IT playing single player games with puzzels and problem solving, while managers played more competitive action roleplay games enhancing problem solving and managerial skills. Engineers played a game where you would build civilizations from scratch. A lot of the games played ties into each profession

Women stayed away from multiplayer confrontations games that is a representation of structural issues with sexual harassment or masked their gender to stay away from scrutiny

Chalmers' main claim in this book is that virtual realities are real, and that they are just as real as life right now, and there is no way of knowing that the life we are living right now is not a simulation. When I ask myself “Can you lead a good life in a virtual world?” I automatically think no. To me, in a virtual world, there is no real good you can do. If you help other people in the virtual world, you are only helping what I would think to be pixels. Anything you do in the virtual reality exists only in the simulation, but if you were to step out of it, anything you did is lost. It reminds me of having a high score in a game, but if you deleted the game, the high score goes away and it's like you never achieved the high score.

I think this connects to what we were talking about in class about gamification. Gamification is a concept that intersects with philosophy. Is it ethical to make certain concepts into a game? This text is trying to do the same thing, and interconnect philosophy and technology, by asking questions about emerging technology (ethics, privacy concerns etc), through a philosophical lens.

Grades have always been something students have tried to "game," and when you can have A.I. help you get good grades with less effort, of course people gravitate towards it. Perhaps this is an argument for "ungrading"

I wonder if turning it into a game would be helpful. I feel like it would work better for me that way.

Do to the age we live in, is there really any sort of job security for something like this? I mean, even AI in a video game can do the exact same thing, and those AI don't have so much time and money pored into them.

for - quote - scientific publishing is misdirection and huge business for publishing companies - quote - Alex Gomez-Marin - alignment - Alex Gomez-Marin - Indyweb - networked self-publishing

Utilizing "widgets" on an iPhone is also very helpful. I have a calendar widget on my home screen & it has been a game changer.

cute little idle game, "night" mechanic where automations turn off

I have personally used both chatgpt and game based learning in my classroom. I don't use chatgpt to provide feedback or assess. I do believe that those aspects are primarily the educators responsibility. However, I have used chatgpt to create collaborative groups, design seating charts, create short stories using specific information and more! I have found It to be quite useful when feeling overwhelmed with the amount of tasks we face daily. As for game based learning, my students love playing blooket and gimkit. I use this as an opportunity to connect vocabulary to images for better memory and to do drill practice with topics like verb conjugations. This past school year, I had students create a trivia game by creating questions about the country of their year long portfolio.

We should have Skoove expert, especially in Germany, being quoted here. Florian or Dominik, instead of a musician.

In order to benefit from brand awareness, it would be really nice having Skoove expert being quoted, insteas of a musician. In general, mentioning Skoove in a way that we really participated in this campaign would be really important for us.

Concerning! He's bought the brand washing attempts of big corps... am I being, rash? Is there no way out for Microsoft? Yes there is: One that doesn't include buying Activision despite being rotten? Profiting from endless games like CoD and Candy Crush? One that doesn't invest in data centers for AI that crush the global South? One that doesn't invest heavily in AAA titles like Halo, including its marketing, only to make a fraction of the investment sponsoring indies (and then laying them off)?

Then, no. I am not being rash. Microsoft owns a greedy ecosystem that includes Word and Excel. It asks people to pay for Windows licenses at 200€. Tried to do a Netflix with Xbox Game Pass. A big problem is that almost everyone knows Microsoft. Who knows Annapurna?

I think AI in sports will have a negative impact because it takes away the human side of the game that makes it exciting. The Washington Post said that MLB’s new ball-strike challenge system takes about “17 seconds,” and even though that’s quick, it still slows things down and changes the flow. I believe that rational decisions are a part of the game. I also don’t think other sports, like the NFL, should bring in AI to fix human errors, because the mistakes and arguments are part of what makes sports fun to watch. If AI gets too involved, games could start to feel robotic and less real. When it comes to jobs, I believe AI will start making a big impact before 2030. I also think people underestimate how many jobs AI can do, because it’s not just in tech, it could take over customer service, driving, and even some parts of healthcare.

important and impressive advice

One of my favorite factors about game.

I believe this fairness makes game intriguing for everyone regardless of social status.

Like the connection here. As an example, football field sometimes seems like huge ritual place, considering how people are hyped up for the game.

Which I believe makes game special and intriguing.

I think the author pointed out the essential element of the game. There are rules set within the game and players voluntarily follow it, no matter who the players are.

Cannot deny that play is made for entertainment. Even though there are serious side of the game, it also gives entertainment to people who feels it from doing serious games.

My favorite part about the concept of game, which, I believe, is maximized through modern form of "play," video games.

I always liked this question: why does people never question the rule of the game itself? In chess, such thoughts created rules like en passant and castling.

The spoil sport rejects the rules and thus rejects the game itself. The cheater rejects the rules but still continues to take part in the game-world.

The idea that the tension element confers a kind of ethical aspect to play is one that I agree with; as the author says, when a game is full of tension, the players character is revealed

This makes me think about our discussion in our first class; when considering what my favorite game is, I thought about the fact that I play a sport (basketball) but then hesitated to name that as a game. It is a game, of course, but after the years long experience I've had in training for the sport and competing very seriously, calling it a "game" feels in some ways very wrong. To me, it is more than a game; there are instances where some days it feels like work! With this in mind, can it still be considered a form of play?

This is kind of like false hope. We have agency in the game where we can make decisions that have impacts, but if these results lead to no end, no matter how immersive or engaging the environment is, the feeling of agency is bound to disappear.

This could be seen as a more figurative sense as well, by how the frightening place with all the dangers is the internal conflicts that people have to deal with. Adventures with Anxiety is a great example for that, with how the objective of the game is to struggle with the human's internal anxiety as the wolf and make sure that the human doesn't do anything bad. Dealing with those internal conflicts could lead to that mental freedom, which is the great reward that is mentioned.

I think that this is not similar to either of the games we have played because this is more describing a "sandbox" style game, but there are endings in Quing's Quest and Adventures with Anxiety.

This sentence ties to the big idea that when on a story journey, you should be questioning why everything is happening, even if we don't get all the answers we are looking for. This is similarly seen in Adventures With Anxiety, with how each of the choices makes you think about how it would have been different with another choice and what caused the specific reaction. Overall, it ends with you wondering whether or not you made all the right choices still and you won't truly know unless you play the game again.

Puzzles can be satisfying, but for them to be effective in enhancing the feeling of agency, they should not require a further suspension of disbelief. A game should work within the logic and rules that it's already established - such as Myst's elevator puzzle, in which it would be somewhat reasonable to have a hidden entrance; conversely, The Seventh Guest's cake puzzle is unrealistic as there is no reason to cut a cake past the game instructing the player to do so. Thus, the player feels as if they have effectively more agency in Myst than The Seventh Guest.

A puzzle/adventure game could be physically very open yet have many moral paths/choices

These sentences add to the author's definition of agency as a feeling of determination to solve a mystery or face the truth, is satisfactory. This is similar to finding the ending of the Adventures with Anxiety game, as we were "staring at the threatening beast" while still trying finish the game.

New way of agency, now you are not just navigating a game space, but you must solve a problem like a puzzle(direct user input that decides whether you win or not) in order to advance and navigate

Calm Things To Take Your Mind Off Noisy Sports Games

What were the results of this testing? Did it lead to fewer bugs or higher user satisfaction?

Mention any player metrics or feedback received post-launch to demonstrate success.

What was the user impact of these features? Include user growth or engagement metrics.

Imru-Ul-Quais' poem centers on themes of loss, longing, and memory, as he recalls past loves and mourns the traces of abandoned camps while weaving his grief into vivid depictions of nature, desire, and the desolate world around him. I paused at the line, “Nay, the cure of my sorrow must come from gushing tears. Yet, is there any hope that this desolation can bring me solace?” because it complicates the usual idea of mourning as a release, suggesting instead that memory may intensify pain rather than ease it. What especially captured my imagination, however, was the elaborate description of his horse, whose speed, strength, and other features seem to embody both the poet’s vitality and the severe beauty of the desert. The horse appears tireless (“he did not even sweat so as to need washing” after outrunning wild game") and is compared to natural forces like torrents and fire, suggesting a kind of resistance to human limits that contrasts sharply with the poem’s opening images of loss and desolation. This blending of personal sorrow with natural and animal imagery makes me think about how pre-Islamic poetry connects human emotion to the environment/nature, which could be an area to explore further.

Today: I want to get this half of the discussion done and take some time to myself to watch my show. This week: I want to get all my school work done and go out to the football game. This month: I want to focus on my school work while also focusing on balancing my social life.

Would you then say that play can make play in some way? Like in the game uno, your own unique rules can create a new form of play, or is it still the same?

Could there be limits to their interpretation, like when some days don’t play around, does our mind shift to not seeing the moment as a game

Very interesting tool, but bringing my A game will be scary

Master this fun Swedish lawn game that combines skill and strategy with our complete guide on how to play Kubb. By learning the simple Kubb rules and clever throwing techniques, you'll be ready to dominate your next outdoor get-together with friends and family. Read the full Kubb game instructions below and start playing this classic game today!

for - comparison - spiritual vs material technologies - Donald Hoffman

• Q❓- What about love? As per earlier discussion, love it's the most quintessential spiritual quality
• if we don't have live in life, any technology would not matter

for - future project - building a model to explain spacetime using Active Inference - Donald Hoffman - use Active Inference to minimise surprise using Markov chains - this model assumes consciousness is fundamental - this is going to be a model of intelligence based entirely from a model which takes consciousness as fundamental. - it goes back to game theory again. - back to the idea of a simulation - If you're able to create a piece of software that - is able to replicate and - is built on the fundamentals of consciousness. - Then it's potentially, it's going to think it's conscious

A game of baseball

This is very true nowadays, as you go to a basketball game and it's a blowout, but the next time you attend a game, it could end with a buzzer beater. You don't know what could happen.

This passage emphasizes the versatility of operating systems, which perform many roles depending on the type of computer and its purpose. Because computers are embedded in a wide range of devices—from household appliances to spacecraft—the OS must be designed to meet diverse needs and environments.

Explanation in English:

The word "commiserations" expresses sympathy or sorrow, often used to convey condolences or a shared sense of loss. In the provided context, it seems Adam is acknowledging a difficult situation, possibly related to a sports team facing relegation, where the speaker, likely Lawrence, is offering commiserations. The conversation reflects a blend of sadness over a loss and pride in the team’s sportsmanship, emphasizing the importance of the love of the game over financial rewards.

中文解释：

“致以哀悼”这个词表达了同情或悲伤，通常用于表示慰问或共享某种损失。在提供的上下文中，亚当似乎在承认一个困难的局面，可能与一支正面临降级的运动队有关，发言者，可能是劳伦斯，正在表示哀悼。这段对话反映了对失利的悲伤与对团队运动精神的自豪感，强调了对游戏的热爱比金钱奖励更重要。

In the excerpt "relish our defeat," the speaker is expressing a sense of enjoyment or satisfaction derived from experiencing a loss. This phrase suggests an ironic or good-natured acceptance of failure, possibly indicating a camaraderie or shared perspective among team members or friends. It reflects a mindset that values the experience of defeat as part of the game, rather than merely focusing on winning.

在“relish our defeat”这个短语中，讲话者表达了一种从失败中获得的享受或满足感。这句话传达了一种讽刺或善意接受失败的情感，可能表明团队成员或朋友之间的相互理解与亲密。这反映了一种心态，即将失利的经历视为比赛的一部分，而不仅仅关注胜利。

What is Zoonie's favourite game?

