10,000 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2019
    1. sales volume

      "Sales volume is the number of units sold within a reporting period. This figure is monitored by investors to see if a business is expanding or contracting. Within a business, sales volume may be monitored at the level of the product, product line, customer, subsidiary, or sales region."

    2. . TI also invented the hand-held calculator in 1967, and introduced the first single-chip microcontroller (MCU) in 1970, which combined all the elements of computing onto one piece of silicon.[10]

      Start of the calculators

    1. Pathogenic amyloids form when previously healthy proteins lose their normal physiological functions and form fibrous deposits in plaques around cells which can disrupt the healthy function of tissues and organs.

      Clusters of these proteins prevent organs from functioning correctly.

    2. Amyloids are aggregates of proteins that become folded into a shape that allows many copies of that protein to stick together, forming fibrils. In the human body, amyloids have been linked to the development of various diseases.

      Amyloids are clusters of proteins that are associated with development of various diseases in humans.

    1. They appear only twice (always plural) in the Tanakh, at Psalm 106:37 and Deuteronomy 32:17 both times, it deals with child or animal sacrifices.[6] Although the word is traditionally derived from the root ŠWD (Hebrew: שוד‎ shûd) that conveys the meaning of "acting with violence" or "laying waste"[7] it was possibly a loan-word from Akkadian in which the word shedu referred to a protective, benevolent spirit.[8] The word may also derive from the "Sedim, Assyrian guard spirits"[9] as referenced according to lore "Azazel slept with Naamah and spawned Assyrian guard spirits known as sedim".[10] With the translation of Hebew texts into Greek, under influence of Zorastrian dualism, shedim were translated into daimonia with implicit negativity. Otherwise, later in Judeo-Islamic culture, shedim became the Hebrew word for Jinn with a morally ambivalent attitude
    2. Shedim (Hebrew: שֵׁדִים‎) are spirits or demons in early Jewish mythology. However, they are not necessarily equivalent to the modern connotation of demons as evil entities.[3] Evil spirits were thought as the cause of maladies; conceptual differing from the shedim,[4] who are not evil demigods, but the foreign gods themselves. Shedim are just evil in the sense that they are not God.
    1. The report found that, due to human impact on the environment in the past half-century, the Earth's biodiversity has suffered a catastrophic decline unprecedented in human history

      This is really sad :(

    1. closed when approximately 13,000 workers voted to strike "indefinitely" in protest of a union leaders arrest for calling for an end to military rule in Chile.

      what was the military rule?

    1. Parametric statistics is a branch of statistics which assumes that sample data comes from a population that can be adequately modelled by a probability distribution that has a fixed set of parameters.[1] Conversely a non-parametric model differs precisely in that the parameter set (or feature set in machine learning) is not fixed and can increase, or even decrease, if new relevant information is collected.[2] Most well-known statistical methods are parametric.[3] Regarding nonparametric (and semiparametric) models, Sir David Cox has said, "These typically involve fewer assumptions of structure and distributional form but usually contain strong assumptions about independencies".[4]

      Non-parametric vs parametric stats

    1. Statistical hypotheses concern the behavior of observable random variables.... For example, the hypothesis (a) that a normal distribution has a specified mean and variance is statistical; so is the hypothesis (b) that it has a given mean but unspecified variance; so is the hypothesis (c) that a distribution is of normal form with both mean and variance unspecified; finally, so is the hypothesis (d) that two unspecified continuous distributions are identical. It will have been noticed that in the examples (a) and (b) the distribution underlying the observations was taken to be of a certain form (the normal) and the hypothesis was concerned entirely with the value of one or both of its parameters. Such a hypothesis, for obvious reasons, is called parametric. Hypothesis (c) was of a different nature, as no parameter values are specified in the statement of the hypothesis; we might reasonably call such a hypothesis non-parametric. Hypothesis (d) is also non-parametric but, in addition, it does not even specify the underlying form of the distribution and may now be reasonably termed distribution-free. Notwithstanding these distinctions, the statistical literature now commonly applies the label "non-parametric" to test procedures that we have just termed "distribution-free", thereby losing a useful classification.

      Non-parametric vs parametric statistics

    2. Non-parametric methods are widely used for studying populations that take on a ranked order (such as movie reviews receiving one to four stars). The use of non-parametric methods may be necessary when data have a ranking but no clear numerical interpretation, such as when assessing preferences. In terms of levels of measurement, non-parametric methods result in ordinal data. As non-parametric methods make fewer assumptions, their applicability is much wider than the corresponding parametric methods. In particular, they may be applied in situations where less is known about the application in question. Also, due to the reliance on fewer assumptions, non-parametric methods are more robust. Another justification for the use of non-parametric methods is simplicity. In certain cases, even when the use of parametric methods is justified, non-parametric methods may be easier to use. Due both to this simplicity and to their greater robustness, non-parametric methods are seen by some statisticians as leaving less room for improper use and misunderstanding. The wider applicability and increased robustness of non-parametric tests comes at a cost: in cases where a parametric test would be appropriate, non-parametric tests have less power. In other words, a larger sample size can be required to draw conclusions with the same degree of confidence.

      Non-parametric vs parametric statistics

    1. The concept of data type is similar to the concept of level of measurement, but more specific: For example, count data require a different distribution (e.g. a Poisson distribution or binomial distribution) than non-negative real-valued data require, but both fall under the same level of measurement (a ratio scale).
    1. In probability theory and statistics, the term Markov property refers to the memoryless property of a stochastic process. It is named after the Russian mathematician Andrey Markov.

    1. Yazidi accounts of creation differ from that of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and resembles Zoroastrianism[119] or Hinduism. Especially worshipping a holy peacock, Melek Taus in oil lamps is more common in Hinduism. They believe that God first created Tawûsê Melek from his own (God's) illumination (Ronahî) and the other six archangels were created later. God ordered Tawûsê Melek not to bow to other beings. Then God created the other archangels and ordered them to bring him dust (Ax) from the Earth (Erd) and build the body of Adam. Then, God gave life to Adam from his own breath and instructed all archangels to bow to Adam. The archangels obeyed except for Tawûsê Melek. In answer to God, and the seemingly contradictory command, Tawûsê Melek replied, "How can I submit to another being! I am from your illumination while Adam is made of dust." Then, God praised him and made him the leader of all angels and his deputy on the Earth. This probably furthers what some see as a connection to the Islamic Shaytan, as according to the Quran, he too refused to bow to Adam at God's command, though in this case it is seen as being a sign of Shaytan's sinful pride. Hence, the Yazidis believe that Tawûsê Melek is the representative of God on the face of the Earth and comes down to the Earth on the first Wednesday of Nisan (April).
    2. The reason for the Yazidis' reputation of being devil worshipers is connected to the other name of Melek Taus, Shaytan, the same name the Koran has for Satan.[115] Yazidis, however, believe Tawûsê Melek is not a source of evil or wickedness. They consider him to be the leader of the archangels, not a fallen angel.[66][49] The Yazidis of Kurdistan have been called many things, most notoriously 'devil-worshippers,' a term used both by unsympathetic neighbours and fascinated Westerners. This sensational epithet is not only deeply offensive to the Yazidis themselves, but quite simply wrong."[116] Non-Yazidis have associated Melek Taus with Shaitan (Islamic/Arab name) or Satan, but Yazidis find that offensive and do not actually mention that name.[116]
    3. Yazidis are monotheists,[58] believing in one God, who created the world and entrusted it into the care of a Heptad of seven Holy Beings, often known as Angels or heft sirr (the Seven Mysteries). The names of these beings or angels are Azaz'il, Gabra'il (Jabra'il), Mikha'il, Rafa'il (Israfil), Dadra'il, Azrafil and Shamkil (Shemna'il)[113] Preeminent among these is Tawûsê Melek (frequently known as "Melek Taus" in English publications), the Peacock Angel[114][69] (identified with one of these Angels). Tawûsê Melek is often identified by Christians and Muslims with Satan. According to claims in Encyclopedia of the Orient,
    1. Monseigneur de Hemptinne watched Yeke people working at Dikuluwe as late as 1924. They worked in the dry season and stopped when the first rains arrived. The mining camp was near a stream where millet could be planted. Women and children collected malachite from the surface, while men used iron picks to excavate pits and shafts, using fire to crack the rocks when needed. The mines were between 10 metres (33 ft) and 15 metres (49 ft) deep with galleries up to 20 metres (66 ft) long. The ore would be sorted and then taken to a nearby stream for concentration before being smelted

