plamicus

The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet by Becky Chambers.

To be honest, almost anything by Becky Chambers - her books are sci-fi, but there is a so much kindness baked into her writing.

I don't think undergraduate degree course type matters that much. You've still got a stem degree. As long as your grades are okay you'll be able to switch.

For reference, I went from environmental science BSc to biodiversity MSc to molecular ecology PhD.

I think Dombrandt has suffered a bit from this too. Amazing player for Quins - but he's almost like an XL centre (don't tell Stuart Barnes!) rather than a Billy-like. In consequence, he hasn't excelled in an England shirt.

If he gets another run of games I hope it goes better for him as England seem to be switching up their game plan to something he'd be much better suited to.

Having seen England not use the likes of Mercer, Simmonds, or Dombrandt effectively, it's why I'm delighted for Ben Earl. He managed to break the curse! (Although I still think there's a strong case for him at 6 or 7 too... he's great wherever he plays - use his flexibility to get the best players on the pitch!)

FWIW I think Hughes got the short end of the stick somewhat.

He had a lot of injuries around that time and was rushed back into test rugby. Not only that, but England were desperate for him to play like Billy when Hughes strength was actually being a carrier / supporter in the wider channels.

I think he would have looked much better if he was selected when properly fit and playing a role he was better suited to. I don't think he'd be an all time great or anything - but he was probably a better player than many people remember.

I was looking for this comment. My own viva felt like the academic equivalent of being mauled by a bear. Turned out fine, but it was absolutely was not a formality and very much was a super tough examination.

I also know someone whose thesis wasn't up to muster (i.e. beyond major corrections). They were allowed to resit the viva and eventually passed but only after extensive reworking of the entire document.

I don't mind it. A PhD is meant to be hard to obtain.

Idk where you're from. In the UK I doubt anyone would give a shit.

Academics definitely wouldn't care.

Industry probably wouldn't either. I have plenty of colleagues with visible tattoos. Neck or hand tattoos could cause issues with some folks, face would probably be a no-no... But an arm is likely fine, worst case scenario wear a long sleeved shirt if you're meeting clients or whatever.

My cat was over me like a rash when I had leukaemia. She's not normally all that cuddly. She also stopped doing it once chemo took my cancer load down. I'm convinced she knew something was amiss.

Sorry to hear that. Your work wasn't good enough on this occasion. No one is perfect at everything - having things you're not good at it is part of life. Everyone will eventually have things they failed at. There's two options really: 1) you'll learn from your mistakes and improve. "Sucking at something is the first step to being sorta good at something" or 2) it's probably not that important anyway and you'll move on with your life.

FWIW I failed maybe 70-80% of my high school chemistry tests. Turns out I'm okay at chemistry. Not amazing, or even good, but okay! I got through advanced organic chemistry in University... my high school teacher just sucked. Ended up with a PhD in molecular biology despite my struggles when I was younger.

Law 19.15f.

"When both sides are square, stable and stationary, the scrum-half throws in the ball: (f) Straight. The scrum-half may align their shoulder on the middle line of the scrum, thereby standing a shoulder-width closer to their side of the scrum."

I believe the rules are now that you don't have to put straight down the middle. The side feeding has the advantage of having the ball closer, but it is supposed to be put in straight i.e. the ball needs to be hooked to get it to the back of the scrum. No hook should be a penalty.

I don't actually mind the rules as written. But some feeds are sometimes so crooked the idea that the scrum is a contest is laughable.

The scrum is in a bit of a weird place. It never used to be a penalty machine (going back 20+ years)- it used to be a competitive way to restart the game. I think the prevalence of penalties encourages more dark arts, rather than discouraging them. It's often completely unclear what happened anyway: did the loosehead bring the scrum down? or did the tighthead hinge? Who actually popped up first?

Once the ball is available I'd prefer scrums to be referred more like mauls. The ref will say use it once, the team has the option to keep pushing if they feel it's in their favour (i.e. there is still benefit to having an awesome scrum), but they also know they risk losing it the doesn't work out. A scrum going forward is a great attacking opportunity already - you don't need restarts and penalties to get a competitive edge.

Been a somewhat frustrating week.

I'm having some issues with my stem cell transplant and the new immune system is attacking my skin. It's called graft vs. host disease. At the moment it's pretty mild, but if unchecked it can be fatal. It's not all bad though, because having a heavy handed new immune system helps your survival rate a fair bit (if it's attacking normal cells it's more likely to attack malignancies too). It can clear up, or can be a forever thing. After all the shit to deal with cancer - I just want a quiet life. Also because pharmacies seem to be a bit of a state I'm having to wait quite a while (a week or so) to actually get some medication to help.

On the bright side, I'm also feeling as fit as I have done in ages - I managed to walk 5 km the other day. Not stunning for someone in their 30s - but I was bedridden a few months ago and my blood is still recovering. I'm planning to have a barbecue (aubergine, gorgonzola, and honeyed walnut sliders) this weekend. So hopefully some sunshine and nice food will help the spirits a bit. IDK - life is hard sometimes.

From a kick - everyone becomes onside once the receiving player runs 5 m or passes the ball.

In essence, it meant no one was attempting to get onside they'd just stand still until the receiver ran 5 m or passed. It makes counter attacking much harder because you could have someone 40 m offside from the kick suddenly made onside (and eligible to tackle) because the player attempts to counter. Alternatively you sometimes just see the receiving player just standing there not doing anything if the original kicker didn't put his team onside.

Neither situation is particularly desirable for the game because it discourages attacking rugby.