Foreshadowing

These three questions happen to contain three very different examples of play that show us a wide range from harmless and innocent to extremely harmful and maladaptive. A baby enjoying a game is both normal and great for her positive development, but the gambler who is "losing himself" in his passion is quite literally ruining his life. It's interesting how different forms of play can have very different effects on the player's life

I enjoy that the book mentioned both the internal and external Demographic influences. Corporations must make discussions based both their own employee demographics and the pressure of consumers. An example of changes for consumers from my personal interests is the fact that in the video game series Kirby, the box art for the american releases of the games has kirby with his brows furrowed. This was to appeal to the interests of teenage boys, who were the primary demographic of american nintendo consoles, while in japan they were marketed towards families.

Not just cleaning or spending time with a significant other, but also important deadlines and homework assignments

This moment really changes the game in the Amistad story when the U.S. Navy finally catches up with the ship. The navigator tricked everyone by sailing west and north at night, which kept the Africans stuck at sea longer than they thought they would be, showing how both vulnerable and strong they were. Once they were captured near Long Island, the whole situation shifted from the ocean to American courts, meaning the Africans' future would depend not on navigation anymore, but on legal battles, politics, and the larger fight over slavery and freedom.

State how the UI/UX design improved user interaction or satisfaction rates.

Include specific metrics on user engagement or feedback received post-launch.

The “riding a bike” metaphor for reading theory reminded me of improvisation in sports: if you play too slowly, you risk losing the moment which could cost the game, but you also want to avoid playing too fast, so it seems improvising and being in the moment is the only play. Learning to play a sport is about process and sometimes is about finding the right way to play is about balance.

The social media metrics can be very unfair especially when people are putting their opinion out there and it's not necessarily ignored but put aside and hidden. At this point it can almost seem useless to even say anything when clearly the feeds are controlled by someone.

Although the internet feeds us with unlimited information, they don't always show us the entirety of what's going on in the world.

Tee & Mo's Grabs-A-Daisy game

Shows how technology was changing everyday life and family routines.

The question from Better Homes and Gardens, "Where does the receiver go"? Seems irrelevant to many people today. The answer to that question today could be that the receiver can be anywhere, even on the go outside of the home.

Back then many families had only one tv, while nowadays families tend to have multiple tv’s throughout the house.

The food at Casa Bonita

Rex, Hamm, Buzz, Slinky and Mr Potato Head waiting outside a warmly lit garage near a Dinoco petrol station

I find this very intriguing that a 3 sylable word can have so much meaning.

English Explanation:

In the excerpt, "feisty" describes an energetic and spirited attitude, particularly regarding a female professional golfer who makes the sport seem enjoyable and engaging. The conversation highlights how her feistiness brings excitement to golf, indicating that her lively nature enhances the experience. The context also includes humorous banter about golf, suggesting that the enjoyment of the game can depend on the people you are playing with.

Chinese Explanation:

在这个摘录中，“feisty”形容一种充满活力和精神的态度，特别是指一位女性职业高尔夫球手，她让这项运动看起来既有趣又吸引人。对话强调她的活泼使高尔夫变得更加刺激，表明她的生动个性提升了这项运动的体验。上下文还包含了关于高尔夫的幽默对话，暗示打球的乐趣可能取决于与你一起打球的人。

whacking

English Explanation: In this excerpt, the term "whacking" refers to the act of hitting a golf ball with force, often used informally to describe swinging a golf club. The conversation involves two individuals discussing golf, and one mentions following a female professional golfer online who is skilled and energetic. This suggests that "whacking" can also imply enjoying the game and making it look exciting. The mention of playing with a partner, Martin Gibson, indicates that one's experience can vary based on the playing companion.

Chinese Explanation: 在这段摘录中，“whacking”一词指的是用力击打高尔夫球，通常以非正式的方式形容挥动高尔夫球杆。对话中，两个人在讨论高尔夫，其中一人提到在线关注一位女性职业高尔夫球手，她技艺高超且充满活力。这表明“whacking”也意味着享受这项运动并使其看起来充满乐趣。提到与合作伙伴马丁·吉布森一起打球，说明与打球伙伴的配合会影响个人的游戏体验。

ignorant /ɪɡˈnɔːrənt/ tidak tahu\ Dalam konteks ini, 'tidak tahu' menunjukkan bahwa Tie Zhu tidak memiliki pengetahuan atau pemahaman tentang para immortal, meskipun ia menyadari pentingnya situasi tersebut berdasarkan ekspresi orang tuanya.

1. Adjektiva: Tidak memiliki pengetahuan atau informasi tentang sesuatu
2. He was ignorant of the rules of the game.
3. Ia tidak tahu aturan permainan.

別姓問題のネックは、選択性というところである。

This seems out of place based on the 'Rules of the Game' - we're supposed to be Python devs who don't know Ruby. The Phoenix vs Rails comparison doesn't align with the established context, and it doesn't connect to the previous conversation either.

This sounds like children not wanting another kid to have access to a new toy or game because they can't have it first or as much. This kind of business behavior is detrimental to country wide progress.

We can see these being true on this day of day but with kids and iPads, iPhones, and game devices.

Missing from the analysis, however, are all the pieces of the system that you benefit from, but that you weren't originally paying for. If you don't fund those solutions too, then it does become a zero sum game with the actors who are already receiving the money, with no way in for those that have been doing things for the common good from the beginning

• Storytelling With Charlotte
• Never Know Day
• Slomo Spot A Kiss Game
• Indoor Camp

Playing a game of pouring Coke into the gas pipe in your car

• Aimed for kids
• Educational
• Perfect for family game night
• 30 cards

Asher Watkins must have been shocked that the animal he was trying to murder was scary and mad

hmmm

that sound provocative to me

predator

What does it mean though for a "stock market" to go up?

If this was zero sum though, can the value be accumulating at the loss of some other entity that's not in the stock market, possibly customers of the actual product etc.?

But one could argue that customers paid for whatever value they got from the product. So that is a positive sum transaction too.

• ClojureScript has excelled in standard UI patterns but now aims to harness modern browser APIs for high-performance use cases.

"The majority of Clojurescript application development and community discussions seems to be focused on improving standard UI implementation patterns and the general workflow of how we can build web applications better, easier and faster." (Medium)

• The workshop’s goal was to probe ClojureScript’s internals, identify bottlenecks, and introduce technologies like WebGL, WebRTC, WebWorkers, and Emscripten.

"So for this workshop I chose to look more below the surface of Clojurescript, analyze problem areas, examine possible optimization strategies and above all introduce people to a number of modern web technologies (WebGL, WebRTC, WebWorkers, Emscripten), techniques & tools offering possible routes to use the language in a sound and elegant way to work with these features." (Medium)

• A six-step implementation of Conway’s Game of Life, from naive to optimized, achieved a speedup from 10,840 ms to 16.5 ms per frame (\~650× faster) on a 1024×1024 grid.

"Six implementations of Conway’s Game of Life — from naive (but idiomatic & slow) to optimized Clojurescript using typed arrays and direct pixel manipulations (10,840 ms / frame vs 16.5 ms / frame = \~650× faster for a 1024×1024 grid)." (Medium)

• A compile-time macro version of get-in eliminated temporary vector allocations and reduce calls, boosting lookup speed from 205.18 ns to 43.61 ns (\~5× faster).

"Benchmarking this example with criterium under Clojure (which has somewhat different/faster protocol dispatch than in Clojurescript), the macro version results in 43.61ns vs 205.18ns for the default get-in (\~5× faster)." (Medium)

• Switching from nested vectors to a flat 1D vector enabled nth-based indexing (\~6× speed-up), before Typed Arrays and loop-based pixel updates removed millions of function calls for the full \~650× gain.

"The more obvious improvement to speed up the simulation was using a flat 1D vector to encode the grid and calculate cell indices for the 2D coordinates ... gain a \~6× speed up ... Since all our data ... are stored in typed arrays ... and altogether gained a \~650× speedup compared to the original." (Medium)

• Adopting transduce for neighbor counting proved \~15–20% slower than map & reduce, highlighting that idiomatic functions can sometimes underperform.

"One of the intermediate steps ... was using transduce instead of map & reduce to compute the number of alive neighbor cells, however this ended up actually being \~15–20% slower in this case." (Medium)

• Effective WebGL programming demands deep knowledge of geometry, linear algebra, the OpenGL state machine, GPU pipelines, and GLSL, making it daunting for newcomers.

"To anyone interested in directly utilizing the GPU in the browser, WebGL is a huge & fascinating topic, but it can also be very daunting for newcomers to graphics programming, since efficient use of it requires a multitude of prerequisite knowledge and terminology about 2D/3D geometry, linear algebra, spatial thinking in multiple spaces (coordinate systems), low-level data organization, the OpenGL state machine ... GPU processing pipelines, knowledge of the GLSL shading language, color theory etc." (Medium)

• The thi.ng/geom library employs Clojure maps for semi-declarative OpenGL/WebGL buffer and shader specifications, while preserving explicit control over the GL state machine.

"The thi.ng/geom library takes a semi-declarative approach to working with OpenGL/WebGL in that it’s extensively using Clojure maps to define various geometry and shader specifications, which are then compiled into the required data buffers & GLSL programs ... but at no point is it hiding the underlying layer, giving advanced users full control over the GL state machine." (Medium)

• Shadergraph addresses GLSL code reuse by offering transitive dependency resolution, a library of common functions, compile-time minification, and metadata extraction for tooling.

"To address this in Clojurescript from early on, we can use the thi.ng/shadergraph library, which provides us with: a transitive dependency resolution mechanism for GLSL code ... a growing library of pure, commonly used GLSL functions (lighting, color conversion, matrix math, rotations, effects etc.) ... and a basic compile-time shader minifier ... Clojure meta data extraction of the defined GLSL functions ..." (Medium)

• A hands-on WebRTC demo showed how to stream a camera feed into Shadertoy-style WebGL shaders for real-time video FX processing.

"I prepared a small example combining a WebRTC camera stream with Shadertoy-like WebGL image processing using a bunch of effect options." (Medium)

• True parallelism in the browser comes from WebWorkers—unlike core.async’s simulated concurrency—and relies on isolated modules, message passing, and transferable ArrayBuffers for efficient data sharing.

"However, the currently only way to obtain real extra compute resources of a multi-core CPU in JavaScript is to use WebWorkers ... WebWorker code needs to be loaded from a separate source file and can only communicate with the main process via message passing. By default, the data passed ... is copied, but some types (e.g. ArrayBuffers) can also be transferred ..." (Medium)

• Emscripten’s LLVM-based compiler targets asm.js (and soon WebAssembly), enabling C/C++ modules to outperform idiomatic ClojureScript for math-heavy and mutable-data tasks.

"Emscripten ... a LLVM-based transpiler for C and C++ to asm.js ... the resulting asm.js code almost always performs noticeably faster than the Clojurescript version ... With WebAssembly on the horizon, it’s maybe a good time to invest some time into some “upskilling” ..." (Medium)

• The workshop’s capstone was a C-based 3D particle system demo, using Emscripten’s JavaScript ArrayBuffer heap and typed arrays to pack 36-byte particle structs tightly and avoid copying overhead.