      info about how mines work

    1. El Quiché forms the heartland of the Kʼicheʼ people. In pre-Columbian times, the Kʼicheʼ settlements and influence reached beyond the highlands, including the valley of Antigua and coastal areas in Escuintla.

      .

    2. There is also evidence for a large degree of cultural exchange between the Kʼicheʼ and the people of Central Mexico, and Nahuatl has influenced the Kʼicheʼ language greatly.[5]

      .

  2. Apr 2019
    1. the phrase alludes to influences by Confucianism[2](p10) – in particular, filial piety or loyalty towards the family, corporation, and nation; the forgoing of personal freedom for the sake of society's stability and prosperity; the pursuit of academic and technological excellence; and, a strong work ethic together with thrift

      I think these values might be useful in teaching in school. I wonder if many colleges and Western schools ever taught this to their children?

    2. Proponents of so-called "Asian values", who tend to support Asian-style authoritarian governments,[2](p13) claim these values are more appropriate for the region than Western democracy with its emphasis on individual freedoms.[3] "Asian values" were codified and promoted in the Bangkok Declaration of 1993, which re-emphasized the principles of sovereignty, self-determination, and non-interference in civil and political rights. They included: Preference for social harmony; Concern with socio-economic prosperity and the collective well-being of the community; Loyalty and respect towards figures of authority; Preference for collectivism and communitarianism.

      Now that I think about the times when people in the MTA Evergreen collaboration program are telling me that I am using male-dominated language, I found that this is the source of my values and yet I just find it sad that Evergreen students just never understand it at all.

    1. The Piri Reis map is a world map compiled in 1513 from military intelligence by the Ottoman admiral and cartographer Piri Reis (pronounced [piɾi ɾeis]). Approximately one third of the map survives; it shows the western coasts of Europe and North Africa and the coast of Brazil with reasonable accuracy. Various Atlantic islands, including the Azores and Canary Islands, are depicted, as is the mythical island of Antillia and possibly Japan. The map's historical importance lies in its demonstration of the extent of global exploration of the New World by approximately 1510, and in its claim to have used a map of Christopher Columbus, otherwise lost, as a source. Piri also stated that he had used ten Arab sources and four Indian maps sourced from the Portuguese. More recently, the map has been the focus of claims for the pre-modern exploration of the Antarctic coast.
    1. Akhenaton placed much emphasis on the worship of the Egyptian sun which can be seen from many artistic depictions of a connection between the Pharoh and his family.[28] Some debate has focused on the extent to which Akhenaten forced his religious reforms on his people.[29] Certainly, as time drew on, he revised the names of the Aten, and other religious language, to increasingly exclude references to other gods; at some point, also, he embarked on the wide-scale erasure of traditional gods' names, especially those of Amun.
    2. Akhenaten tried to shift his culture from Egypt's traditional religion, but the shifts were not widely accepted. After his death, his monuments were dismantled and hidden, his statues were destroyed, and his name excluded from the king lists.[12] Traditional religious practice was gradually restored, and when some dozen years later rulers without clear rights of succession from the 18th Dynasty founded a new dynasty, they discredited Akhenaten and his immediate successors, referring to Akhenaten himself as "the enemy" or "that criminal" in archival records
    1. Balm of Mecca[edit] Forskal found the plant occurring between Mecca and Medina. He considered it to be the genuine balsam-plant and named it Amyris opobalsamum Forsk. (together with two other varieties, A. kataf Forsk. and A. kafal Forsk.).[4] Its Arabic name is abusham or basham, which is identical with the Hebrew bosem or beshem.[6] Bruce found the plant occurring in Abyssinia.[3] In the 19th century it was discovered in the East Indies also.[4] Linnaeus distinguished two varieties: Amyris gileadensis L. (= Amyris opobalsamum Forsk.), and Amyris opobalsamum L., the variant found by Belon in a garden near Cairo, brought there from Arabia Felix. More recent naturalists (Lindley, Wight and Walker) have included the species Amyris gileadensis L. in the genus Protium.[4] Botanists enumerate sixteen balsamic plants of this genus, each exhibiting some peculiarity.[6] There is little reason to doubt that the plants of the Jericho balsam gardens were stocked with Amyris gileadensis L., or Amyris opobalsamum, which was found by Bruce in Abyssinia, the fragrant resin of which is known in commerce as the "balsam of Mecca".[3] According to De Sacy, the true balm of Gilead (or Jericho) has long been lost, and there is only "balm of Mecca".[6] Newer designations of the balsam plant are Commiphora gileadensis (L.) Christ., Balsamodendron meccansis Gled. and Commiphora opobalsamum.
    2. Cancamon[edit] The lexicographer Bar Seroshewai considered the Arabic dseru (ﺿﺮﻭ), a tree of Yemen known as kamkam (ﮐﻤﮑﺎﻡ) or kankam (ﮐﻨﮑﺎﻡ), Syriac qazqamun (ܩܙܩܡܘܢ), Greek κάγκαμον, Latin cancamum, mentioned by Dioscorides (De materia medica 1.32) and Pliny (Hist. Nat. 12.44; 12.98).[28][30][31] Cancamon has been held for Balsamodendron kataf,[31] but also as Aleurites laccifera (Euphorbiaceae), Ficus spec. (Artocarpeae), and Butea frondosa (Papilionaceae).[32] Sanskrit kunkuma (कुनकुम) is saffron (Crocus sativus).
    3. Pine[edit] The Greek word ῥητίνη, used in the Septuagint for translating tsori, denotes a resin of the pine, especially Pinus maritima (πεύκη).[26][27] The Aramaic tserua (ܨܪܘܐ) has been described as the fruit of Pinus pinea L., but it has also been held for stacte or storax.[28] The Greek ῥητίνη ξηρά is a species of Abietineae Rich
    4. Zukum[edit] Ödmann and Rosenmüller thought that the pressed juice of the fruit of the zukum-tree (Eleagnus angustifolius L.) or the myrobalanus of the ancients, is the substance denoted; but Rosenmüller, in another place, mentioned the balsam of Mecca (Amyris opobalsamum L.) as being probably the tsori. Zukum oil was in very high esteem among the Arabs, who even preferred it to the balm of Mecca, as being more efficacious in wounds and bruises. Maundrell found zukum-trees near the Dead Sea. Hasselquist and Pococke found them especially in the environs of Jericho. In the 19th century, the only product in the region of Gilead which had any affinity to balm or balsam was a species of Eleagnus
    5. Tsori[edit] In the Hebrew Bible, the balm of Gilead is tsori or tseri (צֳרִי or צְרִי). It is a merchandise in Gen. 37:28 and Ez. 27:17, a gift in Gen. 43:11, and a medicament (for national disaster, in fig.) in Jer. 8:22, 46:11, 51:8.[11] The Hebrew root z-r-h (צרה) means "run blood, bleed" (of vein), with cognates in Arabic (ﺿﺮﻭ, an odoriferous tree or its gum), Sabaean (צרו), Syriac (ܙܪܘܐ, possibly fructus pini), and Greek (στύραξ, in meaning).[12] The similar word tsori (צֹרִי) denotes the adjective "Tyrean", i. e. from the Phoenician city of Tyre.[13] Many attempts have been made to identify the tsori, but none can be considered conclusive. The Samaritan Pentateuch (Gen. 37:25) and the Syriac bible (Jer. 8:22) translate it as wax (cera). The Septuagint has ῥητίνη, "pine resin". The Arabic version and Castell hold it for theriac. Lee supposes it to be "mastich". Luther and the Swedish version have "salve", "ointment" in the passages in Jer., but in Ezek. 27:17 they read "mastic". Gesenius, Hebrew commentators (Kimchi, Junius, Tremellius, Deodatius), and the Authorized Version (except in Ezek. 27:17, rosin) have balm, balsam, Greek βάλσαμον, Latin opobalsamum.[3
    6. Balm of Gilead was a rare perfume used medicinally, that was mentioned in the Bible, and named for the region of Gilead, where it was produced. The expression stems from William Tyndale's language in the King James Bible of 1611, and has come to signify a universal cure in figurative speech. The tree or shrub producing the balm is commonly identified as Commiphora gileadensis. Some botanical scholars have concluded that the actual source was a terebinth tree in the genus Pistacia.

