90 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2020
    1. We all know that real business logic does not belong in the presentation layer, but what about simple presentation-oriented things like coloring alternate rows in table or marking the selected option in a <select> dropdown? It seems equally wrong to ask the controller/business logic code to compute these down to simple booleans in order to reduce the logic in the presentation template. This route just lead to polluting the business layer code with presentation-oriented logic.
    2. Templates with logic versus "logic-less" templates is a hotly debated point among template language designer and users. Dust straddles the divide by adopting a "less logic" stance.
  2. Oct 2020
    1. I think logic-less templates are overrated. We already have logic in components with {#if} so I don't see what the concern is about logic in templates.

    2. Arguably, it leans into JSX land—including logic in the templates.
    3. Also a vote against, for the simple reason that logicless templates would be the ultimate goal for me.
    4. one of the reasons people sometimes balk at mustache-like syntax is just that: logic in the templates.
    1. Writing a logic-less template requires a bloated view model with comprehensive getters for the raw data. As a result, a messy and difficult-to-maintain view model usually accompanies logic-less templates.
    2. Full-of-logic, logic-less, and less-logic solutions
    3. that does not mean that I am advocating the other extreme–i.e., a templating language that allows a lot of logic. I find such templating languages, especially those that allow the host programming languages to be used inside the template, to be hard to read, hard to maintain, and simply a bad choice.
    1. Mustache is described as a "logic-less" system because it lacks any explicit control flow statements, like if and else conditionals or for loops
    2. Here, when x is a Boolean value then the section tag acts like an if conditional, but when x is an array then it acts like a foreach loop.
    1. A second caution relates to elaborative encoding. The mnemonic techniques are, as you have likely realized, an example of elaborative encoding in action, connecting the things we want to memorize (say, our shopping list) to something which already has meaning for us (say, our memory palace). By contrast, when an expert learns new information in their field, they don’t make up artificial connections to their memory palace. Instead, they find meaningful connections to what they already know.

      This was essentially the logical memory method espoused by Peter Ramus in the mid-1500's. He's a major source of the reason we don't use a broader number of methods within the art of memory in modern society. We need to remedy this error. I feel like the authors are woefully unaware of a lot of history and psychology here.

  3. Jul 2020
    1. In logic, functions or relations A and B are considered dual if A(¬x) = ¬B(x), where ¬ is logical negation. The basic duality of this type is the duality of the ∃ and ∀ quantifiers in classical logic. These are dual because ∃x.¬P(x) and ¬∀x.P(x) are equivalent for all predicates P in classical logic
    1. However, all the machinery of propositional logic is included in first-order logic and higher-order logics. In this sense, propositional logic is the foundation of first-order logic and higher-order logic.
  4. Jun 2020
  5. May 2020
    1. For instance, cor does not distribute over cand: compare (A cand B) cor C with (A cor C) cand (B cor C); in the case ¬A ∧ C , the second expression requires B to be defined, the first one does not
    1. In the context of first-order logic, a distinction is maintained between logical validities, sentences that are true in every model, and tautologies, which are a proper subset of the first-order logical validities.
  6. Apr 2020
    1. 内涵:某一词项的含义,即该词项所指对象共同具有的特有属性。外延:某一词项所指的对象。

      知乎:

      水果是对部分可以食用的植物果实和种子的统称。这个是内涵。 它的外延包括了一切符合定义的事物,如:苹果,梨子,香蕉

    1. the security risk argument doesn't make sense. Numerous social media and forum sites support HTML and they don't seem particularly prone to security issues.
  7. Mar 2020
    1. Whenever I'm so substantively shaky or incoherent as to make my case unpersuasively the first time around, I figure I should live with the consequences. And whenever I find criticism flawed, I figure readers — perceptive as they are — will see the flaw as well, therefore there's no need for me to rub it in.
  8. Jan 2020
    1. the phenomenal form

      In Fowkes, the 'form of appearance' or the Erscheinungsform.