"For the final exercise ... we implemented a simple 3D particle system in C, compiled it with Emscripten and learned how to integrate it into a Clojurescript WebGL demo ... The Emscripten runtime emulates the C heap as a single, large JS ArrayBuffer ... Each particle only takes up 36 bytes ... all particles in this array are tightly packed ..." (Medium)

Reminds me of the school of moral ambition - https://www.moralambition.org/

Toto Slot adalah situs judi slot online terpercaya di Indonesia yang menawarkan berbagai pilihan game slot dengan tingkat kemenangan tinggi dan fair play.

The Tropical Bath * Lady Penelope and I have a nice, long bath in a tropical pool in Eden. We splash each other and play a watery game of hide and seek, before Lady Penelope proceeds to use the freshest flowers to cleanse my skin and body.

Julia Mutzenbach, [Conference report:] Digital in die jüdische Frühe Neuzeit. Innovative Formen der Vermittlung. Organisiert von Interdisziplinäres Forum Jüdische Geschichte und Kultur in der Frühen Neuzeit und Akademie der Diözese Rottenburg-Stuttgart. Stuttgart [Hybrid] 14.--16.02.2025, in: H-Soz-Kult, 24.07.2025 https://www.hsozkult.de/conferencereport/id/fdkn-156294 27.07.2025

A new idea appears like a different Bluey game every day - once you play it, it's enveloped in your memory forever.

I have done this and if I could go back I would have listened to myself. I feel this is a question a lot of people can relate to. I feel a lot of people have put something online they with they would not have. When I was a mighty might football coach, there was a 24 hour rule (cool down time). You could not call or post on Group-Me until 24 hours have past. Whether it be about a game or even practice. Do you have a rule about posting?

Include metrics on user engagement or feedback from testing to show impact.

Mention any user feedback or performance metrics that demonstrate the game's success.

Include any metrics on user engagement or feedback received from testing the game.

What was the outcome of this exploration? Did it lead to a successful game or user feedback?

Include metrics: how many users tested it, and what feedback did you receive on gameplay?

Add specifics: what was the goal of this exploration, and how was it received by users or testers?

Mention any feedback received from users or improvements in gameplay as a result of your development.

Mention any user feedback or performance metrics that demonstrate the game's success or engagement.

Do you play Splinterlands in the Gold League? Is the investment of over $300 in new Chaos cards worthwhile? With modest daily rewards, you can progress to higher leagues for greater earnings. Despite the early low returns, see how to grow your deck. And aim for future success in the game.

Why it's pathos: This evokes a feeling of loneliness and desire and shows how much he sacrificed and wanted to belong with the team.

Why it's logos: Griffin uses an example to show that even with his physical difference he is able to win games.

I find it interesting that words like "wanton" and "harlot" were used to describe this woman. Although Shamash himself states how important of a woman she is. they will always see her as a "mistress" or "harlot." Those words in and of itself have negative connotations. It is as if they degrade her almost.

Perfect, expansionary fiscal bitcoin issuance

Jewish history only peripheral part of history in games.

Well, yes history in games is rarely accurate and this also okay. The main purpose is entertainment. We need a culture that recognizes that a game can still teach some things about history (e.g. how does persecution work). And also show perspectives about history. ALSO: Its not a question if games are educational, people will always use them to passively or actively educate themself about history.

!

Every game you play is a choice between which career you want to have.

Life's a game made for everyone, and good ideas are the prizes for positivity

Soft Like Cotton * As Lady Penelope and I prepare for bed, I hide under the cosy white duvet while its cover is being washed at the laundry. A playful game of hide and seek ensues, with Lady Penelope trying to find out who that 'Little White Slug' is.

Research a topic that appears in your favourite board game.

Think of every story as a game that plays in your head when you get stressed.

This thought experiment necessarily leads us to challenge the assumption that accomplishment of a goal within a game necessarily renders something meaningful. The assumptions are straightforward and lead to the conclusion that with a finite goal, the activity can be meaningless. The experiment does assume, though, that the variation in outcome (the stone ultimately resting on top) is the only factor for determining meaning, which may be oversimplifying too much the psychological determinants of meaning. A stronger counterargument would involve subjective sense of accomplishment or affective interest, but not objective motives

Very well designed so you see the effects of addition and removal of the incentive

Hiện tại, em đang thực hiện tổng kết bài học một cách đơn giản: nhắc lại các điểm chính và đặt một vài câu hỏi kiểm tra kiến thức để học sinh trả lời ☺️

Em quan niệm rằng sau khi đã hoàn thành quá trình giảng dạy, phần tổng kết chỉ cần nhẹ nhàng, giúp học sinh nhìn lại nhanh kiến thức đã học, không nhất thiết phải tổ chức quá cầu kỳ.

MCT with UCT converges to the minimax algorithm for certain restricted games, but also has other advantages.

advantage 1: just like RL in general, the evaluation function can be implicit, coming from rollouts of the game and evaluating the outcome, so no explicit function for evaluation is needed for all states.

le lien devrait être souligné

The power of contrasts. The only way for hell to work is for its inhabitants to have hope; if they had no hope, torture and suffering is pointless. Without hope, hell loses its power.

Reviewer #1 (Public review):

Summary:

In this manuscript, the authors aim to address significant limitations of existing experimental paradigms used to study dyadic social interactions by introducing a novel experimental setup - the Dyadic Interaction Platform (DIP). The DIP uniquely allows participants to interact dynamically, face-to-face, with simultaneous access to both social cues and task-related stimuli. The authors demonstrate the versatility and utility of this platform across several exemplary scenarios, notably highlighting cases of significant behavioral differences in conditions involving direct visibility of a partner.

Major strengths include comprehensive descriptions of previous paradigms, detailed explanations of the DIP's technical features, and clear illustrations of multimodal data integration. These elements greatly enhance the reproducibility of the methods and clarify the potential applications across various research domains and species. Particularly compelling is the authors' demonstration of behavioral impacts related to transparency in interactions, as evidenced by the macaque-human experiments using the Bach-or-Stravinsky game scenario.

Strengths:

The DIP represents a methodological advance in the study of social cognition. Its transparent, touch-sensitive display elegantly solves the problem of enabling participants to attend to both their social partner and task stimuli simultaneously without requiring attention switching. This paper marks a notable step forward toward more options for naturalistic yet still lab-based studies of social decision-making, an area where the field is actively moving, especially given recent research highlighting significant differences in neural activity depending upon the context in which an action is performed. The DIP offers researchers a valuable tool to bridge the gap between tightly controlled laboratory paradigms and the dynamic, bidirectional nature of real-world social interactions.

The authors do well to provide comprehensive documentation of the technical specifications for the four different implementations of the platform, allowing other researchers to adapt and build upon their work. The detailed information about hardware configurations demonstrates careful attention to practical implementation details. They also highlight numerous options for integration with other tools and software, further demonstrating the versatility of this apparatus and the variety of research questions to which it could be applied.

The historical review of dyadic experimental paradigms is thorough and effectively positions the DIP as addressing a critical gap in existing methodologies. The authors convincingly argue that studying continuous, dynamic social interactions is essential for understanding real-world social cognition, and that existing paradigms often force unnatural attention-splitting or turn-taking behaviors that don't reflect naturalistic interaction patterns.

The four example applications showcase the DIP's versatility across diverse research questions. The Bach-or-Stravinsky economic game example is particularly compelling, demonstrating how continuous access to partners' actions substantially changes coordination strategies in non-human primates. This highlights a key strength of the DIP, which is that it removes a level of abstraction that can make tasks more difficult for non-human primates to learn. By being able to see their partner and actions directly, rather than having to understand that a cursor on a screen represents a partner, the platform makes the task more accessible to non-human primates and possibly children as well. This opens up important avenues for enhanced cross-species investigations of cognition, allowing researchers to study social dynamics in a setting that remains naturalistic yet controlled across different populations.

Weaknesses:

Some of the experimental applications would benefit from stronger evidence demonstrating the unique advantages of the transparent setup. For instance, in the dyadic foraging example, it's not entirely clear how participants' behavior differs from what might be observed when simply tracking each other's cursor movements in a non-transparent setup. More evidence showing how direct visibility of the partner, beyond simply being able to track the position of the partner's cursor, influences behavior would strengthen this example. Similarly, in the continuous perceptual report (CPR) task, the subjects could perform this task and see feedback from their partners' actions without having to see their partner through the transparent screen. Evidence showing that 1) subjects do indeed look at their partner during the task and 2) viewing their partner influences their performance on the task would significantly strengthen the claim that the ability to view the partner brings in a new dimension to this task. These additions would better demonstrate the specific value added by the transparent nature of the DIP beyond what could be achieved with standard cursor-tracking paradigms.

A significant limitation that is inadequately addressed relates to neural investigations. While the authors position the platform's ability to merge attention to social stimuli and task stimuli as a key advantage, they don't sufficiently acknowledge the challenges this creates for dissociating neural signals attributed to social cues versus task-based stimuli. More traditional lab-based experiments intentionally separate components like task-stimulus perception, social perception, and decision-making periods so that researchers can isolate the neural signals associated with each process. This deliberate separation, which the authors frame as a weakness, actually serves an important functional purpose in neural investigations. The paper would be strengthened by explicitly discussing this limitation and offering potential approaches to address it in experimental design or data analysis. For instance, the authors could suggest methodological innovations or analytical techniques that might help disentangle the overlapping neural signals that would inevitably arise from the integrated presentation of social and task stimuli in the DIP setup.

Furthermore, the authors' suggestion to arrange task stimuli around the periphery of the screen to maintain a clear middle area for viewing the partner appears to contradict their own critique of traditional paradigms. This recommended arrangement would seemingly reintroduce the very problem of attentional switching between task stimuli and social partners that the authors identified as a limitation of previous approaches. The paper would be strengthened by discussing the potential trade-offs associated with their suggested stimulus arrangement. Additionally, offering potential approaches to address these limitations in experimental design or data analysis would enhance the paper's contribution to the field.

(from Slack chats: CR) What is everyone’s favorite resource to show to undergraduates new to synthetic biology? Bonus points to printable/written/non-video stuff

(GP) Not directly a resource, as this assumes some level of bg has been given, but I was introduced to different parts of a genetic construct via this game during my undergrad:

The concept of online identities is fascinating, especially how individuals craft different personas across platforms. For instance, a student may use LinkedIn to present a professional side, while Facebook highlights personal connections. It’s interesting how these platforms allow for a wide range of self-expression, from informal language with friends to creating game avatars or posting instagram stories in a second language. These digital spaces not only help build new identities but also expand how we connect with others and explore different cultures. How do you think these online identities influence our real-life interactions and perceptions?

This still seems to me like it would be easy to game and get around with no easy way to verify

Ive never heard of these tests before, but I dont know how well they would work at a 3 month follow up. Im skeptical that they would work if you had a cigarette more than a few days before, and everywhere I look online says that they arent very effective past 2 days. This seems like it would be an easy system to game if you simply lie about your smoking in the self report, but I could be wrong

Wry introspection, elaborate detail

Its a good idea to explore cattle raiding. The football game we played pushing back people into their own village is a tribal reality which is coded into the GAA I also sense it is coded into the stories of rape and babies killed by nuns and children raped by priests and uncles and fathers that is also a reality of the Gaelic psycche

Crypto Wallet Development Company, can be referred if looking to develop your crypto wallet.

daft

English Explanation:

In the excerpt, the term "daft" is used to describe something foolish or silly. The speaker asserts, "I’m not daft," indicating awareness of the situation and a rebuttal to any suggestion that they lack common sense. The context suggests that the conversation involves planning a round of golf, which is being framed not just as a game but as an opportunity for meaningful conversation. The speaker expresses confidence that their plans, although considered impractical, could ultimately persuade others.

