These “Songline” stories are ancient, exhibit little variation over long periods of time, and are carefully learned and guarded by the Elders who are its custodians [7].
What is the best way we could test and explore error correction and overwriting in such a system from an information theoretic standpoint?
Nuijten, M. B. (2020). Efficient Scientific Self-Correction in Times of Crisis. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/9hc8z
Department of Error. (2020). The Lancet, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31249-6
where any 10 of 30 segments can fully recover a user's files
the median review time at journals has grown from 85 days to >150 days during the past decade (5)
This statement is a misunderstanding of Powell 2016, which states:
At Nature, the median review time has grown from 85 days to just above 150 days over the past decade, according to Himmelstein's analysis.
However,
the median review time — the time between submission and acceptance of a paper — has hovered at around 100 days for more than 30 years.
So while the median review time at Nature has gone from 85 to 150 days, this is not the case for all journals. See also the related Tweet.