      Gift to King Solomon by the Queen of Sheba

    1. Jung was one of the first people to define introversion and extraversion in a psychological context. In Jung's Psychological Types, he theorizes that each person falls into one of two categories, the introvert and the extravert. These two psychological types Jung compares to ancient archetypes, Apollo and Dionysus. The introvert is likened with Apollo, who shines light on understanding. The introvert is focused on the internal world of reflection, dreaming and vision. Thoughtful and insightful, the introvert can sometimes be uninterested in joining the activities of others. The extravert is associated with Dionysus, interested in joining the activities of the world. The extravert is focused on the outside world of objects, sensory perception and action. Energetic and lively, the extravert may lose their sense of self in the intoxication of Dionysian pursuits.[77] Jungian introversion and extraversion is quite different from the modern idea of introversion and extraversion.[78] Modern theories often stay true to behaviourist means of describing such a trait (sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness etc.) whereas Jungian introversion and extraversion is expressed as a perspective: introverts interpret the world subjectively, whereas extraverts interpret the world objectively.
    1. A blockchain,[1][2][3] originally block chain,[4][5] is a growing list of records, called blocks, which are linked using cryptography.[1][6] Each block contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block,[6] a timestamp, and transaction data (generally represented as a Merkle tree).

      wikipedia

    1. Sartre argued that a central proposition of Existentialism is that existence precedes essence, which means that the most important consideration for individuals is that they are individuals—independently acting and responsible, conscious beings ("existence")—rather than what labels, roles, stereotypes, definitions, or other preconceived categories the individuals fit ("essence"). The actual life of the individuals is what constitutes what could be called their "true essence" instead of there being an arbitrarily attributed essence others use to define them. Thus, human beings, through their own consciousness, create their own values and determine a meaning to their life.[27]
    2. While the predominant value of existentialist thought is commonly acknowledged to be freedom, its primary virtue is authenticity.[6] In the view of the existentialist, the individual's starting point is characterized by what has been called "the existential attitude", or a sense of disorientation, confusion, or dread in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world.[7] Many existentialists have also regarded traditional systematic or academic philosophies, in both style and content, as too abstract and remote from concrete human experience.[8][9]
    1. If in observing the present state of the world and life in general, from a Christian point of view one had to say (and from a Christian point of view with complete justification): It is a disease. And if I were a physician and someone asked me “What do you think should be done?” I would answer, “The first thing, the unconditional condition for anything to be done, consequently the very first thing that must be done is: create silence, bring about silence; God's Word cannot be heard, and if in order to be heard in the hullabaloo it must be shouted deafeningly with noisy instruments, then it is not God’s Word; create silence! Ah, everything is noisy; and just as strong drink is said to stir the blood, so everything in our day, even the most insignificant project, even the most empty communication, is designed merely to jolt the senses and to stir up the masses, the crowd, the public, noise! And man, this clever fellow, seems to have become sleepless in order to invent ever new instruments to increase noise, to spread noise and insignificance with the greatest possible haste and on the greatest possible scale. Yes, everything is soon turned upside-down: communication is indeed soon brought to its lowest point in regard to meaning, and simultaneously the means of communication are indeed brought to their highest with regard to speedy and overall circulation; for what is publicized with such hot haste and, on the other hand, what has greater circulation than---rubbish! Oh, create silence!” Soren Kierkegaard, For Self-Examination 1851 p. 47-48 Hong 1990
    2. How much that is hidden may still reside in a person, or how much may still reside hidden! How inventive is hidden inwardness in hiding itself and in deceiving or evading others, the hidden inwardness that preferred that no one would suspect its existence, modestly afraid of being seen and mortally afraid of being entirely disclosed! Is it not so that the one person never completely understands the other? But if he does not understand him completely, then of course it is always possible that the most indisputable thing could still have a completely different explanation that would, note well, be the true explanation, since an assumption can indeed explain a great number of instances very well and thereby confirm its truth and yet show itself to be untrue as soon as the instance comes along that it cannot explain-and it would indeed be possible that this instance or this somewhat more precise specification could come even at the last moment. Therefore all calm and, in the intellectual sense, dispassionate observers, who eminently know how to delve searchingly and penetratingly into the inner being, these very people judge with such infinite caution or refrain from it entirely because, enriched by observation, they have a developed conception of the enigmatic world of the hidden, and because as observers they have learned to rule over their passions. Only superficial, impetuous passionate people, who do not understand themselves and for that reason naturally are unaware that they do not know others, judge precipitously. Those with insight, those who know never do this. Soren Kierkegaard, Works of Love, (1847) Hong 1995 p. 228-229

      This section particularly interests me, this is more or less how my brain operates, the trains of thought, the natural inclination to analyze life by thinking, thinking of others, assumptions I make, others make. What is the truth? Is there a truth?