Chinese Explanation:

在这一段中，“daft”一词用来描述愚蠢或傻的事物。说话者表示：“我并不傻”，这表明他们对情况有清晰的认识，并反驳了任何暗示他们缺乏常识的说法。上下文提到的高尔夫活动不仅是一场比赛，更是一个进行有意义谈话的机会。说话者自信他们的计划尽管被认为是不切实际，但可能最终会说服他人。

These could be people with low intrinsic motivation and just looking to game the system

children are expensive like if you can say the

sentence children are expensive expensive there may be something wrong with your framing of what children are

all about so that's one of the rules of the game children are expensive and I know many people and young people today

but even in my it's like should I delay my career or should I have a family or should I like this is not a good way to

run your Society where people feel like maybe we shouldn't have a family at any I mean like isn't the point to have a

society you have to have babies to have a so anyway

El comentario a una anotación continente habla de Monos de Markov, en el sentido de atribuirle personalidad y vida a algo inanimado, al hablar con él (tanto como se habla con un Tarot u otro juego interpretativo/narrativo). Estos serían los límites del "ghost in a box", que valdría la pena reconocer a pesar de lo útil de la interpretación animista para el archivo.

eLife Assessment

This valuable work investigates cooperative behaviors in adolescents using a repeated Prisoner's Dilemma game. The computational modeling approach used in the study is solid and well established, yet evidence supporting certain claims remains incomplete. The work could be strengthened with the consideration of additional experimental contexts, non-linear relationships between age and observed behavior, and modeling details. If these concerns are addressed, the results will be of interest to developmental psychologists, economists, and social psychologists.

Reviewer #1 (Public review):

Summary:

Wu and colleagues aimed to explain previous findings that adolescents, compared to adults, show reduced cooperation following cooperative behaviour from a partner in several social scenarios. The authors analysed behavioural data from adolescents and adults performing a zero-sum Prisoner's Dilemma task and compared a range of social and non-social reinforcement learning models to identify potential algorithmic differences. Their findings suggest that adolescents' lower cooperation is best explained by a reduced learning rate for cooperative outcomes, rather than differences in prior expectations about the cooperativeness of a partner. The authors situate their results within the broader literature, proposing that adolescents' behaviour reflects a stronger preference for self-interest rather than a deficit in mentalising.

Strengths:

The work as a whole suggests that, in line with past work, adolescents prioritise value accumulation, and this can be, in part, explained by algorithmic differences in weighted value learning. The authors situate their work very clearly in past literature, and make it obvious the gap they are testing and trying to explain. The work also includes social contexts that move the field beyond non-social value accumulation in adolescents. The authors compare a series of formal approaches that might explain the results and establish generative and model-comparison procedures to demonstrate the validity of their winning model and individual parameters. The writing was clear, and the presentation of the results was logical and well-structured.

Weaknesses:

I also have some concerns about the methods used to fit and approximate parameters of interest. Namely, the use of maximum likelihood versus hierarchical methods to fit models on an individual level, which may reduce some of the outliers noted in the supplement, and also may improve model identifiability.

There was also little discussion given the structure of the Prisoner's Dilemma, and the strategy of the game (that defection is always dominant), meaning that the preferences of the adolescents cannot necessarily be distinguished from the incentives of the game, i.e. they may seem less cooperative simply because they want to play the dominant strategy, rather than a lower preferences for cooperation if all else was the same.

Appraisal & Discussion:

The authors have partially achieved their aims, but I believe the manuscript would benefit from additional methodological clarification, specifically regarding the use of hierarchical model fitting and the inclusion of Bayes Factors, to more robustly support their conclusions. It would also be important to investigate the source of the model confusion observed in two of their models.

I am unconvinced by the claim that failures in mentalising have been empirically ruled out, even though I am theoretically inclined to believe that adolescents can mentalise using the same procedures as adults. While reinforcement learning models are useful for identifying biases in learning weights, they do not directly capture formal representations of others' mental states. Greater clarity on this point is needed in the discussion, or a toning down of this language.

Additionally, a more detailed discussion of the incentives embedded in the Prisoner's Dilemma task would be valuable. In particular, the authors' interpretation of reduced adolescent cooperativeness might be reconsidered in light of the zero-sum nature of the game, which differs from broader conceptualisations of cooperation in contexts where defection is not structurally incentivised.

Overall, I believe this work has the potential to make a meaningful contribution to the field. Its impact would be strengthened by more rigorous modelling checks and fitting procedures, as well as by framing the findings in terms of the specific game-theoretic context, rather than general cooperation.

Reviewer #2 (Public review):

Summary:

This manuscript investigates age-related differences in cooperative behavior by comparing adolescents and adults in a repeated Prisoner's Dilemma Game (rPDG). The authors find that adolescents exhibit lower levels of cooperation than adults. Specifically, adolescents reciprocate partners' cooperation to a lesser degree than adults do. Through computational modeling, they show that this relatively low cooperation rate is not due to impaired expectations or mentalizing deficits, but rather a diminished intrinsic reward for reciprocity. A social reinforcement learning model with asymmetric learning rate best captured these dynamics, revealing age-related differences in how positive and negative outcomes drive behavioral updates. These findings contribute to understanding the developmental trajectory of cooperation and highlight adolescence as a period marked by heightened sensitivity to immediate rewards at the expense of long-term prosocial gains.

Strengths:

(1) Rigid model comparison and parameter recovery procedure.

(2) Conceptually comprehensive model space.

(3) Well-powered samples.

Weaknesses:

(1) A key conceptual distinction between learning from non-human agents (e.g., bandit machines) and human partners is that the latter are typically assumed to possess stable behavioral dispositions or moral traits. When a non-human source abruptly shifts behavior (e.g., from 80% to 20% reward), learners may simply update their expectations. In contrast, a sudden behavioral shift by a previously cooperative human partner can prompt higher-order inferences about the partner's trustworthiness or the integrity of the experimental setup (e.g., whether the partner is truly interactive or human). The authors may consider whether their modeling framework captures such higher-order social inferences. Specifically, trait-based models-such as those explored in Hackel et al. (2015, Nature Neuroscience)-suggest that learners form enduring beliefs about others' moral dispositions, which then modulate trial-by-trial learning. A learner who believes their partner is inherently cooperative may update less in response to a surprising defection, effectively showing a trait-based dampening of learning rate.

(2) This asymmetry in belief updating has been observed in prior work (e.g., Siegel et al., 2018, Nature Human Behaviour) and could be captured using a dynamic or belief-weighted learning rate. Models incorporating such mechanisms (e.g., dynamic learning rate models as in Jian Li et al., 2011, Nature Neuroscience) could better account for flexible adjustments in response to surprising behavior, particularly in the social domain.

(3) Second, the developmental interpretation of the observed effects would be strengthened by considering possible non-linear relationships between age and model parameters. For instance, certain cognitive or affective traits relevant to social learning-such as sensitivity to reciprocity or reward updating-may follow non-monotonic trajectories, peaking in late adolescence or early adulthood. Fitting age as a continuous variable, possibly with quadratic or spline terms, may yield more nuanced developmental insights.

(4) Finally, the two age groups compared - adolescents (high school students) and adults (university students) - differ not only in age but also in sociocultural and economic backgrounds. High school students are likely more homogenous in regional background (e.g., Beijing locals), while university students may be drawn from a broader geographic and socioeconomic pool. Additionally, differences in financial independence, family structure (e.g., single-child status), and social network complexity may systematically affect cooperative behavior and valuation of rewards. Although these factors are difficult to control fully, the authors should more explicitly address the extent to which their findings reflect biological development versus social and contextual influences.

This can also be what reinforces bad behavior and causes people to start practicing a bad habit only to take themselves off of it in order to game the system

La Salle begins to undermine Jolliet's findings as he was interested in using the resources himself, especially the bison hide which could make him a fortune.

play the game, man i foul it

I started reading this paper with great interest, which flagged over time. As someone with extensive experience both publishing peer-reviewed research articles and working with publication data (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, PubMedCentral) I understand there are vagaries in the data because of how and when it was collected, and when certain policies and processes were implemented. For example, as an author starting in the late 1980s, we were instructed by the journal “guide to authors” to use only initials. My early papers were all only using initials. This changed in the mid-late 1990s. Another example, when working with NIH publications data, one knows dates like 1946 (how far back MedLine data go), 1996 (when PubMed was launched), and 2000 (when PubMedCentral was launched) and 2008 (when NIH Open Access policy enacted). There are also intermediate dates for changes in curation policy…. that underlie a transition from initials to full name in the biomedical literature.

I realize that the study covers all research disciplines, but still I am surprised that the authors of this paper don’t start with an examination of the policies underlying publications data, and only get to this at the end of a fairly torturous study.

As a reader, this reviewer felt pulled all over the place in this article and increasingly frustrated that this is a paper that explores the Dimensions database vagaries only and not really the core overall challenges of bibliometric data, irrespective of data source. Dimensions ingests data from multiple sources — so any analysis of its contents needs to examine those sources first.

A few specific comments:

• The “history of science” portion of the paper focuses on English learned societies in the 17th century. There were many other learned societies across Europe, and also “papers” (books, treatises) from long before the 17th century in Middle-eastern and Asian countries (e.g, see history of mathematics, engineering, governance and policy, etc.). These other histories were not acknowledged by the authors. Research didn’t just spring full-formed out of Zeus’ head.

• It is unclear throughout if the authors are referring to science, research, which disciplines are or are not included. The first chart on discipinary coverage is Fig 13 and goes back to 1940ish. Also, which languages are included in the analysis? For example, Figure 2 says “academic output” but from which academies? What countries? What languages? Disciplines? Also, in Figure 2, this reviewer would have like to see discussion about the variability in the noisiness of the data over time.

• The inclusion of gender in the paper misses the mark for this reviewer. When dealing with initials, how can one identify gender? And when working in times/societies where women had to hide their identity to be published…. how can a name-based analysis of gender be applied? If this paper remains a study of the “initial era”, this reviewer recommends removing the gender analysis.

• Reference needed for “It is just as important to see ourselves reflected in the outputs of the research careers…” (section B).

• Reference needed for “This period marked the emergence of “Big Science” (Section B). How do we know this is Big Science? What is the relationship with the nature of science careers? Here it would be useful perhaps to mention that postdocs were virtually unheard of before Sputnik.

• Fig 3. This would be more effective as a % total papers than absolute #.

• Gradual Evolution of the Scholarly Record. This reviewer would like to see proportion of papers without authors. A lot of history of science research is available for this period, and a few references here would be welcome, as well as a by-country analysis (or acknowledgement that the data are largely from Europe and/or English-speaking countries).

• Accelerated Changes in Recent Times. Again, this reviewer would like to see reference to scholarship on the history of science. One of the things happening in the post WW2 timeframe is the increase in government spending (in the US particularly) on R&D and academic research. So, is the academy changing or is it responding to “market forces”.

• Reflective richness of data. “Evolution of the research community” is not described in the text, not is collaborative networks.

• In the following paragraph, one could argue that evaluation was a driver of change, not a response to it. This reviewer would like to see references here.