      Exchange value is the 'form of appearance' of something contained in it, yet distinguishable from it--this 'third thing' will turn out to be 'socially necessary labor time'.

      Book Two of Hegel's Science of Logic, the Doctrine of Essence, begins with a chapter on 'Der Schein,' which appears in A.V. Miller's translation as "Illusory Being" (Hegel, Science of Logic, trans. by A.V. Miller, pp. 393-408).

      Here, Hegel describes "schein" as "reflected immediacy, that is immediacy which is only by means of its negation and which when contrasted with its mediation is nothing but the empty determination of the immediacy of negated determinate being," (p. 396).

      Hegel goes on to remark that "Schein" is "the phenomenon [Phänomen] of skepticism, and the Appearance [Erscheinung] of idealism," (p. 396).

      In describing exchange value as the 'Erscheinungsform' of 'something contained in it, yet distinguishable from it'--which will be labor--Marx is clearly flirting with the terminology surrounding "Illusory Being" in the Science of Logic, which suggests labor as the 'thing-in-itself' of the exchange value. Exchange-value is the reflected immediacy that conceals the congealed labor that it is its essence.

      The passage as a whole is suggestive of how exchange value will wend its way through Marx's demonstration, unfolding from itself determinations of itself.

      Before presenting a long, difficult quotation from Hegel, I think the most straightforward way to present this reference to Hegel is to say present the argument as follows:

      In Kantian idealism, we find that the 'thing-in-itself' cannot become an object of knowledge; consciousness only ever has immediate access to the form of appearance, the 'sensible form' of a 'thing-in-itself' which never presents itself to consciousness. In referring to the value form as the 'form of appearance' of something else which does not appear, Marx is saying that just as idealism subordinates the objectivity of the world to its appearance for consciousness, exchange-value represents immediately an essence that it suppresses, and implicitly, denies the possibility of knowledge of this essence.

      Hegel writes, "Skepticism did not permit itself to say 'It is'; modern idealism did not permit itself to regard knowledge as a knowing of the thing-in-itself; the illusory being of skepticism was supposed to lack any foundation of being, and in idealism the thing-in-itself was not supposed to enter into knowledge. But at the same time, skepticism admitted a multitude of determinations of its illusory being, or rather its illusory being had for content the entire manifold wealth of the world. In idealism, too, Appearance [Erscheinung] embraces within itself the range of these manifold determinateness. This illusory being and this Appearance are immediately thus manifoldly determined. This content, therefore, may well have no being, no thing or thing-in-itself at its base; it remains on its own account as it is; the content has only been transferred from being into an illusory being, so that the latter has within itself those manifold determinateness, which are immediate, simply affirmative, and mutually related as others. Illusory being is, therefore, itself immediately determinate. It can have this or that content; whatever content it has, illusory being does not posit this itself but has it immediately. The various forms of idealism, Leibnizian, Kantian, Fichtean, and others, have not advanced beyond being as determinateness, have not advanced beyond this immediacy, any more than skepticism did. Skepticism permits the content of its illusory being to be given to it; whatever content it is supposed to have, for skepticism it is immediate. The monad of Leibniz evolves its ideas and representations out of itself; but it is not the power that generates and binds them together, rather do they arise in the monad like bubbles; they are indifferent and immediate over against one another and the same in relation to the monad itself. Similarly, the Kantian Appearance [Erscheinung] is a given content of perception; it presupposes affections, determinations of the subject, which are immediately relatively to themselves and to the subject. It may well be that the infinite obstacle of Fichte's idealism has no underlying thing-in-itself, so that it becomes purely a determinateness in the ego; but for the ego, this determinateness which it appropriates and whose externality it sublates is at the same time immediate, a limitation of the ego, which it can transcend but which has in it an element of indifference, so that although the limitation is in the ego, it contains an immediate non-being of the ego." (p. 396-397).

      In Lenin's notebooks on Hegel's Science of Logic, these sections provoke a considerable degree of excitement. Lenin's 'Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic' can be accessed via Marxists.org here:

      https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/ch02.htm

    2. presents

      In Ben Fowkes translation in the Penguin edition, we find "The wealth of societies…appears as."