    3. One must first learn to know himself before knowing anything else (γνῶθι σεαυτόν). Not until a man has inwardly understood himself and then sees the course he is to take does his life gain peace and meaning; only then is he free of that irksome, sinister traveling companion — that irony of life, which manifests itself in the sphere of knowledge and invites true knowing to begin with a not-knowing (Socrates) just as God created the world from nothing. But in the waters of morality it is especially at home to those who still have not entered the tradewinds of virtue. Here it tumbles a person about in a horrible way, for a time lets him feel happy and content in his resolve to go ahead along the right path, then hurls him into the abyss of despair. Often it lulls a man to sleep with the thought, "After all, things cannot be otherwise," only to awaken him suddenly to a rigorous interrogation. Frequently it seems to let a veil of forgetfulness fall over the past, only to make every single trifle appear in a strong light again. When he struggles along the right path, rejoicing in having overcome temptation's power, there may come at almost the same time, right on the heels of perfect victory, an apparently insignificant external circumstance which pushes him down, like Sisyphus, from the height of the crag. Often when a person has concentrated on something, a minor external circumstance arises which destroys everything. (As in the case of a man who, weary of life, is about to throw himself into the Thames and at the crucial moment is halted by the sting of a mosquito.) Frequently a person feels his very best when the illness is the worst, as in tuberculosis. In vain he tries to resist it but he has not sufficient strength, and it is no help to him that he has gone through the same thing many times; the kind of practice acquired in this way does not apply here. (Søren Kierkegaard's Journals & Papers IA Gilleleie, 1 August 1835)
    1. In the early months of 1951, public declarations from Dwight D. Eisenhower and other American military brass followed, to the effect of there being 'a real difference between the German soldier and Hitler and his criminal group.'[11]

      The thinking was that the troops and the leader needed to be alienated from one another, and therefore, the troops needn't be brought to trial and would be integrated back into society? In other words, force apologies between the citizenry and the troops? Move on...

    1. Annotations can be considered an additional layer with respect to comments. Comments are published by the same publisher who hosts the original document. Annotations are added on top of that, but may eventually become comments which, in turn, may be integrated in a further version of the document itself

      comments(评论)能否是Annotation(注解)呢?

    1. community ban of Abd from English Wikipedia

      I've seen this before. Contrary to what the Smith brothers claim, I have not been commonly banned. This ban is like another that they also cite: if I retire, claim that I'm not going to edit any more, as long as a certain abusive situation continues, they then ban me. "You can't quit, you're fired!" This is all social dysfunction.

    2. strong consensus

      Wikipedia pretends that the community does not vote, rather, decisions are to be made on the strength of arguments, which can be quite subjective. When involvement is considered, the consensus was far weaker than he suggested. What I would say is that the ban was within his discretion as a closer,. He was correct, that the discussion was a waste of time. Subsequent history proved this, because something that few, if any, in the discussion seemed to realize. If the goal was to prevent disruption, it would not be prevented by declaring a ban. I had clearly abandoned any further participation on Wikipedia, but if I did intend to continue editing, being banned would not have any effect. Not being banned might make it easier to revert edits,but nobody seems to have noticed that no reversion was necessary for what I did. So what this discussion did for me was to demonstrate how hopeless the Wikipedia community was. But not just the Wikipedia community. It was the generic wiki community. I did work for some years on Wikiversity, and there were some exciting possibilities there, but it would take a community effort and vigilance to create them, and I never managed to iinspire that, though I did accomplish a lot. When I realized that Wikiversity was vulnerable to what the founder of Wikiversity called "Wikipedia Disease," and I called Wiki disease because it can happen on any wiki without protective structure, and attempts to create protective structure will be resisted by the oligarchy that has formed, existing wikis are intrinsically dangerous. Something else is needed. I see no sign that Wikipedia will be able to break the paralysis that increasingly afflicted it.

      And I am so glad that I bailed when I did. It was a simple move, and made my life far easier than struggling with that mess.

    3. antithetic to the concepts of Wikipedia.

      I don't know what talk page, but "Wikipedia" began with a set of ideas and ideals that were not intended to be fixed, hence WP:IAR. However, that's where it went, such that this person could believe that "the concepts of Wikipedia" are a fixed thing. That is the beginning of death, but I do not know how long it will take.

    4. none of his other socks have been blocked

      Yes. I had disclosed socks. I don't recall what I said then, but I just checked, there is such a sock still unblocked. I stopped the experiment because the purpose had been achieved and, yes, it was causing collateral damage. That he thought I was delighting in it was his projection, and that this fellow would say that demonstrates what is all too common. ABF rules.

    5. IP editing before and after his block

      No, not true. I did not sock to evade blocks. I openly socked, dislosing the edits, initially on my talk page, which was quckly blocked (and, yes, I know the policy and why), then on Wikiversity, on a user study page. The IP socking was from 2 May to 8 May, By the end of that the enforcement, mostly by T. Canens, as I recall, was becomiing draconian, causing collateral damage. I was done, I had collected evidence that these idiots completely overlook, without harming anyone or any content, actually making positive contributions. Then I created one sock. What I wanted to observe was how a neutral editor, carefully avoiding disruption, would be treated. I found out. The old protective policies were dead. But, in any case, I did not disclose that account at first, for obvious reasons. The account EnergyNeutral, made 98 edits from May 19 to May 31, and then went on "wikibreak." It was blocked on 3 June. There were no furhter edits of Wikipedia by me. Calling a period of editing of one week,19 edits, with a defined purpose, designed to minimize disruption, as "extensive editing" was misleading, but misleading evidence and arguments are routine on Wikipedia from administrators and editors in good standing>

      there is no adult supervision. JzG, however, was recently reprimended, his mojo must not be working, and he has been gone for about a month, from previous intense activity. But if history is any guide, he will realize that he can ignore this and carry on as if nothing happened, with maybe only a tiny amount of caution. At this rate, perhaps before he dies, he will stop telling users to fuck off.

    6. block evasion

      If block evasion had been my purpose, I would have created an account from the beginning and disguised my IP. Instead, this was all open, and very restrictted and time limited. I never claimed that the admin had no right to block me. In fact, I made it trivially easy to identify my edits.

      When a banned user who was popular with the faction made edits under ban that were "harmless spelling corrections," many of the same users going after me thought it was ridiculous to block someone for making harmless edits. I invented self-reversion as a way that he could make those spelling corrections, easily, and without complicating ban enforcement, if the policy had been amended to legitimate this. I proposed it, and the proposal sat there for a time until someone actually used self-reversion and then the screams rose up A ban is a ban is a ban." And to hell with WP:IAR.and to hell with encouraging cooperation.

      That user -- it was Science Apologist -- angrily rejected the proposal because "why should he revert a perfectly good edit," and the answer was meaningless to him, "to make ban enforcement uncomplicated by cooperating with the ban." He did not want to cooperate with the ban, he wanted to make any admin who reverted him look silly. And I then confronted this and he was site-bannnd for a time. This guy, though, highly disruptive, has a faction that just loves him. ArbCom site-banned, he came back through a community discussion, and he went right back to his old behavior, which is usually accepted because he has friends.

    7. chronic editing through IP accounts

      For a very short time, in a way as to cause minimal disruption. There is almost no notice of that. There was only disruption from the enforcement effort, and that only for a short time. This was actually a demonstration of how enforcement can cause more disruption that the original problem. but admins don't want to look at that.

    8. I take words out of context

      Experienced Wikipedia administrator does not know how to assume good faith. It is all too common. What T Canens said took what Silverseren had written and intepreted it in a way that was not implied.