• II. Methodology. (i) 2nd sentence missing “to” “… and full form to refer to an author name…”. (ii) 2nd para the authors talk about epochs, but the data could be (are) discontinuous because of (a) curation policy, (b) curation technology, (c) data sources (e.g., Medline rolled out in the 1960s and back-populated to 1946). (iii) 4th para referes to Figs 3 and 4 showing a marked change between 1940 and 1950, but Fig 3 goes back only to 1960, and Fig 4 is so compressed it is hard to see anything in that time range. (iv) Para 7. “the active publishing community is a reasonable proxy for the global research population”. We need a reference here and more analysis. Is this Europe? English language? Which disciplines? All academia? Dimensions data? (v) Para 12 “In exploring the issue of gender…” see comments above. Gender is an important consideration but is out of scope, in this reviewer’s opinion, for this paper focused on use of initials vs. full name.

• Listing 1. Is there a resolvable URL/DOI for this query?

• Figs 9-11, 14, 15. This reviewer would like to see a more fulsome examination / discussion of data discontinuities. Particularly around ~1985-2000.

Discussion

• The country-level discussion suggests the data (publications included) are only those that have been translated into English. Please clarify. Also, please add references in this section. There are a lot of bold statements, such as “A characteristic of these countries was the establishment of strong national academies.” Is this different from other places in the world? How? In the para before this statement, there is a phrase “picking out Slavonic stages” that is not clear to this reviewer.

• The authors seem to get ahead of themselves talking about “formal” and “informal” in relation to whether initials or full names are used. And then discuss the “Power Distance” and end up arguing that it isn’t formal/informal … but rather publisher policies and curation practices driving the initial era and its end.

• And then the authors come full circle on research articles being a technology, akin to a contract. Which is neat and useful. But all the intermediate data analysis is focused on the Dimensions data base and this reviewer would argue should be a part of the database documentation rather than a scholarly article.

• This reviewer would prefer this paper be focused much more tightly on how publishing technology can and has driven the sociology of science. Dig more into the E. Journal Analysis and F. Technological analysis. Stick with what you have deep data for, and provide us readers with a practical and useful paper that maybe, just maybe, publishers will read and be incentivized to up their game with respect to adoption of “new” technologies like ORCID, DOIs for data, etc. Because these papers are not just expositions on a disciplinary discourse, they are also a window into how science (research) works and is done.

setup...

This line is funny but also deep. The question has no real answer, but the idea keeps going and going. It shows us how Indigenous stories don't always work the same way as scientific ones. They focus more on connection and wonder rather than trying to prove something.

Introduction Welcome to “A Beginner's Guide to Information Literacy,” a step-by-step guide to understanding information literacy concepts and practices. This guide will cover each frame of the "Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education," a document created by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) to help educators and librarians think about, teach, and practice information literacy. The goal of this guide is to break down the basic concepts in the Framework and put them in accessible, digestible language so that we can think critically about the information we're exposed to in our daily lives. To start, let's look at the ACRL definition of information literacy, so we have some context going forward: Information Literacy is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning. Boil that down and what you have are the essentials of information literacy: asking questions, finding information, evaluating information, creating information, and doing all of that responsibly and ethically. We'll be looking at each of the Frames alphabetically, since that's how they are presented in the Framework. None of these Frames is more important than another, and all need to be used in conjunction with the others, but we have to start somewhere, so alphabetical it is! In order, the frames are: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Information Has value Research as Inquiry Scholarship as Conversation Searching as Strategic Exploration Just because we're laying this out alphabetically does not mean you have to go through it in order. Some of the sections reference Frames previously mentioned, but for the most part you can jump to wherever you like and use this guide however you see fit! You can also open up the Framework using the link above or in the attached resources to read the Framework in its original form and follow along with each section. The following sections originally appeared as blog posts for the Texas A&M- Corpus Christi's library blog. Edits have been made to remove institutional context, but you can see the original posts in the Mary and Jeff Bell Library blog archives. Authority is Constructed and Contextual The first frame is Authority is Constructed and Contextual. There's a lot to unpack in that language, so let's get started.

Start with the word "Authority." At the root of “Authority” is the word Author. So start there: who wrote the piece of information you’re reading? Why are they writing? What stake do they have in the information they’re presenting? What are their credentials (you can straight up google their name to learn more about them)? Who are they affiliated with? A public organization? A university? A company trying to make a profit? Check it out.

Now let's talk about how authority is "Constructed." Have you ever heard the phrase “social construct”? Some people say gender is a social construct or language, written and spoken, is a construct. “Constructed” basically means humans made it up at some point to instill order in their communities. It’s not an observable, scientifically inevitable fact. When we say “authority” is constructed, we’re basically saying that we as individuals and as a society choose who we give authority to, and sometimes we might not be choosing based on facts.<br /> A common way of assessing authority is by looking at an author’s education. We’re inclined to trust someone with a PhD over someone with a high school diploma because we think the person with a PhD is smarter. That’s a construct. We’re conditioned to think that someone with more education is smarter than people with less education, but we don't know it for a fact. There are a lot of reasons someone might not seek out higher education. They might have to work full time, or take care of a family, or maybe they just never wanted to go to college. None of these factors impact someone’s intelligence or ability to think critically. If aliens land on South Padre Island, TX, there will be many voices contributing to the information collected about the event. Someone with a PhD in astrophysics might write an article about the mechanical workings of the aliens’ spaceship. Cool, they are an authority on that kind of stuff, so I trust them. But the teenager who was on the island and watched the aliens land has first-hand experience of the event, so I trust them too. They have authority on the event even though they don’t have a PhD in astrophysics. So we cannot think someone with more education is inherently more trustworthy, or smarter, or has more authority than anyone else. Some people who are authorities on a subject are highly educated, some are not. Likewise, let’s say I film the aliens landing and stream it live on Facebook. At the same time, a police officer gives an interview on the news that says something contradicting my video evidence. All of a sudden, I have more authority than the police officer. Many of us are raised to trust certain people automatically based on their jobs, but that’s also a construct. The great thing about critical thinking is that we can identify what is fact and fiction, and we can decide for ourselves who to trust.

The final word is "Contextual." This one is a little simpler. If I go to the hospital and a medical doctor takes out my appendix, I’ll probably be pretty happy with the outcome. If I go to the hospital and Dr. Jill Biden, a professor of English, takes out my appendix, I’m probably going to be less happy with the results. Medical doctors have authority in the context of medicine. Dr. Jill Biden has authority in the context of education. And Doctor Who has authority in the context of inter-galactic heroics and nice scarves. This applies when we talk about experiential authority, too. If an 8th grade teacher tells me what it’s like to be a 4th grade teacher, I will not trust their authority. I will, however, trust a 4th grade teacher to tell me about teaching 4th grade.

The Takeaway: Basically, when we think about Authority, we need to ask ourselves, “Do I trust them? Why?” If they do not have experience with the subject (like witnessing an event or holding a job in the field) or subject expertise (like education or research), then maybe they aren’t an authority after all. P.S. I'm sorry for the uncalled-for dig, Dr. Biden. I’m sure you’d do your best with an appendectomy.

Ask Yourself In what context are you an authority? If you needed to figure out how to do a kickflip on a skateboard, who would you ask? Who's an authority in that situation? Information Creation as a Process The second Frame is "Information Creation as a Process."

Information Creation So first of all, let’s get this out of the way: Everyone is a creator of information. When you write an essay, you’re creating information. When you log the temperature of the lizard tank, you’re creating information. Every Word Doc, Google Doc, survey, spreadsheet, Tweet, and PowerPoint that you’ve ever had a hand in? All information products. That YOU created. In some way or another, you created that information and put it out into the world.

Processes One process you’re probably familiar with if you're a student is the typical “Research Paper.” You know your professor wants about five to eight pages consisting of an introduction that ends in a thesis statement, a few paragraphs that each touch on a piece of evidence that supports your thesis, and then you end in a conclusion paragraph which starts with a rephrasing of your thesis statement. You save it to your hard drive or Google Drive and then you submit it to your professor. This is one process for creating information. It’s a boring one, but it’s a process.<br /> Outside of the classroom, the information creation process looks different, and we have lots of choices to make. Once of the choice you’ll need to make is the mode or format in which you present information. The information I’m creating right now comes to you in the mode of an Open Educational Resource. Originally, I created these sections as blog posts. Those five-page essays I mentioned earlier are in the mode of essays. When you create information (outside of a course assignment), it’s up to you how to package that information. It might feel like a simple or obvious choice, but some information is better suited to some forms of communication. And some forms of communication are received in a certain way, regardless of the information in them. For example, if I tweet “Jon Snow knows nothing,” it won’t carry with it the authority of my peer-reviewed scholarly article that meticulously outlines every instance in which Jon Snow displays a lack of knowledge. Both pieces of information are accurate, but the processes I went through to create and disseminate the information have an effect on how the information is received by my audience. And that is perhaps the biggest thing to consider when creating information: your audience.

The Audience Matters If I just want my twitter followers to know Jon Snow knows nothing, then a tweet is the right way to reach them. If I want my tenured colleagues and other various scholars to know Jon Snow knows nothing then I’m going to create a piece of information that will reach them, like a peer-reviewed journal article. Often, we aren’t the ones creating information, we're the audience members ourselves. When we're scrolling on Twitter, reading a book, falling asleep during a PowerPoint presentation-- we're the audience observing the information being shared. When this is the case, we have to think carefully about the ways information was created. Advertisements are a good example. Some are designed to reach a 20-year old woman in Corpus Christi through Facebook, while others are designed to reach a 60-year old man in Hoboken, NJ over the radio. They might both be selling the same car, and they’re going to put the same information (size, terrain, miles per gallon, etc.) in those ads, but their audiences are different, so their information creation process is different, and we end up with two different ads for different audiences.

Be a Critical Audience Member When we are the audience member, we might automatically trust something because it’s presented a certain way. I know that, personally, I’m more likely to trust something that is formatted as a scholarly article than I am something that is formatted as a blog. And I know that that's biased thinking and it's a mistake to make that assumption. It's risky to think like that for a couple of reasons: Looks can be deceiving. Just because someone is wearing a suit and tie doesn’t mean they’re not an axe murderer and just because something looks like a well-researched article, doesn’t mean it is one. Automatic trust unnecessarily limits the information we expose ourselves to. If I only ever allow myself to read peer-reviewed scholarly articles, think of all the encyclopedias and blogs and news articles I’m missing out on! If I have a certain topic I’m really excited about, I’m going to try to expose myself to information regardless of the format and I’ll decide for myself (#criticalthinking) which pieces of information are authoritative and which pieces of information suit my needs. Likewise, as I am conducting research and considering how best to share my new knowledge, I’m going to consider my options for distributing this newfound information and decide how best to reach my audience. Maybe it’s a tweet, maybe it’s a Buzzfeed quiz, or maybe it’s a presentation at a conference. But whatever mode I choose will also convey implications about me, my information creation process, and my audience.

The Takeaway You create information all of the time. The way you package and share it will have an effect on how others perceive it.

Ask Yourself Is there a form of information you're likely to trust at first glance? Either a publication like a newspaper or a format like a scholarly article? Can you think of some voices that aren't present in that source of information? Where might you look to find some other perspectives? If you read an article written by medical researchers that says chocolate is good for your health, would you trust the article? Would you still trust their authority if you found out that their research was funded by a company that sells chocolate bars? Funding and stakeholders have an impact on the creation process, and it's worth thinking about how this can compromise someone's authority.

Information Has Value Onwards and upwards! We're onto Frame 3: Information Has Value.