      In the German edition, Marx uses the verb erscheint ('scheint' shares an etymological link to the English word, shine.)

      On p. 127, Marx uses the Hegelian expression, Erscheinungsform (form of appearance). In this edition, it is rendered "the phenomenal form."

      Marx uses this term to describe the way that, in order for exchange-values to present an equivalence between two distinct use-values (i.e. x corn, y silk) they must possess some common element of identical magnitude. As exchange-values, commodities "cannot be anything other than the mode of expression, the 'form of appearance' [Erscheinungsform], of a content distinguishable from it," (Karl Marx. Capital, Vol. I, p. 127)

  9. Mar 2019
    1. Which got McCulloch thinking about neurons. He knew that each of the brain’s nerve cells only fires after a minimum threshold has been reached: Enough of its neighboring nerve cells must send signals across the neuron’s synapses before it will fire off its own electrical spike. It occurred to McCulloch that this set-up was binary—either the neuron fires or it doesn’t. A neuron’s signal, he realized, is a proposition, and neurons seemed to work like logic gates, taking in multiple inputs and producing a single output. By varying a neuron’s firing threshold, it could be made to perform “and,” “or,” and “not” functions.

      I'm curious what year this was, particularly in relation to Claude Shannon's master's thesis in which he applied Boolean algebra to electronics.

      Based on their meeting date, it would have to be after 1940. And they published in 1943: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02478259

  10. Feb 2019
    1. If one's content is logical, it will be easy to remember.

      In this sense, can "logic" be at all subjective? By subjective I mean can the definition of logical different between individuals when organizing information? For example, I think it would be logical to organize my information chronologically, while someone else may think it is most logical to utilize a topical organizational pattern.

    2. I-laving developed one's rational powers, one could then read as extensively (or not) as one wished.

      This reminds me of Plato's "Chariot Allegory:" the notion that the charioteer (logic, reason) attempts to drive and control the two horses (rational and irrational) toward the truth.

    1. reasoning was not enough

      This is a pretty lie that we like to tell ourselves, that reasoning and logic are what we allow to guide our choices and actions. Cf. Haidt's The Righteous Mind, where he argues that our gut responses (those not based on logic) come first and reason/rationalizations come second.

  11. Sep 2018
  12. Jul 2018
    1. er. Each of these choices reflect power dynamics and conflicting tensions. Desires for ‘presence’ or singular focus often conflict with obligations to be responsive and integrate ‘work’ and ‘life

      Are these power dynamics/tensions: actor or agent-based? individual or technical? situational or contextual? deliberate or autonomous?

    2. How do we understand such mosaictime in terms of striving for balance? Temporal units are rarely single-purpose and their boundaries and dependencies are often implicit. What sociotemporal values should we be honoring? How can we account for time that fits on neither side of a scale? How might scholarship rethink balance or efficiency with different forms of accounting, with attention to institutions as well as individuals?

      Design implication: What heuristics are involved in the lived experience and conflicts between temporal logic and porous time?

    3. Our rendering of porous time imagines a newperspective on time, in whichthe dominant temporal logic expandsbeyond ideals of control and mastery to include navigation(with or without conscious attention) of that which cannot be gridded or managed: the temporal trails, multiple interests, misaligned rhythms and expectations of others.

      Design implication: How to mesh temporal logic with porous time realities?

    4. Taken together, an orientation to time as spectral, mosaic, rhythmic (dissonant),and obligatedsuggestsa possible alternate understanding of what time is and how it can work.An initial typology ofporous time honors the fluidity of time and its unexpected shifts; it also acknowledges novel integrations of time in everyday practice. Addressingthese alternate temporal realities allows us to build on CSCW’s legacy of related research to questionthereach and scope of thedominant temporal logic.

      Description of porous time and its elements as an extension of CSCW literature on temporal logic.

    5. Yet, thepromise of social control affordedby information and communication technologies belies the inadequacy ofthe dominant temporal logic.