    9. trying to point a finger and laugh at him

      In fact, fast-forward to 2017-2019, this ban is pointed to as proof of how disruptive I was, by people allied with JzG and that whole faction. There was no necessity for this ban, it did nothing but allow others to claim I was not merely indef blocked, but "banned." It did not prevent one edit.

    10. s that it enables the formal 3RR shield for reversions.

      What is brilliant about this is that the examples cited of bannable behavior were not edits that required any reversions at all, originally because they were self-reverted. Because those edits were also self-identified, ban enforcement was made easier. If these users actually looked at that experiment with an eye toward seeing if there was anything of value there, they'd have seen this. If I actually cared about this, I might end up being really pissed and then creating massive disruption But I don't and that is not ever what I have done.

    11. Was that lifted from a political "trial" in Maoist China

      No, from a political trial in fascist Wikipedia. Now, here is how this works: A user who was highly involved in conflict with me, who, in fact, held a grudge and commonly blamed me for everything wrong with the cold fusion article, for years later, filed a request to consider a ban. His friend pile in and there are many comments in support from them. that then attracts other users who want to be a part of the community, or who are inclined to agree. Few of these will actually consider evidence, fewer still will consider contrary positions and ideas. So process on wikipedia, discussions like this without the protections of evidence collection with RfC or ArbCom cases, and without any protection against presenting even radically false arguments and deceptive evidence, will tend to go with the early responses. Reversal is unusual.

      There is no penalty for being part of a pitchfork=weilding mob, I have never seen it, and I have seen maybe hundreds of ban discussions.

      And these process defects are larded through Wikipedia. The adhocracy worked wonderfully for quick building of an encyclopedia, but not for making it reliable in any way. POV pushing is allowed if the POV is a popular one, which then pushes the project away from academic neutrality, toward a popular belief that what most editors believe is neutral, and any other POV is not neutral. So you can push a skeptical position, can insult a medical professoinal as a quack, with no sanction, but if you point out that this is not a neutral comment, you might be dinged for POV-pushing. Identifying administrative abuse was crucial to the development of a neutral project, but the reality is that they shoot the messenger.

    12. rest of us to handle it

      Why is someone knowing they are right (or incorrectly believing they are right, or appearing to be so) a cause requiring any handling at all?

    13. Support

      Very involved, prior conflict.

      Ban policy (I checked) still requires a consensus of uninvolved editors. I contronted a rather large faction, over administrative abuse. It is utterly unsurpising that they would vote for a ban.

      This was, remember, a process where I was not allowed to defend. It really made no difference to me what the outcome was. It did not stop me from editing, what stopped me was my choice not to waste any more time.

    14. I'm not cooperating any more, period.

      Yes. I finished some work of personal and larger interest, and then left Wikipedia entirely alone.

      These fascists have no idea of how to create cooperation. It never occurs to them to ask a user what their intentions are. When they decide to unblock a user, commonly, nothing is put in place to help the user stay unblocked. When ArbComm admonished JzG, there was absolutely no structure to monitor his behavior to ensure that he heeded the warning. Commonly, when a user is sanctioned, no help is put in place to guide them to more productive behavior. No, it's all about punishment which is called "protective," but which is very inefficient at actual protection. As I wrote, if I had chosen to retaliate, I could have. Scibaby could easily create far more work than it took him to sock, once one learns how to do it. Yes, it may be necessary to block, etc., but for starters, Flagged Revisions to reduce the need for immediate attention. There is no coordination of monitoring of Recent Changes, it is all ad hoc and wastes vast amounts of editor time, it probably take fifty times the labor compared to what would be necessary with a little focus and a little developed responsibility. Wikipedia will eventually be eaten. That's my prediction. Meanwhile sane people move on, once they see the reality of the cabal. Meanwhile, ah, paid editing. Do they think that won't happen because they declare a policy against it? The system encourages paid editing, in fact, by not creating reliable review. If there were relaible review, there would be no problem with paid editing. It would be like news media prohibiting press releases. The early community had some great ideas, but little long-term vision. Not surprising, in fact.

    15. With due process exhausted, my compliance becomes no longer a matter of obligation

      that's correct. It becomes voluntary only. That full statement should be read. I stopped cooperating. However, that does not mean that I would continue to edit Wikipedia. Why should I care about sewage floating in a cesspool? Wikipedia can be beautiful at times, but overall, it is not a useful place to work on content. Horrible, actually. Wikipedia process requires a willingness to engage in vastly inefficient process. It took weeks to get consensus for putting in one freaking link because JzG kept reverting it. So I created a review process. A lot of work. It showed that the community wanted the link, and armed with that, he stopped removing it. Weeks of work for one link. And, of course, eventually it slid into the muck.

      What I put in became this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_Fleischmann&oldid=357342538#Conference_proceedings

      This was not a "peer-reviewed" source, it was Fleischmann's own description of why he had undertaken his work. To use something like that requires consensus, and with substantial effort, consensus was obtained. So, for a time, readers of the article could find that source. One editor removed it in 2016 without discussion as part of a much more extensive edit. Nobody noticed (because, remember, I was banned, but there were others who had that page watchlisted and who knew.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_Fleischmann&type=revision&diff=743068690&oldid=731418542

      The edit was generally good. But this editor had no idea why that text was there, and likely did not look at the talk page archive. Wikis are unreliable, unless they have far better protective structure in place.

    16. This topic ban is still in effect, and Abd has absolutely no intention of abiding by it.

      Mind-reader. By the time of this discussion, I had completely stopped editing Wikipedia, and never again editied it. (There are apparently two exceptions, I documented this on the Wikiversity user page mentioned, where, much later, I apparently accidentally edited something by IP. So what?

    17. I propose a community ban for Abd.

      What he did not propose was any right of the banned user to respond to charges. "

      Well aware" is how wikis go south, because popular impressions are created based on quick impressions. One might notice a factor missing from all this discussion. Not an administrator, I took two administrators to ArbCom and the first (JzG) was reprimanded and the second (William M. Connolley) was desysopped. In the second case, there were dozens of editors calling for me to be banned, as there were two dozen users in the RfC that preceded the JzG case calling for my ban -- compared to only a dozen actually reading the case and supporting it, which case was eventually supported by ArbCom. Two dozen editors violated policy. Nothing done about it, nothing would ever be done about it.

      Bottom line? I was wasting my time with Wikipedia, it was a lost cause. But there are other wikis and more to be learned. I have just opened up a wiki and my first two users were notable scientists, with Wikipedia articles.

      I'm having fun.

    18. Abd is really to that extent compared to the usual criteria we hold for community bans.

      Usually it requires extensive disruption. The basis for this ban was a short period of socking and one actual sock. Definitely there was a basis for continuing the block. However, the community can ban whatever it wants through a consensus of uninvolved users, at least that was policy. In reality, I have never seen an analysis of who was involved or not. JzG and Raul654 would be very involved, from prior disputes.

    19. Rdfox and Raul, not Jzg

      It is possible that JzG was a participant in the much later private complaints to the WMF that led them to globally ban me, he was involved in the deletion discussion on Wikiversity that was connected with it.

      I was never close to a community global ban. For starters, I was only banned on one wiki, en.wikipedia. I was blocked for a short time on meta, that was lifted. I had activity on hundreds of WMF wikis.