What Counts as Value? There are a lot of different ways we value things. Some things, like money, are valuable to us because we can exchange them for goods and services. On the other hand, some things, like a skill, are valuable to use because we can exchange them for money (which we exchange for more goods and services). Some things are valuable to us for sentimental reasons, like a photograph or a letter. Some things, like our time, are valuable because they are finite.

The Value of Information Information has all different kinds of value.<br /> One kind is monetary. If I write a book and it gets published, I’m probably going to make some money off of that (though not as much money as the publishing company will make). So that’s valuable to me. But I’m also getting my name out into the world, and that’s valuable to me too. It means that when I apply for a job or apply for a grant, someone can google me and think, “Oh look! She wrote a book! That means she has follow-through and will probably work hard for us!” That kind of recognition is a sort of social value. That social value, by the way, can also become monetary value. If I’ve produced information, a university might give me a job, or an organization might fund my research. If I’ve invented a machine that will floss my teeth for me, the patent for my invention could be worth a lot of money (plus it'd be awesome. Cool factor can count as value.). In a more altruistic slant, information is also valuable on a societal level. When we have more information about political candidates, for example, it influences how we vote, who we elect, and how our country is governed. That’s some really valuable information right there. That information has an effect on the whole world (plus outer space, if we elect someone who’s super into space exploration). If someone is trying to keep information hidden or secret, or if they’re spreading misinformation to confuse people, it’s probably a sign that the information they’re hiding is important, which is to say, valuable. On a much smaller scale, think about the information on food packages. If you’re presented with calorie counts, you might make a different decision about the food you buy. If you’re presented with an item’s allergens, you might avoid that product and not end up in an Emergency Room with anaphylactic shock. You know what’s super valuable to me? NOT being in an Emergency Room! But if you do end up in the Emergency Room, the information that doctors and nurses will use to treat your allergic reaction is extremely valuable. That value of that information is equal to the lives it’s saved.

Acting Like Information is Valuable When we create our own information by writing papers and blog posts and giving presentations, it’s really important that we give credit to the information we’ve used to create our new information product for a couple of reasons. First, someone worked really hard to create something, let’s say an article. And that article’s information is valuable enough to you to use in your own paper or presentation. By citing the author properly, you’re giving the author credit for their work which is valuable to them. The more their article is cited, the more valuable it becomes because they’re more likely to get scholarly recognition and jobs and promotions. Second, by showing where you’re getting your information, you’re boosting the value of your new information product. On the most basic level, you’ll get a higher grade on your paper which is valuable to you. But you’re also telling your audience, whether it’s your professor or your boss or your YouTube subscribers, that you aren’t just making stuff up—you did the work of researching and citing, and that makes your audience trust you more. It makes the audience value your information more. Remember early on when I said the frames all connect? "Information Has Value" ties into the other information literacy frames we've talked about, "Information Creation as a Process" and "Authority as Constructed and Contextual." When I see you’ve cited your sources of information, then I, as the audience, think you’re more authoritative than someone who doesn’t cite their sources. I also can look at your information product and evaluate the effort you’ve put into it. If you wrote a tweet, which takes little time and effort, I’ll generally value it less than if you wrote a book, which took a lot of time and effort to create. I know that time is valuable, so seeing that you were willing to dedicate your time to create this information product makes me feel like it’s more valuable.

The Takeaway: Information is valuable because of what goes into its creation (time and effort) and what comes from it (an informed society). If we didn’t value information, we wouldn’t be moving forward as a society, we’d probably have died out thousands of years ago as creatures who never figured out how to use tools or start a fire. So continue to value information, because it improves your life, your audiences’ lives, and the lives of other information creators. More importantly, if we stop valuing information a smarter species will eventually take over and it’ll be a whole Planet of the Apes thing and I just don't have the energy for that right now.

Ask Yourself Can you think of some ways in which a YouTube video on dog training has value? Who values it? Who profits from it? Think of some information that would be valuable to someone applying to college. What does that person need to know?

Research as Inquiry Easing on down the road, we've come to frame number 4: Research as Inquiry. Inquiry is another word for curiosity or questioning. I like to think of this frame as "Research as Curiosity," because I think it more accurately captures the way our adorable human brains work.

Inquiring Minds Want to Know When you think to yourself, “How old is Madonna?” and you google it to find out she’s 62 (as of the creation of this resource), that’s research! You had a question (how old is Madonna?), you applied a search strategy (googling “Madonna age”) and you found an answer (62). That’s it! That’s all research has to be! But it’s not all research can be. This example, like most research, is comprised of the same components we use in more complex situations. Those components are: a question and an answer, Inquiry and Research, “how old is Madonna?” and "62." But when we’re curious, we go back to the inquiry step again and ask more questions and seek more answers. We’re never really done, even when we’ve answered the initial question and written the paper and given the presentation and received accolades and awards for all our hard work. If it’s something we’re really curious about, we’ll keep asking and answering and asking again. If you’re really curious about Madonna, you don’t just think, “How old is Madonna?” You think “How old is Madonna? Wait, really? Her skin looks amazing! What’s her skincare routine? Seriously, what year was she born? Oh my god, she wrote children’s books! Does my library have any?” Your questions lead you to answers which, when you’re really interested in a topic, lead you to more and more questions. Humans are naturally curious, we have this sort of instinct to be like, “huh, I wonder why that is?” and it’s propelled us to learn things and try things and fail and try again! It’s all Research as Inquiry. And to satisfy your curiosity, yes, the library I currently work at does own one of Madonna’s children’s books. It’s called The Adventures of Abdi and you can find it in our Juvenile Collection on the second floor at PZ8 M26 Adv 2004. And you can find a description of her skincare routine in this article from W Magazine: https://www.wmagazine.com/story/madonna-skin-care-routine-tips-mdna. You’re welcome.

Identifying an Information Need One of the tricky parts of Research as Inquiry is determining a situation’s information need. It sounds simple to ask yourself, “What information do I need?” and sometimes we do it unconsciously. But it’s not always easy. Here are a few examples of information needs: You need to know what your niece’s favorite Paw Patrol character is so you can buy her a birthday present. Your research is texting your sister. She says, “Everest.” And now you’re done. You buy the present, you're a rock star at the birthday party. Your information need was a short answer based on a 3-year old’s opinion. You’re trying to convince someone on twitter that Nazis are bad. You compile a list of opinion pieces from credible news publications like the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, gather first-hand narratives of Holocaust survivors and victims of hate crimes, find articles that debunk eugenics, etc. Your information need isn’t scholarly publications, it’s accessible news and testimonials. It’s articles a person might actually read in their free time, articles that aren’t too long and don’t require access to scholarly materials that are sometimes behind paywalls. You need to write a literature review for an assignment, but you don’t know what a literature review is. So first you google “literature review example.” You find out what it is, how one is created, and maybe skim a few examples. Next, you move to your library's website and search tool and try “oceanography literature review,” and find some closer examples. Finally, you start conducting research for your own literature review. Your information need here is both broader and deeper. You need to learn what a literature review is, how one is compiled, and how one searches for relevant scholarly articles in the resources available to you. Sometimes it helps to break down big information needs into smaller ones. Take the last example, for instance: you need to write a literature review. What are the smaller parts? Information Need 1: Find out what a literature review is Information Need 2: Find out how people go about writing literature reviews Information Need 3: Find relevant articles on your topic for your own literature review It feels better to break it into smaller bits and accomplish those one at a time. And it highlights an important part of this frame that’s surprisingly difficult to learn: ask questions. You can’t write a literature review if you don’t know what it is, so ask. You can’t write a literature review if you don’t know how to find articles, so ask. The quickest way to learn is to ask questions. Once you stop caring if you look stupid, and once you realized no one thinks poorly of people who ask questions, life gets a lot easier. So let’s add this to our components of research: ask a question, determine what you need in order to thoroughly answer the question, and seek out your answers. Not too painful, and when you’re in love with whatever you’re researching, it might even be fun.

The Takeaway When you have a question, ask it. When you’re genuinely interested in something, keep asking questions and finding answers. When you have a task at hand, take a second to think realistically about the information you’ll need to accomplish that task. You don’t need a peer-reviewed article to find out if praying mantises eat their mates, but you might if you want to find out why.

Ask Yourself What's the last thing you looked up on Wikipedia? Did you stop when you found an answer, or did you click on another link and another link until you learned about something completely different? If you can't remember, try it now! Search for something (like a favorite book or tv show) and click on linked words and phrases within Wikipedia until you learn something new! What was the last thing you researched that you were really excited about? Do you struggle when teachers and professors tell you to "research something that interests you"? Instead, try asking yourself, "What makes me really angry?" You might find you have more interests than you realized!

Scholarship as Conversation We've made it friends! My favorite frame: Scholarship as Conversation. Is it weird to have a favorite frame of information literacy? Probably. Am I going to talk about it anyway? You betcha!

What does "Scholarship as Conversation" mean? Scholarship as conversation refers to the way scholars reference each other and build off of one another’s work, just like in a conversation. Have you ever had a conversation that started when you asked someone what they did last weekend and ended with you telling a story about how someone (definitely not you) ruined the cake at your mom's dog's birthday party? And then someone says, “but like I was saying earlier…” and they take the conversation back to a point in the conversation where they were reminded of a different point or story? Conversations aren’t linear, they aren’t a clear line to a clear destination, and neither is research. When we respond to the ideas and thoughts of scholars, we’re responding to the scholars themselves and engaging them in conversation.

Why do I Love this Frame so Much? Let me count the ways. Reason 1 I really enjoy the imagery of scholarship as a conversation among peers. Just a bunch of well-informed curious people coming together to talk about something they all love and find interesting. I imagine people literally sitting around a big round table talking about things they’re all excited about and want to share with each other! It’s a really lovely image in my head. Eventually the image kind of reshapes and devolves into that painting of dogs playing poker, but I love that image too! Reason 2 It harkens back to pre-internet scholarship, which sound excruciating and exhausting, but it was all done for the love of a subject! Scholars used to literally mail each other manuscripts seeking feedback. Then, when they got an article published in a journal, scholars interested in the subject would seek out and read the article in the physical journal it was published in. Then they’d write reviews of the article, praising or criticizing the author’s research or theories or style. As the field grew, more and more people would write and contribute more articles to criticize and praise and build off of one another. So for example, if I wrote an article that was about Big Foot and then Joe wrote an article saying, “Emily’s article on Big Foot is garbage, here’s what I think about Big Foot,” Sam and I are now having a conversation. It’s not always a fun one, but we’re writing in response to one another about something we’re both passionate about. Later, Jaiden comes along and disagrees with Joe and agrees with me (because I’m right) and they cite both me and Joe. Now we’re all three in a conversation. And it just grows and grows and more people show up at the table to talk and contribute, or maybe just to listen. Reason Three You can roll up to the table and just listen if you want to. Sometimes we’re just listening to the conversation. We’re at the table, but we’re not there to talk. We’re just hoping to get some questions answered and learn from some people. When we’re reading books and articles or listening to podcasts or watching movies, we’re listening to the conversation. You don’t have to do groundbreaking research to be part of a conversation. You can just be there and appreciate what everyone’s talking about. You're still there in the conversation. Reason Four You can contribute to the conversation at any time. The imagery of a conversation is nice because it’s approachable, just pull up a chair and start talking. With any new subject, you should probably listen a little at first, ask some questions, and then start giving your own opinion or theories, but you can contribute at any time. Since we do live in the age of internet research, we can contribute in ways people 50 years ago never dreamed of! Besides writing essays in class (which totally counts because you’re examining the conversation and pulling in the bits you like and citing them to give credit to other scholars), you can talk to your professors and friends about a topic, you can blog about it, you can write articles about it, you can even tweet about it (have you ever seen Humanities folk on Twitter? They go nuts on there having actual, literal scholarly conversations). Your ways for engaging are kind of endless! Reason Five Yep, I'm listing reasons. Conversations are cyclical. Like I said above, they're not always a straight path and that’s true of research too. You don’t have to engage with who spoke most recently, you can engage with someone who spoke ten years ago, someone who spoke 100 years ago, you can respond to the person who started the conversation! Jump in wherever you want. And wherever you do jump in, you might just change the course of the conversation. Because sometimes we think we have an answer, but then something new is discovered or a person who hadn’t been at the table or who had been overlooked says something that drastically impacts what we knew, so now we have to reexamine it all over again and continue the conversation in a trajectory we hadn’t realized was available before. Reason Six Lastly, this frame is about sharing and responding and valuing one another’s work. If Joe, my Big Foot nemesis, responds to my article, they're going to cite me. If Jaiden then publishes a rebuttal, they're going to cite both Joe and me, because fair is fair. This is for a few reasons: 1) even if Jaiden disagrees with Joe’s work, they respect that Joe put effort into it and it’s valuable to them. 2) When Jaiden cites Joe, it means anyone who jumps into the conversation at the point of Jaiden's article will be able to backtrack and catch up using Jaiden's citations. A newcomer can trace it back to Joe’s article and trace that back to mine. They can basically see a transcript of the whole conversation so they can read Jaiden’s article with all of the context, and they can write their own well-informed piece on Big Foot.