      Design implication: Re-aligning real time needs/pressures/representations with temporal logic.

    6. bels. To date, we have found that our subjects have a minimal ability, and almost no language, to discuss the vagaries of time. In general, people attempt to negotiate their subjective experiences of time through the assumptions of the dominant temporal logic outlined a

      So true, in my study too.

      Cite this graf.

    7. In witnessing how people struggle toorient to the dominant temporal logic,we find it isinsufficient to encapsulate temporal experiences. Thus, we now theorizea set of expanded notions, an initial typology that we call ‘porous time’.

      Definition of porous time.

      Elements of porous time include: spectral, mosaic, rhythmic and obligated.

    8. One of the ways that a temporal logic becomesvisible for analysis and critique is through the tensions that emerge when its assumptions and norms do not align with daily experience. In our collective fieldwork we have observedmultiple examples of mundane dailypractices coming into conflict withthe logic that time is, or should be, chunk-able, singular purpose, linear, and/or owned.These tensionshelp bring to the fore the extent of the dominant temporal logic and showcase the inadequacy of this narrow set of assumptions to fully describetemporal experiences.

      This section of the paper focuses on tensions in temporal logic that lead to the new typology of "porous time".

      These tensions give rise to conflicts in how people's activities don't align with the logic of how they should/could allot, manage and/or own their time.

      "The road to hell is paved with good intentions and bad calendaring?"

    9. We call this prevailing temporal logic ‘circumscribed time.’ We use this label to highlight the underlying orientation to time as a resource that can, and should, be mastered. A circumscribed temporal logic infers that time should be harnessed into ‘productive’ capacity by approaching it as something that can be chunked, allocated to a single use, experienced linearly, and owned. In turn, the norms of society place the burden on individuals to manage and ‘balance’ time as a steward, optimizing this precious resource by way of control and active manipulation.

      Description of the elements of circumscribed time.

    10. Finally,time is understood asaresource that is owned by an individual and thus needs to be managed and apportioned by that individual.Like personal income, time is a resource that the individual has both the burden and responsibility to manage well. This vision of time reflects an assumption there are ‘better’ or ‘worse’ ways to use, spend and save time and it is up to the individual to engage in practices of temporal ownership. Controlling time doesnot suggest thatan individual can speed up or slow down time, but rather,suggeststhat timecan be personally configured to meet individual aims or goals.

      Definition of time as ownable.

      This idea of time as a resource also denotes a certain sense of personal agency/control over time when certain practices, like scheduling or efficiencies, are applied.

    11. Thedominant temporal logicalso conceptualizestime aslinear. In other words,one chunk of time leads to another in a straight progression. While chunks of time can be manipulated and reordered in the course of a day (or week, or month), each chunk of time has a limited duration and each activity has a beginning and an end. An hour is an hour is an hour, and in the course of a day (or a lifetime) hours stack up like a vector, moving one forward in a straightforward progression.

      Definition of linear time.

      WRT to temporal linguistics, linear time drives moving-ego and moving-time metaphors.

    12. Aligned with chunk-able time is the assumption that each chunk of time, or its particular gridded arrangement, is allocated to a single purpose.

      Definition of single purpose time.

      Design implication: How does single-purpose time align or conflict with multitasking and/or blurred task types that overlap home vs office, personal vs professional.

    13. appointment. Time chunksopen up the possibility for future-oriented temporal manipulation and valuation; they assumethat we are able to know, in advance, the duration of tasks and experiences.

      How does the idea of time chunks and future-orientation fit with:

      Reddy's temporal horizon concept? Zimbardo's future time perspective?

    14. The expectation that time is chunk-able is conditioned by an understanding that time exists in units (a second, a minute, a year) and that temporal units are equal–that can be swapped and exchanged with relative ease.

      Definition of chunkable time.

      Design implication: Time is experienced in consistent, measurable, and incremental units.

      Ex: 60 minutes is always 60 minutes no matter what part of the day it occurs or in any social context, such as calendaring/scheduling an event.

