a complex external dependency or wasting big amounts of money.

So what if a story or bit of information has to be retracted by law?

I second my sibling, newspapers have no interest in transparency.

Oh, blissful unawareness of the crazy untrustworthiness of Google product longevity.

And they track all you read, thanks to being a private, centralized service.

And you habe not been killed by frozen poop falling from an airplane in the sky. Which would have been as likely as Bitcoin becoming a speculative hype. Celebrate that!

Function definitions are evaluated once and early. Easy rule to learn and not really problematic.

So what? Pandas and numpy are still use with Python code using their APIs. The implementation details are not something the users care about. They write Python.

Seafile is great