DVD 的發行時間差異導致盜版

MPAA 資助的報告顯示 DVD 的發行時間差異導致盜版:「DVD Release Delays Boost Piracy and Hurt Sales, Study Shows」,報告在「Windows of Opportunity: The Impact of Piracy and Delayed International Availability on DVD Sales」這邊可以看到。

用真實資料計算得到:

"When we run our regressions on Spain and Italy alone, we observe a 10% drop in sales for every 10-day delay in legal availability, as compared to a 2% drop in sales for every 10-day delay in the entire sample," the paper reads.

"Our results suggest that an additional 10-day delay between the availability of digital piracy and the legitimate DVD release date in a particular country is correlated with a 2-3% reduction in DVD sales in that country," the researchers write.

時效的重要...

GitHub 支援 HTTP Code 451 了...

GitHub 宣佈支援 HTTP Code 451 了:「The 451 status code is now supported」。也就是 RFC 7725 的「An HTTP Status Code to Report Legal Obstacles」。

目前會把因為 DMCA takedown notice 下架的內容以 HTTP Code 451 標出:

The GitHub API will now respond with a 451 status code for resources it has been asked to take down due to a DMCA notice.

HTTP Code 451 的點子出自「華氏 451 度」這本書,表示紙的燃點。

超過一半的心理研究都無法重製結果

應該是前陣子被 Nuzzel 推薦 2015 八月的老新聞,這個研究在 Nature 上發表:「Over half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test」。

這個研究重複了 98 篇原創研究來重新實驗:

In the biggest project of its kind, Brian Nosek, a social psychologist and head of the Center for Open Science in Charlottesville, Virginia, and 269 co-authors repeated work reported in 98 original papers from three psychology journals, to see if they independently came up with the same results.

結果在 100 次的實驗 (其中有 2 個是重複的) 發現只有 39 個實驗結果被重製出來:

According to the replicators' qualitative assessments, as previously reported by Nature, only 39 of the 100 replication attempts were successful. (There were 100 completed replication attempts on the 98 papers, as in two cases replication efforts were duplicated by separate teams.)

這成功率其實頗低,如果實驗無法被重製,就不能算科學研究...

GitHub 上 Pull Request 的男女歧視問題

衛報報導了從 GitHub 上分析 pull request 的性別分析研究:「Women considered better coders – but only if they hide their gender」,原始論文出自「Gender bias in open source: Pull request acceptance of women versus men」。

研究的結果說明女性的 pull request 接受機率比男性高,但如果貢獻者可被確認是女性的話則會反過來,也就是說男女歧視問題是可被觀察到的:

Surprisingly, our results show that women's contributions tend to be accepted more often than men's. However, when a woman's gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.

由於性別資訊不是必填項目,論文裡面也有提到透過 social network 的資料比對,以及其他方式去推測。這個研究成果看起來應該會產生不少討論...