      Using a chunkable time perspective, we conform our activities/appointments to clock-time increments rather than making the calendar conform. Per Mazmanian, et al., this perspective "perpetuates a sense that time is malleable and responsive" with little concern about how changing an appointment time can affect the rest of the calendar.

    15. the nature of timethat reflect a dominant temporal logic –specifically that timeischunkable, single-purpose, linearandownable

      4 aspects of circumscribed time

      describes time as a resource that can be mastered incrementally.

    16. A temporal logicoperatesat multiple levels. It is perpetuated insocialand cultural discourse; is embedded in institutional expectations and policies; drivesthe design and implementation of technologies;establishes resilient social norms; and provides a cache of normative, rational examples to draw on when individuals needtomake sense of their everyday engagements with time. When a tool like Microsoft Outlook is designed, presented, and justified in a marketing campaign it is both reflecting and perpetuating atemporal logic.

      Design implication: How temporal logic informs and influences other behaviors.

    17. In particular, by temporal logicwe mean the socially legitimated, shared assumptions about time that areembedded in institutional and societal norms, discourses, material and technological processes, and shared ideologies. A temporal logic defines what is rational, normal and expected, andimbues a society with a definitionof what time is that directsindividuals in how they should operate in and through time.It provides an understanding of time that becomes so embedded that it seems to define reality.

      Definition of temporal logic as a shared understanding that leads to social constructs of common practices, rules, and norms.

    18. What would it look like to more explicitly acknowledge power dynamics in information and communication technologies? In the tradition of critical and reflective design [50], how might CSCW scholarship think about designing technologies that ‘protect’ users from temporal obligations and render messiness and disorganization a possible way of engaging with time?

      Design implication: What if porous time was considered a feature not a bug?

      How to better integrate personal agency/autonomy and values into a temporal experience?

      How could a temporal artifact better support a user flexibly shifting/adapting temporal logic to a lived experience?

    19. Interrogating the temporal logic of circumscribed time raises three related sociotemporal concerns particularly relevant to CSCW: lived experience, visions of success, and power relations. We address each concernin relation to key theoretical works to showhow the insights presented here both point tothe limitations of the dominant temporal logic of circumscribed time and demandexpanding this logic to include those orientations suggested by porous time.

      3 sociotemporal concerns that help bridge circumscribed and porous time: lived experience, visions of success and power relations.

    20. The temporal logic of circumscribed time falls short of describing, let alone organizing, the complex temporalities that govern American lives today. As an expansion of the dominant logic, porous time aims toprovide a more nuanced account of howtemporality shapes interactions among people, technologies, and the

      The tension between circumscribed and porous time leads to control-seeking and a need to adapt to the "fluidities of time".

      This tension serves up different coping mechanisms, such as: metaphors, time representations, design challenges, routines, need for self-reflection, quantification via scheduling, data collection, technical solutions, predictive models, etc.

    21. We find and name an emergent set of temporal elements–spectral, mosaic,rhythmicand obligatedtime–which implicitly challenge the assumptions of the dominant logic. We call this collective set ‘porous time.’

      Definition of porous time and the set of temporal elements that challenge the dominant logic.

    22. s ‘circumscribed time.’This logic, which is embedded in many popular tools, current scholarship,and especially in the discourse of time management, is characterized by assumptions that time is chunk-able(i.e. unitized and measurable), oriented to a single purpose, experiencedlinearly, and owned by individuals

      Definition of circumscribed time -- a dominant temporal logic.

    23. temporal logic–a particular orientation to time that manifests in time-related social norms, moral judgments, daily practices, and technologies for scheduling and coordinat

      Definition of temporal logic

  13. Apr 2018
    1. (== 10)

      This confused me. I'm relatively new to Haskell and did not know about sectioning. After learning that detail, this makes sense as a (right) partial application of the (==) function.

  14. Mar 2018
    1. Lucius Gregory Meredith, Mike Stay, and Sophia Drossopoulou. Policy as types. CoRR, 2013. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.7766.