The Takeaway There’s a lot to take away from this frame, but here’s what I think is most important: Be respectful of other scholars’ work and their part in the conversation by citing them. Start talking whenever you feel ready, in whatever platform you feel comfortable. And finally, make sure everyone who wants to be at the table is at the table. This means making sure information is available to those who want to listen and making sure we lift up the voices that are at risk of being drowned out.

Ask Yourself What scholarly conversations have you participated in recently? Is there a Reddit forum you look in on periodically to learn what's new in the world of cats wearing hats? Or a Facebook group on roller skating? Do you contribute or just listen?<br /> Think of a scholarly conversation surrounding a topic-- sharks, ballet, Game of Thornes. Who's not at the table? Whose voice is missing from the conversation? Why do you think that is?

Searching as Strategic Exploration You've made it! We've reached the last frame: Searching as Strategic Exploration. “Searching as Strategic Exploration” addresses the part of information literacy that we think of as “Research.” It deals with the actual task of searching for information, and the word “Exploration” is a really good word choice, because it’s evocative of the kind of struggle we sometimes feel when we approach research. I imagine people exploring a jungle, facing obstacles and navigating an uncertain path towards an ultimate goal (note: the goal is love and it was inside of us all along). I also kind of imagine all the different Northwest Passage explorations, which were cool in theory, but didn’t super-duper work out as expected. But research is like that! Sometimes we don’t get where we thought we were headed. But the good news is this: You probably won’t die from exposure or resort to cannibalism in your research. Fun, right?

Step 1: Identify a Goal The first part of any good exploration is identifying a goal. Maybe it’s a direct passage to Asia or the diamond the old lady threw into the ocean at the end of Titanic. More likely, the goal is to satisfy an information need. Remember when we talked about "Research as Inquiry?" All that stuff about paw patrol and Madonna's skin care regimen? Those were examples of information needs. We’re just trying to find an answer or learn something new. So great! Our goal is to learn something new. Now we make a strategy.

Step 2: Make a Strategy For many of your information needs you might just need to Google a question. There’s your strategy: throw your question into Google and comb through the results. You might limit your search to just websites ending in .org, .gov, or .edu. You might also take it a step further and, rather than type in an entire question fully formed, you just type in keywords. So “Who is the guy who invented mayonnaise?” becomes “mayonnaise inventor.” Identifying keywords is part of your strategy and so is using a search engine and limiting the results you’re interested in.

Step 3: Start Exploring Googling “mayonnaise inventor” probably brings you to Wikipedia where we often learn that our goals don’t have a single, clearly defined answer. For example, we learn that mayonnaise might have gotten its name after the French won a battle in Port Mahon, but that doesn't tell us who actually made the mayonnaise, just when it was named. Prior to being named, the sauce was called “aioli bo” and was apparently in a Menorcan recipe book from 1745 by Juan de Altimiras. That’s great for Altimiras, but the most likely answer is that mayonnaise was invented way before him and he just had the foresight to write down the recipe. Not having a single definite answer is an unforeseen obstacle tossed into our path that now affects our strategy. We know we have a trickier question than when we first set sail. But we have a lot to work with! We now have more keywords like Port Mahon, the French, and Wikipedia taught us that the earliest known mention of “mayonnaise” was in 1804, so we have 1804 as a keyword too. Let’s see if we can find that original mention. Let’s take our keywords out of Wikipedia where we found them and voyage to a library's website! At my library we have a tool that searches through all of our resources. We call it the "Quick Search." You might have a library available to you, either at school, on a University's campus, or a local public library. You can do research in any of these places! So into the Quick Search tool (or whatever you have available to you) go our keywords: 1804, mayonnaise, and France. The first result I see is an e-book by a guy who traveled to Paris in 1804, so that might be what we’re looking for. I search through the text and I do, in fact, find a reference to mayonnaise on page 99! The author (August von Kotzebue) is talking about how it’s hard to understand menus at French restaurants, for “What foreigner, for instance, would at first know what is meant by a mayonnaise de poulet, a galatine de volaille, a cotelette a la minute, or even an epigramme d’agneau?” He then goes on to recommend just ordering the fish, since you’ll know what you’ll get (Kotzebue, 99).<br /> So that doesn't tell us who invented mayonnaise, but I think it's pretty funny! So I’d call that detour a win.

Step 4: Reevaluate When we hit ends that we don’t think are successful, we can always retrace our steps and reevaluate our question. Dead ends are a part of exploration! We’ve learned a lot, but we’ve also learned that maybe “who invented mayonnaise?” isn’t the right question. Maybe we should ask questions about the evolution of French cuisine or about ownership of culinary experimentation. I’m going to stick with the history or mayonnaise, for just a little while longer, but my “1804 mayonnaise france” search wasn’t as helpful as I’d hoped, so I’ll try something new. Let’s try looking at encyclopedias. I searched in a database called Credo Reference (which is a database filled with encyclopedia entries) and just searching “mayonnaise.” I can see that the first entry, “Minorca or Menorca” from The Companion to British History, doesn’t initially look helpful, but we’re exploring, so let’s click on it! It tells us that Mayonnaise was invented in 1756 by a French commander’s cook and its name comes from Port Mahon where the French fended off the British during a siege (Arnold-Baker, 2001). That’s awesome! It’s what Wikipedia told us! But let’s corroborate that fact. I click on The Hutchinson Chronology of World History entry for 1756 which says mayonnaise was invented in France in 1756 by the duc de Richelieu (Helicon, 2018). I’m not sure I buy it. I could see a duke’s cook inventing mayonnaise, but I have a hard time imagining a duke and military commander taking the time to create a condiment.<br /> But now I can go on to research the duc de Richelieu and his military campaigns and his culinary successes! Just typing “Duke de Richelieu” into the library’s Quick Search shows me a TON of books (16,742 as of writing this) on his life and he influence on France. So maybe now we’re actually exploring Richelieu or the intertwined history of French cuisine and the lives of nobility.

What Did We Just Do? Our strategy for exploring this topic has had a lot of steps, but they weren't random. It was a wild ride, but it was a strategic one. Let’s break the steps down real quick: We asked a question or identified a goal We identified keywords and googled them We learned some background information and got new keywords from Wikipedia and had to reevaluate our question We followed a lead to a book but hit a dead end when it wasn’t as useful as we’d hoped We identified an encyclopedia database and found several entries that support the theory we learned in Wikipedia which forced us to reevaluate our question again We identified a key player in our topic and searched for him in the library’s Quick Search tool and the resources we found made us reevaluate our question yet again! Other strategies could include looking through an article’s reference list, working through a mind map, outlining your questions, or recording your steps in a research log so you don’t get lost-- whatever works for you!

The Takeaway Exploration is tricky. Sometimes you circle back and ask different questions as new obstacles arise. Sometimes you have a clear path and you reach your goal instantly. But you can always retrace your steps, try new routes, discover new information, and maybe you’ll get to your destination in the end. Even if you don't, you've learned something. For instance, today we learned that if you can’t understand a menu in French, you should just order the fish.

Ask Yourself Where do you start a search for information? Do you start in different places when you have different information needs? If your research questions was, "What is the impact of fast fashion on carbon emissions?" what keywords would you use to start searching?

Wrap Up The Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education is heck of a document. It's complicated, its frames intertwine, it's written in a way that can be tricky to understand. But essentially, it's just trying to get us to understand that the ways we interact with information are complicated and we need to think about our interactions to make sure we're behaving in an ethical and responsible way. Why do your professors make you cite things? Because those citations are valuable to the original author, and they prove your engagement with the scholarly conversation. Why do we need to hold space in the conversation for voices that we haven't heard from before? Because maybe no one recognized the authority in those voices before. The old process for creating information shut out lots of voices while prioritizing others. It's important for us to recognize these nuances when we see what information is available to us and important for us to ask, "whose voice isn't here? why? am I looking hard enough for those voices? can I help amplify them?" And it's important for us to ask, "why is the loudest voice being so loud? what motivates them? why should I trust them over others?" When we think critically about the information we access and the information we create and share, we're engaging as citizens in one big global conversation. Making sure voices are heard, including your own voice, is what moves us all towards a more intelligent and understanding society. Of course, part of thinking critically about information means thinking critically about both this Guide and the Framework. Lots of people have criticized the Framework for including too much library jargon. Other folks think the Framework needs to be rewritten to explicitly address how information seeking systems and publishing platforms have arisen from racist, sexist institutions. We won’t get into the criticisms here, but they're important to think about. You can learn more about the criticism of the Framework in a blog post by Ian Beilin, or you can do your own search for criticism on the Framework to see what else is out there and form your own opinions.

The Final Takeaway Ask questions, find information, and ask questions about that information.

fluke

English Explanation

The term "fluke" has several meanings based on its context. Here are the most common interpretations:

1. Scientific Definition: In biology, a "fluke" refers to a type of flatworm belonging to the class Trematoda. These organisms often live as parasites in the bodies of various hosts, including humans, where they can cause diseases.

2. Colloquial Use: In everyday language, "fluke" is used to describe a fortunate occurrence that happens by chance. For example, if someone wins a game by an unexpected move or score, it might be considered a "fluke," implying that the outcome was not expected or was somewhat accidental.

3. Fishing Term: In fishing terminology, a "fluke" can refer to a type of fish, specifically the summer flounder, which is known for its flat body and is a popular target for sport fishermen.

Overall, the word "fluke" captures the idea of an unexpected or unusual occurrence, whether in nature, conversation, or specific hobbies like fishing.