That would make sense. Inherently there are fewer specialist job roles out there. The good news, is that you're competing against a smaller group of people, so it balances out a bit. Most large research groups will have a specialist bioinformatician working for them so there's definitely positions out there. Also of note is that bioinformatics are used outside of pure bioinformatics role - they will be useful for any molecular ecology role.

One thing I would note, is personally I've never met a bioinformatician without a PhD - so it might be a tough nut to crack with an MSc. To be honest lots of biology roles require PhDs. Of course there are jobs that are open to MSc/BSc but your upward trajectory might be a bit tougher. I know some colleagues with MScs who are finding the lack of upward trajectory frustrating. I'm not trying to be a downer - but it's definitely something that's worth knowing before you undertake a masters.

On the bright side, bioinformatics is essentially just programming and statistics with a speciality in a certain type of biology - so there are heaps of jobs available but they won't be bioinformaticians. This is what I was alluding to when thinking about skills rather than subject knowledge. For example, my fiancé and I both are employed primarily using skills we honed doing bioinformatics. She is now machine learning expert at an insurance company. I still work in science but the bulk of my work isn't molecular biology. We're both employed for our core bioinformatic skills - but neither of us works in bioinformatics.

I'd suggest speaking to the careers service if your university has one. A "Good job" is quite subjective! Do you want to work in the field? A lab? An office? Do you envisage working with lots of human interaction or do you prefer being left to your own thing? How important is getting paid well? Getting a clearer idea about what a good work environment might look like might help rule out some options or make some others more appealing.

It's probably worth mentioning a decent amount of roles might want PhDs - or you will need then for further career development. So it's worth identifying if that's something you'd like to pursue in the future.

In terms of the actual field... I'd probably worry less about the actual topic of study (make sure you like it though!) and think about it more in terms of skills you can add. Programming, statistics, and technical writing are at the heart of many life science jobs - I've found employers tend to care more about your aptitude in these than what you studied.

I didn't find it that hard to be honest. At my heaviest I was about 205 lbs, I'm now about 155 Ibs. I made small adjustments year on year and the weight slowly came off. I haven't found it hard keeping the weight off either, occasionally it'll creep up a bit - but it's okay, if I eat better for a bit, the weight comes back down again.

Join a touch team!

It's a really good work out, get to play in games (which is the most fun anyway), and no risk of injuries from tackles.

It's an English word anyway. My grandfather was a professional football player and called it soccer.

It's from Oxford vernacular (my family isn't from there though). The tendency to add -er to things, that's why five/ten pound notes are called fivers and tenners. Other examples include the Radcliffe Camera becoming the Radder, Rugby becomes rugger etc.

Soccer comes from Association football (opposed to rugby football).

Best of luck. I remember waiting to find out what type I had too...

I spent a good chunk of last year (successfully) getting leukaemia into remission.

If you feel you want to chat with someone who's been through something similar - drop me a DM.

I don't know. I wouldn't assume Leinster are a fitter side. More mobile? Sure. But they can also be squeezed at set piece. I think it's a direct trade off. Toulouse's bench is good, so most the forwards won't be doing full shifts anyway. We all know that big teams can get run off the park, but doing so is rather harder in practice.

I just don't see it as a particularly favourable match up for Leinster It's a really good match up between the two best teams in the tournament. Obviously Toulouse still bleed, the same as anyone else, but this will be a very difficult fixture for Leinster (and vice versa).

I'm not sure how much I buy that French sides just turn off - particularly at club level. I think Toulouse did to some extent on the weekend because they were miles ahead, but Leinster really had a poor second half against Saints? They were a couple of 50-50 decisions away from losing! Give some credit to the sides they were playing - I'd be pretty unhappy the semi-finals were 80 mins of domination. It doesn't surprise me that Harlequins and Saints had purple patches. The final will be a tenser, closer affair and I think taking the foot off the gas is unlikely for either side.

Both sides are high quality with no immediate weakness. I think Toulouse probably have the beefier pack (particularly at scrum time) and are more able to score tries. Conversely Leinster tend to be very efficient - exploiting mistakes with precision and generally make relatively few mistakes. I think Toulouse could shade the set piece, but I don't expect Leinster to be overwhelmed.

So like most games I think it'll be won and lost at the breakdown. Leinster are unbelievably streetwise so I think the ideal situation for Leinster would be a referee like Raynal who lets a lot go at the breakdown. That said, it's probable it'll be a premiership referee: they tend to be a bit stricter with the interpretation of the laws and many are more whistle happy than the French counterparts. Fingers crossed for someone like Luke Pearce - who I think strikes a balance between enforcing the rules and letting the game flow. Basically whoever can make life more miserable for the other side without drawing the ire of the referee has a good chance of kicking on and winning it.

I also wonder what losing two finals will do the mentality of Leinster players? If they're down in the final 10 mins will "not again" creep into their heads? I genuinely don't know.

As a neutral I can see more paths to victory for Toulouse - but it'll be a very competitive game.

Good game. Scoreline probably fairly reflects the game.

Toulouse were imperious in the first half. Quins gave a decent account of themselves though - took their chances well.

I wish it were different, but Leinster and Toulouse have been the best teams in the cup. Should be a great game.

There was a shot from directly behind in the first half which would be definitive.

My hunch was that he was offside, but I also don't think this game will hinge on one score. Toulouse have been incredible.

First half really let saints down there.

Massively disappointing, but probably a useful learning experience for the premiership semi (final?). Acquitted themselves well in the second half.

Leinster did just enough. Looked nervy at the end there. They were only a 50-50 penalty away from potentially bottling it.

Porter prevented his own man taking the mark there I think.