      I think I have my head around this one now.

  15. Sep 2017
  16. Mar 2017
    1. She doesn't "speak," she throws her trembling body forward; she lets go of herself, she flies; all of her passes into her voice, and it's with her body that she vi-tally supports the "logic" of her speech.

      This is very different from the choreographed gestures of Austin. The body is spontaneous. In addition, she seems to expand what logic is. Logic is traditionally an intellectual capacity, one which has been considered men's strong point and women's weakness. She flips this conception by challenging the mind/body binary of traditional rhetoric and claiming that the body is a site of logic.

  17. Feb 2017
    1. When the sisters addressed groups together, Sarah usually began by carefully laying out evidence of slavery's evils and biblical justifications for opposing it, and then Angelina would take the floor to passionately denounce the institution based on her eyewitness experience of its horrors, exhorting the audience to act before this moral evil brought Divine vengeance on the nation.

      Thinking here about Whateley when he admits that logic alone may not always be enough when forming an argument.

      "Are emotions not part of human decision? Do we not often seek to persuade ourselves to choose a course of action by representing to ourselves appropriate thoughts and feelings? It is legitimate and necessary, Whateley says, to stimulate emotions such as hope, fear, and altruism because they lead to worthy aims."

      It's almost as if the Grimké sisters operate in the kind of rhetorical duality that Whateley imagines between "logic" and "passion" but do so in a physical sense by literally sharing the stage. Sarah acts as the "logic" when systematically presenting evidence and justification, and Angelina acts as the "passion" by motivating the audience into action by supplementing the evidence with feeling.

    1. Cicero il; hardly to be reckoned among the num· ber; for he delighted so much more in the prac-tice, than in the theory, of his art, that he is per-petually drawn off from the rigid philosophical analysis of iL,; principles, into discursive decla• mations, always eloquent indeed, and often highly interesting, but adverse to regularity of system, c,4.,~ and frequently as unsatisfactory to the practical .5-"~'"~ student as to the Philosopher.

      Didn't he establish that the issue for rhetoric "is to determine what people will take to be true or persuasive?" (1001) And that it sometimes doesn't follow logic?

      This, apparently lacking, regularity of Cicero's sounds a lot like the sometimes that Whately throws in.

    2. Logic
    1. Conspiracy theorists have connected a lot of dots

      Blair-"True rhetoric and sound logic are very nearly allied."

  18. Jun 2015
    1. Gilbert, Tafarodi and Malone's paper was entitled "You Can't Not Believe Everything You Read". This suggests —to say the very least—that we should be more careful when we expose ourselves to unreliable information, especially if we're doing something else at the time. Be careful when you glance at that newspaper in the supermarket.

      I wonder if this accounts for the bad design of pseudoscience publications.

  19. Dec 2014
  20. Nov 2014
  21. Oct 2014
    1. Any serious discussion of the changing climate must begin by acknowledging not only the scientific certainties but also the uncertainties

      This article does not acknowledge the scientific certainties in the domain of climate change science and emphasizes the uncertainties. According to the author's definition, this article would not be qualified "a serious discussion of the changing climate".

    2. That uncertainty need not be an excuse for inaction.

      Incoherent with the main message of the article.

  22. Nov 2013
    1. There are two universal, general gifts be-stowed by nature upon man, Reason and Speech; dialectic is the theory of the former, grammar and rhetoric of the latter.

      For Ramus, logic comes first.

  23. Sep 2013
    1. it must adapt itself to an audience of untrained thinkers who cannot follow a long train of reasoning.

      Interesting. Rhetoric must be able to act as a means to persuade those who cannot follow complex arguments, implying that the purest form of persuasion is totally based in logic.

    1. For if I have had the affection of men who have received rewards in recognition of excellence, but have nothing in common with the sycophant, then how, in all reason, could you judge me to be a corrupter of youth?

      Logically flawed.

    1. SOCRATES: And in the same way, he who has learned what is just is just?

      Being just... isn't a profession. Logically flawed.