    20. back in the delegable-proxy day

      that was a proposed experiment that would have been voluntary, involve no policy change, but that might create the collection of information to better assess consensus. This was considered a net negative, so negative that it was proposed to delete the proposal (not my proposal, by the way, but I was an off-wiki theoretician with delegable proxy). That sequence revealed to me how dead-set Wikipedia was in preserving the status quo. Anything the might show a better way (or not!) was to be "terminated with extreme prejudice." The vehemence was astonishing to me. I really had high hopes for Wikipedia, but knew that it would need to develop more reliable process. By 2011, I had competely abandoned that idea. This was unlikely to happen with Wikipedia, the Iron Law of Oligarchy had taken over. I see mo sign now (2019) of any move to actually empower the full community. Wikipedia runs for the interests of what Jimbo called the "Cabal." And denies that there is any cabal, only by pretending that the only kind of cabal is one with guys with moustaches rubbing their hands in an evil conspiracy. In fact, the wiki structure encourages factions to form and to advance factional agendas, it's trivial. Watchlists and no restraining community review process that actually works.

    21. BUT you can't actually revert the edits more than once, else you risk running afoul of EW and eventually 3RR

      and if the edit was constructive that you reverted, you have damaged the project simply in order to enforce a "rule." This situation does not actually change if the user is blocked or banned. This all points out how far the admin corps has gone from wiki-sanity. He is looking for a rule to justify reversion. Yes, someone could, in theory, create multiple accounts but this had nothing to do with the experiment.

    22. somewhat similar experiment

      Knowing Guido den Broder, I doubt it was actually similar. Self-reversion can be done disruptively. Yes, it was an experiment, but once the WP admin response had played out, I was not going to continue it and only did one more experiment, also not disruptive. (But some will argue that any block evasion is disruptive. Regardless of conditions. to put this bluntly, WP:IAR is dead.

    23. alternate approaches to editing whilst banned from a WMF wiki

      He gets it better than others. The approach was invented before I was banned, and it worked. To work, however, requires that a policy be established that self-reverted edits, identified as made under a ban (and therefore to be carefully examined before reverting them back in) would not be ban violations, not in themselves. If the edits were otherwise disruptive, like "So-and-so is poo!", self reversion might not avoid sanction.

      The real point of self-reversion is that, to work, cooperation must be set up.

    24. you can buy all the components and try it yourself

      Yes. that was ready and available by the time the web site was up. I still have all those components, but largely abandoned that project. There is more known, now, and I might restart it. This is for experiment, i.e., for study and learning, not to "prove" anything. But these WP admins have some weird idea about "believers" in pseudoscience. I have been published under peer review in a mainstream journal on the topic. They probably believe that such publications don't exist, and why? Because all reference to them has systematically been expunged from the WP article! One of the last things before I was topic-banned was getting a declaration from WP:RSN that a particular peer-reviewed secondary source was usable as reliable source. That was attacked extensively, but the decision was, yes, reliable source. This was the most prominent review of cold fusion ever. Excluded. Why? (and I am not claiming that the conclusions of that article are "true." Verification, not truth, right?

    25. the actual working model

      This kit would not be called a "working model." It was a collection of materials to be used to replicate a SPAWAR experiment, claim to produce a few neutrons (very few, but this kit was optimized from various reports of theirs to crreate, possibly, as many as thousands of proton-knock-on tracks and a few "triple-tracks," which are diagnostic of neutrons. I thought it was a cool idea. I did not expect to make a profit, rather it was designed to break even, covering necessary labor at a modest rate.

    26. have the kit available yet,

      where did he get that. The materials were available for sale, making what could have been difficult, easy.

    27. advertising their COI

      Disclosing. WMF policy requires disclosing COI. Is that "advertising." I suppose. But this was an educational resource, and the kit was designed to replicate a notable experiment.

    28. we as Wikipedians can force that decision.

      In any case, he was correct, except for one thing. A collection of "trusted" Wikipedians could privately complain and if a user was actually violating the terms of use, they could convince the Office to globally lock. Even more, they could have a user not violating the TOU be banned, by presenting misleading evidence or worse, since the WMF has a star chamber process.

    29. vendettas

      I was not carrying out any "Wikipedia vendetta." Those were not allowed on Wikiversity, and I was part of the defense against it. But a Wikipedia vendetta spilled over onto Wikiversity, and Wikiversity was largely defenseless.

    30. Wikipedia Review

      This was misleading. Wikiversity was for educational resources, and included learning-by-doing, and people could study whatever interested them. Some people have been interested in "wiki studies," and that can include criticism. As a WV sysop, I acted to prevent personal attacks on Wikipedians. Later, one of my blocks came, if I recall correctly, when I used revert warring to call attention to persistent outing and personal attack against a WP sysop. It worked. In other words, where a major policy required breaking a minor one (3RR). I went for major instead of minor. A more general application of this principle is in WP:IAR. Admins, however, come to not actually care about improving the project, they care about enforcing rules and their own ideas of what "improvement" means. And once opped, they become almost impossible to remove. They can become incredibly disruptive and nothing is done, and if somone points it out, it can be wiki-suicide.

    31. anyone is actually listening

      Well, I write to learn and I write for the future. And out of my Wikipedia experience, I was able to be paid as a consultant. That drives them crazy! But it was not a violation of policy.

    32. f he's quietly editing some non-cold-fusion-related topic with socks, then what's the harm

      Indeed. But the fascists actually want to punish. And if you look at what I was banned for around cold fusion, it was not for POV-pushing. It was for allegedly writing too much on the Talk page. And the example given was a request to lift a global blacklisting on meta (not on Wikipedia!) That had started simple but, guess who! JzG made it complicated by lying about the facts, so I needed to present evidence and that gets long. The request was successful. So I was banned for a successful request on meta. Go figure. These fascists do whatever they want and invent excuses for it, and they have high experience at presenting popular excuses.

    33. Jimbo stepped in and shut it down

      That intervention occurred before I was active on WV. However, it had consequences. When Jimbo parachuted in with a meat-axe, it had massive negative consequences on that community, which prized academic freedom. So a WV sysop filed an RfC to remove Jimbo's Founder powers. It was doing poorly, running about 2:1 against, because of long-term users like Raul654, did he vote? I don't recall, but his vote would have been obvious. Jimbo apparently did not notice that many long-term users had voted to remove the tools. It had, in fact, been heavy-handed. So, perhaps emboldened, he went to Commons and started deleting porn. The way I have summarized this later was "Academic freedom? Who cares? But don't touch our porn!" The issue was really the same, the right of the local wikis to autonomy. Cross-wiki disruption could already be handled by stewards, but there were ways to preserve neutrality and avoid cross-wiki disruption without destroying academic freedom. I was very careful about that project not to cause any damage other than what was created by over-reaction, and that was limited. By the time of this discussion, I had ceased all editing of Wikipedia. As typical for these fascists, had I been banned, it would not have stopped me. They imagine that they have super-powers, being admins really does go to their heads.

    34. nor should they, since his actions aren't vandalism, they're just the cold fusion topic area)

      While I did do a lot of study of cold fusion there, it was not the bulk of my work, for the longest time. The documentation of my socking -- which was part of a larger study of the use of self-reversion to avoid ban violation -- was presented for deletion and consensus was to keep it.