中文解释

“fluke”这个词根据不同的语境有几种含义。以下是最常见的解释：

1. 科学定义：在生物学中，“fluke”指的是一种属于扁形虫门（Trematoda）的扁虫。这些生物通常作为寄生虫寄居在各种宿主的体内，包括人类，并且可能引起疾病。

2. 口语用法：在日常语言中，“fluke”用来形容偶然发生的幸运事件。例如，如果某人通过意外的举动或得分赢得了比赛，这可能被视为一个“fluke”，暗示结果并不是预期的，或者说有些意外。

3. 钓鱼术语：在钓鱼术语中，“fluke”可以指一种鱼，具体来说，就是夏季比目鱼（summer flounder），这种鱼以其扁平的身体而闻名，是运动钓鱼者的热门目标。

总的来说，“fluke”这个词传达了一个意外或不寻常发生的事件的概念，无论是在自然界、日常对话，还是特定的爱好（如钓鱼）中。

Tit for Tat,

Excerpt Explanation in English

"Tit for Tat" is a strategy often discussed in the context of game theory, particularly in the study of cooperation and conflict. It describes a situation in which one individual responds to the actions of another with a similar action. If the other party cooperates, the response will also be cooperative. Conversely, if the other party acts in an uncooperative or hostile manner, the response will mirror that behavior.

This strategy is simple but effective in encouraging mutual cooperation, especially in repeated interactions. It fosters a sense of fairness because it rewards cooperation and punishes betrayal. "Tit for Tat" has been shown to be successful in various scenarios, including economic transactions, social dilemmas, and biological contexts.

Excerpt Explanation in Chinese

“以牙还牙”是一种通常在博弈论的背景下讨论的策略，特别是在合作与冲突的研究中。它描述了一种情况，即一个个体以类似的行为回应另一个个体的行动。如果对方合作，回应也将是合作性的。反之，如果对方表现出非合作或敌对的行为，回应也会反映出这种行为。

这种策略简单却有效，能够在反复的交互中鼓励相互合作。它培养了一种公平感，因为它奖励合作并惩罚背叛。“以牙还牙”在各种场景中被证明是成功的，包括经济交易、社会困境和生物学背景。

jackpot

English Explanation:

The term "jackpot" commonly refers to a large prize or sum of money that is won in a game of chance, particularly in gambling contexts such as slot machines or lottery games. When someone hits the jackpot, it often means they have won a significant amount of money, usually the highest possible prize in that particular game. The term can also be used metaphorically to indicate a major success or a sudden stroke of good luck in any context outside of gambling. For example, someone might say they hit the jackpot in their career after receiving a prestigious job offer or a promotion.

Chinese Explanation:

“jackpot”这个词通常指的是在机会游戏（特别是在赌博场合，如老虎机或彩票游戏）中赢得的大笔奖金或金额。当有人“中头奖”时，通常意味着他们赢得了大量的钱，通常是该游戏中可能获得的最高奖金。这个词也可以用作隐喻，表示在赌博之外的任何情况下的重大成功或突如其来的好运。例如，有人可能会说自己在职业生涯中“中头奖”，因为他们获得了一个有声望的工作机会或晋升。

the ramifications of this beguiling game.

Certainly! Let's break down the excerpt "the ramifications of this beguiling game."

English Explanation

1. Ramifications: This term refers to the consequences or outcomes that result from a particular action or decision. It suggests that there are multiple layers to consider, indicating that the results may be complex and far-reaching.

2. Beguiling: This adjective is used to describe something that is charming or enchanting, often in a deceptive way. It indicates that the game in question possesses qualities that are alluring and may draw people in, but there could be underlying issues or complexities that are not immediately apparent.

3. Game: In this context, "game" could refer to a literal game, such as a board game or video game, or it could be a metaphorical game, representing strategies, interactions, or dynamics in social contexts, politics, economics, etc.

Putting it all together, the phrase suggests a need to carefully consider the complex consequences stemming from a captivating (but possibly deceptive) activity or scenario. The intriguing nature of the game catches attention, but it also implies that there are significant and perhaps unforeseen effects that need to be acknowledged.

Chinese Explanation

1. Ramifications (后果): 这个词指的是某个行动或决策所带来的结果或影响。它暗示了需要考虑多个层面的后果，这些结果可能是复杂并且影响深远的。

2. Beguiling (迷人的): 这个形容词用来描述某种迷人或令人着迷的事物，往往带有欺骗的意味。它表明这个游戏具有吸引人的特质，可能使人们沉迷其中，但可能也存在一些不易察觉的潜在问题或复杂性。

3. Game (游戏): 在这个上下文中，“游戏”可以指一个字面上的游戏，比如桌面游戏或视频游戏，也可以是一个比喻游戏，代表社交、政治、经济等领域的策略、互动或动态。

综合来说，这句话暗示需要仔细考虑因一个迷人的（但可能具欺骗性的）活动或情境所产生的复杂后果。这个游戏的吸引力引发了关注，但同时也意味着需要承认可能存在重大的、甚至是意想不到的影响。

consolation

Certainly! Let's break down the term "consolation" thoroughly in both English and Chinese.

English Explanation

Consolation refers to the comfort or relief provided to someone who is experiencing sorrow, grief, or disappointment. It can take various forms, such as words of comfort, gestures of kindness, or even physical presence. Consolation serves to alleviate emotional pain and can come from family, friends, or even strangers.

There are different contexts in which the term can be used:

1. Emotional Support: When someone is feeling sad due to a loss (like the death of a loved one), the support from friends and family can provide consolation.

2. Encouragement: In situations where a person has faced failure (like losing a game), offering words of encouragement can serve as consolation, helping them to move past the disappointment.

3. Consolation Prizes: In competitive contexts, a consolation prize may be given to participants who do not win, providing recognition and validating their effort.

The concept of consolation is important in human relationships as it emphasizes empathy, compassion, and the bond between individuals. It signifies that although hardships are part of life, support and understanding can help individuals cope with their challenges.

Chinese Explanation

安慰 (ān wèi) 指的是给予正在经历悲伤、痛苦或失落的人们的情感支持和舒缓。安慰可以表现为安慰的话语、善意的举动，或者甚至是肢体上的陪伴。安慰的目的是帮助减轻情感上的痛苦，这种支持可以来自家人、朋友，甚至陌生人。

以下是该词的不同上下文使用：

1. 情感支持：当一个人因失去（比如亲人的去世）而感到悲伤时，朋友和家人的支持能起到安慰的作用。

2. 鼓励：在一个人面临失败（例如输掉比赛）的情况下，提供鼓励的话语可以作为安慰，帮助他们度过失望。

3. 安慰奖：在竞争场合中，未获胜的参与者可能会得到一种安慰奖，以此认可他们的努力，并给予他们价值感。

安慰的概念在人与人之间的关系中非常重要，因为它强调了同理心、同情心和人际之间的连结。它表明虽然生活中充满了困难，但支持和理解可以帮助人们应对挑战。

Summary

In summary, "consolation" or "安慰" plays a vital role in fostering connections among people facing difficult times, focusing on the importance of support and understanding in overcoming emotional distress.

more devious cheating

English Explanation

The phrase "more devious cheating" refers to a form of cheating that is particularly cunning, sly, or deceitful. The word "devious" implies a level of craftiness or indirectness, suggesting that the cheating is not only dishonest but also executed in a way that is clever or sneaky. This type of cheating might involve intricate plans or hidden strategies that make it harder to detect. It often suggests that the person cheating has gone above standard dishonesty to employ more complex and subtle means to achieve their goals.

For example, in a game setting, "more devious cheating" might involve using hidden devices or collaborating with others in secret, rather than just obvious cheating like looking at someone else's paper. It indicates a greater level of premeditation and intelligence in the maneuvering involved in the cheating process.

Chinese Explanation

“更狡猾的作弊”指的是一种特别狡诈、阴险或具有欺骗性的作弊行为。“狡猾”这个词暗示了一种巧妙或间接的程度，表明这种作弊不仅不诚实，而且以聪明或偷偷摸摸的方式进行。这种类型的作弊可能涉及复杂的计划或隐藏的策略，使其更难被发现。它通常暗示作弊者在标准的不诚实之上，以更复杂和微妙的手段来实现他们的目标。

例如，在游戏环境中，“更狡猾的作弊”可能涉及使用隐藏的设备或与他人秘密合作，而不仅仅是像抄袭别人试卷那样明显的作弊。这表明在作弊过程中涉及更高程度的预谋和智能。

But the cheats still have the grudgers to reckon with.

English Explanation

The excerpt "But the cheats still have the grudgers to reckon with" implies a situation where individuals who cheat (likely in a game or competition) are faced with the consequences of their actions. The word "grudgers" refers to those who hold a grudge, meaning they feel resentment or bitterness towards someone else, often due to perceived wrongs or unfairness. The phrase "to reckon with" means to confront or deal with a particular issue or challenge.

In this context, it suggests that the cheats not only face the results of their dishonesty but also have to deal with people who are upset with them for their cheating. This adds an additional layer of conflict or tension in the situation. Ultimately, it conveys the idea that cheating may provide short-term gains, but it can lead to long-term repercussions in terms of relationships and reputations.

Chinese Explanation

这段摘录“但作弊者仍然需要面对那些怀恨在心的人”暗示了一种情况，其中作弊的人（可能是在游戏或比赛中）需要面对他们行为的后果。“怀恨在心的人”（grudgers）指那些心中有怨恨的人，意味着他们对其他人感到愤恨或苦涩，通常是由于感到被不公正对待或受到伤害。“面对”（to reckon with）的意思是要面对或处理某个特定的问题或挑战。

在这种情况下，它表明作弊者不仅会面临诚实带来的后果，而且还要与那些因他们的作弊而感到不满的人打交道。这给情况增加了一层额外的冲突或紧张感。总的来说，这传达了一个观点：作弊可能带来短期的利益，但长期来看，可能会导致人际关系和声誉方面的后果。

a cunning blow struck by queens against worker

English Explanation

The excerpt "a cunning blow struck by queens against worker" can be interpreted in several ways, depending on the context in which it is used.

1. Literal Interpretation in Chess: In the game of chess, "queens" refer to the powerful pieces that can move in any direction. A "worker" could be interpreted as a pawn, which is a weaker piece. The phrase might describe a strategic move where a queen captures a pawn or puts it in a vulnerable position, showcasing the tactical nature of the game.

2. Metaphorical Interpretation: Beyond the chessboard, this phrase could symbolize the strategies employed by those in positions of power (the "queens") against those who are more vulnerable or in a subservient role (the "worker"). It might reflect themes of social inequality, where powerful individuals or entities use their influence to undermine or exploit the less powerful.

3. Cunning Nature: The word "cunning" suggests a level of deception or cleverness involved in the action, indicating that the strike was not merely a direct attack but rather a tactful maneuver aimed at achieving a specific goal.

Chinese Explanation

这段文字“女王对工人发出的狡诈一击”可以根据使用的上下文进行多种解读。

1. 象棋中的字面解读：在象棋中，“女王”指的是可以在任意方向移动的强力棋子，而“工人”可以理解为士兵（Pawn），一种相对较弱的棋子。这句话可能描绘了女王捕捉士兵或将其置于脆弱位置的战略动作，展示了游戏的战术性。

2. 隐喻解读：超越棋盘，这句话可以象征那些掌握权力的个体（“女王”）对更脆弱或处于从属地位的人的策略（“工人”）。它可能反映了社会不平等的主题，强大个人或实体利用其影响力来削弱或剥削弱势群体。

3. 狡诈的性质：“狡诈”一词暗示这一举动涉及一定的欺骗或聪明才智，表明这一击并不是简单的直接攻击，而是一种技巧性的操作，旨在实现特定目标。

lol

Very good point. The denomination or quantification (e.g. measurement) of a somthing should not affect its exchangability-- except that is exactly how we practice the "currency game"

game theory baby!!