    35. until the folks over there decide otherwise

      And so it went. But I was eventually banned from Wikiversity. If you look at it, a whole drawer of socks appeared to harass, a 'crat who had been very inactive appeared and said he had received private complaints, Some Wikipedians piled in to comment and attack, and I was unilaterally banned by him on some trumped-up excuse that had never been used before, the length of my block log. I had been extremely active on Wikiversity, practically ran the place for a time, had been abusively blocked by a rogue probationary sysop, and there were other events. I even made some mistakes and was short-blocked. All fairly normal. But I had already concluded that Wikiversity was unsafe and I had stopped working there. I only was editing to confront impersonation socking. That 'crat called it a "vendetta." In fact, he was colluding with them, that's become more and more obvious (it is more than admitting to private contact, which was bad enough.)

    36. and how to impose a ban on him on all WMF projects

      And Raul654 was a very large presence with that faction, having created, with WMC, one of the largest sock farms ever by simply banning someone because of their global warning point of view. He created an entire industry to detect edits mentioning cow farts, he blocked large swathes of the internet. By a year or two before this, functionaries were telling me he had to go.

    37. I wonder if it's possible to arrange a *global* ban from all WMF projects

      At that point, no. This user had no idea of global policy and how and why it was very different from Wikipedia. Wikiversity has a neutrality policy, but was neutral by inclusion, rather than exclusion. That is academic rather than encyclopedic. In academia, people do original research and argue for their ideas, and that is protected. But I was not "pushing a cold fusion POV on Wikipedia. That was a myth created by my confrontation of the pseudoskeptical POV pushers who resisted my very conservative editing of that article. I was not a "believer," but I was putting in information from reliable sources, which the faction (that included JzG and William M. Connolley later) revert warred to keep out. Connolley lost his tools over my first cold fusion ban, but the faction continued to push for it, and if you have two dozen editors, including some administrators, pushing a position, it does not take off-wiki collusion for it to happen. They will wear anyone down.

    38. turning topic ban evasion

      what the project was about was as a demonstration that it was possible for banned users to make positive contributions, making enforcement easier, and this idea had been approved by an arbitrator, before. The method was to self-revert the edit, as being subject to a ban, with identification of the user. The proposal was that such self-reverted edits would not be considered ban violations (as they would be harmless and would only come back in if explicitly accepted.) This actually worked, and created cooperation between banned editors and the very editors who had wanted them banned.This study stopped because it was obvious that admins would do anything to enforce a ban, including blocking innocent users, creating massive range blocks, creating edit filters to prevent the user from identifying himself (with many false positives), and using revision deletion to hide perfectly good edits.

      Nobody looked at balance. That is what Wikipedia had become, an inefficient mess, needlessly pissing off people so that they become LTAs, and not actually caring about the impact on neutrality of differential blocking based on POV,

    39. to evade ArbCom sanctions

      It was not an ArbCom sanction. JzG is so careless with reality that he might as well be said to be a liar.

    40. Given EnergyNeutral (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) following on from an unsuccessful appeal of the topic ban re Cold fusion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), I am assuming that Abd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is now considered banned? It's probably best if someone else tags the user page and links to the various sockpuppets. Guy

      Why someone else? Well, Guy (JzG) was highly involved with me, I had taken him to ArbCom and he was reprimanded and never forgave this. He implies that I was ArbComm banned. I had been but it expired and was replaced by a community ban. I appealed to ArbCom and I was blocked during the appeal, and it became obvious that ArbCom was not going to do anything, and I considered I had exhaused due process and I was going to be blocked and banned if I jaywalked, and so I abandoneed Wikipedia. But first I tested a procedure I had developed whereby banned users could non-disruptively make positive contributions. That required some socking, so I did that. When it became obvious that the WP admin coomunity no longer cared about WP:IAR, but had become fascist, I then did one final test, to see how a carefullly neutral and non-disruptive user would be treated. That was Energy Neutral. Look at contributions. No conflict. Yet, abruptly, banned by an arbitrator. I had taken no steps to disgusie my IP. But once upon a time, they would not checkuser you unless you were disruptive. I had now learned that the community had abandoned the traditions that originally built Wikipedia. So I never again socked. So one actual sock puppet in 2011.

    1. Poison dart frog (also known as dart-poison frog, poison frog or formerly known as poison arrow frog) is the common name of a group of frogs in the family Dendrobatidae which are native to tropical Central and South America.[2] These species are diurnal and often have brightly colored bodies.

      Bright coloration in frogs = danger

    1. Whereas Aristotle had claimed that virtue was to be found in the golden mean between excess and deficiency of emotion (metriopatheia), the Stoics sought freedom from all passions (apatheia). It meant eradicating the tendency to react emotionally or egotistically to external events, the things that cannot be controlled. For Stoics, it was the optimum rational response to the world, for things cannot be controlled if they are caused by the will of others or by Nature; only one's own will can be controlled. That did not mean a loss of feeling, or total disengagement from the world. The Stoic who performs correct (virtuous) judgments and actions as part of the world order experiences contentment (eudaimonia) and good feelings (eupatheia).
    1. The common thread in the literature of the existentialists is coping with the emotional anguish arising from our confrontation with nothingness, and they expended great energy responding to the question of whether surviving it was possible. Their answer was a qualified "Yes," advocating a formula of passionate commitment and impassive stoicism.— Alan Pratt[1]
    1. Professional digital practice: using digital media tools for professional purposes: to build networks, construct an e-profile, publicise and share research and instruct students. Sociological analyses of digital use: researching the ways in which people's use of digital media configures their sense of selves, their embodiment and their social relations. Digital data analysis: using digital data for social research, either quantitative or qualitative. Critical digital sociology: undertaking reflexive and critical analysis of digital media informed by social and cultural theory.

      Tressie McMillan Cottom quotes this in her post "Why Is Digital Sociology?"

    1. Dąbrowski called OE "a tragic gift" to reflect that the road of the person with strong OE is not a smooth or easy one. Potentials to experience great highs are also potentials to experience great lows. Similarly, potentials to express great creativity hold the likelihood of experiencing a great deal of personal conflict and stress. This stress both drives development and is a result of developmental conflicts, both intrapsychic and social. Suicide is a significant risk in the acute phases of this stress. The isolation often experienced by these people heightens the risk of self-harm.
    2. The most evident aspect of developmental potential is overexcitability (OE), a heightened physiological experience of stimuli resulting from increased neuronal sensitivities. The greater the OE, the more intense are the day-to-day experiences of life. Dąbrowski outlined five forms of OE: psychomotor, sensual, imaginational, intellectual, and emotional. These overexcitabilities, especially the latter three, often cause a person to experience daily life more intensely and to feel the extremes of the joys and sorrows of life profoundly. Dąbrowski studied human exemplars and found that heightened overexcitability was a key part of their developmental and life experience. These people are steered and driven by their value "rudder", their sense of emotional OE. Combined with imaginational and intellectual OE, these people have a powerful perception of the world

      Extremely prominent traits of AD(H)D are described in the overexcitabilities.

    3. Dąbrowski also described a group of people who display a different course: an individualized developmental pathway. These people break away from an automatic, rote, socialized view of life (which Dąbrowski called negative adjustment) and move into and through a series of personal disintegrations. Dąbrowski saw these disintegrations as a key element in the overall developmental process. Crises challenge our status quo and cause us to review our self, ideas, values, thoughts, ideals, etc. If development continues, one goes on to develop an individualized, conscious and critically evaluated hierarchical value structure (called positive adjustment). This hierarchy of values acts as a benchmark by which all things are now seen, and the higher values in our internal hierarchy come to direct our behavior (no longer based on external social mores). These higher, individual values characterize an eventual second integration reflecting individual autonomy and for Dąbrowski, mark the arrival of true human personality. At this level, each person develops his or her own vision of how life ought to be and lives it. This higher level is associated with strong individual approaches to problem solving and creativity. One's talents and creativity are applied in the service of these higher individual values and visions of how life could be—how the world ought to be. The person expresses his or her "new" autonomous personality energetically through action, art, social change and so on.
    4. Dąbrowski felt that our society was largely influenced by these lower two factors and could be characterized as operating at Level I. For example, our emphasis on corporate success ("a dog eat dog mentality") means that many CEOs operate on the basis of first factor—they will quickly sacrifice another to enhance their own advancement. As well, our educational, political, corporate, and media systems are self-promoting and discourage real examination or individual autonomy—the second factor. Alternatively, social justifications are often used: "of course I break the speed limit, everyone does." Or a soldier may explain that he or she was simply "following orders". Thus, this external value system absolves the individual of any individual responsibility.
    1. Machine learning techniques were originally designed for stationary and benign environments in which the training and test data are assumed to be generated from the same statistical distribution.

      the best thing ever!

  3. Mar 2019
    1. It suffices to consider a 1+1-dimensional space-time ℝ×S1, in which the spatial direction is compactified to a circle of circumference 2π, rendering the momenta discrete.

      TODO

    2. The classical equations of motion of a field are typically identical in form to the (quantum) equations for the wave-function of one of its quanta. For example, the Klein–Gordon equation is the classical equation of motion for a free scalar field, but also the quantum equation for a scalar particle wave-function.

      really? but it doesn't have wavefunction interpretation...

    1. On 26 September 2017, King Salman issued an order to allow women to drive in Saudi Arabia, with new guidelines to be created and implemented by June 2018.[16] Women to drive campaigners were ordered not to contact media and in May 2018, several, including Loujain al-Hathloul, Eman al-Nafjan, Aisha Al-Mana, Aziza al-Yousef and Madeha al-Ajroush, were detained.

      Author objectivity

    1. (e.a.), Hull (1992). All the women are white, all the black are men, but some of us are brave black women's studies. Feminist Press. ISBN 978-0912670959. OCLC 1050058204.

      look into

    2. Mary J. Garrett who founded a group consisting of hundreds of Black women in New Orleans, said that Black women strived for education and protection

      Need to look into further

    1. Creative Commons license

      How relevant/helpful: This article really fleshed out the reading from the course and gave me a deeper understanding of the licenses. Also helpful were the info about CC licenses current standing in the courts and info about ported versions of the license which I had not seen elsewhere.

    1. Plants and worn, aged materials are generally used by Japanese garden designers to suggest an ancient and faraway natural landscape, and to express the fragility of existence as well as time's unstoppable advance.

      Description of elements that compose and give atmosphere to the gardens.

    1. An electrical circuit makes acoustic or ultrasonic vibrations in the piezoelectric material, which produce linear or rotary motion. In one mechanism, the elongation in a single plane makes a series of stretches and position holds, analogous to the way a caterpillar moves.

      go to Here

    1. Discovery of the Leyden jar in Musschenbroek's lab. The static electricity produced by the rotating glass sphere electrostatic generator was conducted by the chain through the suspended bar to the water in the glass held by assistant Andreas Cunaeus. A large charge accumulated in the water and an opposite charge in Cunaeus' hand on the glass. When he touched the wire dipping in the water, he received a powerful shock.

      video <br> Leyden Jar <br> Advanced

    1. A field study at Google[4] covering over 100,000 consumer-grade drives from December 2005 to August 2006 found correlations between certain S.M.A.R.T. information and annualized failure rates: In the 60 days following the first uncorrectable error on a drive (S.M.A.R.T. attribute 0xC6 or 198) detected as a result of an offline scan, the drive was, on average, 39 times more likely to fail than a similar drive for which no such error occurred. First errors in reallocations, offline reallocations (S.M.A.R.T. attributes 0xC4 and 0x05 or 196 and 5) and probational counts (S.M.A.R.T. attribute 0xC5 or 197) were also strongly correlated to higher probabilities of failure. Conversely, little correlation was found for increased temperature and no correlation for usage level. However, the research showed that a large proportion (56%) of the failed drives failed without recording any count in the "four strong S.M.A.R.T. warnings" identified as scan errors, reallocation count, offline reallocation and probational count. Further, 36% of failed drives did so without recording any S.M.A.R.T. error at all, except the temperature, meaning that S.M.A.R.T. data alone was of limited usefulness in anticipating failures.[5]
    1. Self-archiving of non-open access publications provides a low cost alternative model

      I'm curious about the discovery infrastructure that enables researchers, students, etc. to discover articles in isolated institutional repositories. It seems like this is the one service that journals actually provide, but isn't that a relatively easy one to overcome?

    2. $1000 for closed-access and $3500 for open-access

      Again, the publishers are maintaining their bottom line at the expense of the public, be it through the institution, the author, or the library. How is this tolerated?

    3. This fee is usually paid by an author's institution or research funder rather than by the author themselves

      How is this any different than charging the institution's library for a subscription? If a single article fee can be $1,000, the same as the average price for an academic JOURNAL subscription, it feels like this is an even smarmier way for profit-driven publishers. to scam the public educational system.

  4. Feb 2019
    1. The Battle of San Patricio was fought on February 27, 1836, between Mexican troops and rebellious immigrants from the Mexican province of Texas, known as Texians. The battle marked the start of the Goliad Campaign, the Mexican offensive to retake the Texas Gulf Coast. It took place in and around San Patricio.

      asdfdf

    1. Their long association with humans has led dogs to be uniquely attuned to human behavior[17] and they are able to thrive on a starch-rich diet that would be inadequate for other canid species.[18] Dogs vary widely in shape, size and colors.[19] Dogs perform many roles for humans, such as hunting, herding, pulling loads, protection, assisting police and military, companionship and, more recently, aiding disabled people and therapeutic roles. This influence on human society has given them the sobriquet of "man's best friend".

      dogs are basically humans

    2. en considered a distinct species)[4] is a member of the genus Canis (canines), which forms part of the wolf-like canids,[5] and is the most widely abundant terrestrial carnivore.[6][7][8][9][10] The dog and the extant gray wolf are sister taxa[11][12][13] as modern wolves are not closely related to the wolves that were first domesticated,[12][13] which implies that the direct ancestor of the dog is extinct.[14] The dog was the first species to be domesticated[13][15] and has been selectively bred over millennia for various behaviors, sensory capabilities, and physical attributes.[16]

      dogs are so cute and love able and so sweet.

    1. Every document can contain a royalty mechanism at any desired degree of granularity to ensure payment on any portion accessed, including virtual copies ("transclusions") of all or part of the document.

      Knoweldge economy is Giving economy

    2. Permission to link to a document is explicitly granted by the act of publication.

      Intellectual Property is a construct. It doesn't exist. Scarcity has been gamed for systemic purpose by industry

    3. Every document can contain links of any type including virtual copies ("transclusions") to any other document in the system accessible to its owner. Links are visible and can be followed from all endpoints.

      The context is essential to create meaning