46 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2021
    1. CovidCallOut on Twitter: “Vaccines work or they don’t…. If they do…. Opening up… let them do there job… If they don’t…. You have to return to normality at some stage… Otherwise then what… restrictions on who you see, what you do and where you go until when…. Forever.. It’s one or the other…” / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved July 18, 2021, from https://twitter.com/Covid_CallOut/status/1416078635266609152

  2. Jun 2021
  3. May 2021
    1. Ira, still wearing a mask, Hyman. (2020, November 26). @SciBeh @Quayle @STWorg @jayvanbavel @UlliEcker @philipplenz6 @AnaSKozyreva @johnfocook Some might argue the moral dilemma is between choosing what is seen as good for society (limiting spread of disinformation that harms people) and allowing people freedom of choice to say and see what they want. I’m on the side of making good for society decisions. [Tweet]. @ira_hyman. https://twitter.com/ira_hyman/status/1331992594130235393

  4. Apr 2021
  5. Mar 2021
    1. That said, I wish more people would talk both sides. Yes, every dependency has a cost. BUT the alternatives aren't cost free either. For all the ranting against micropackages, I'm not seeing a good pro/con discussion.
  6. Feb 2021
    1. So, whenever you hear the medieval argument “Trailblazer is just a nasty DSL!”, forgive your opponent, you now know better. The entire framework is based on small, clean Ruby structures that can be executed programmatically.
  7. Dec 2020
  8. Nov 2020
    1. In Rust, we use the "No New Rationale" rule, which says that the decision to merge (or not merge) an RFC is based only on rationale that was presented and debated in public. This avoids accidents where the community feels blindsided by a decision.
    2. I'd like to go with an RFC-based governance model (similar to Rust, Ember or Swift) that looks something like this: new features go through a public RFC that describes the motivation for the change, a detailed implementation description, a description on how to document or teach the change (for kpm, that would roughly be focused around how it affected the usual workflows), any drawbacks or alternatives, and any open questions that should be addressed before merging. the change is discussed until all of the relevant arguments have been debated and the arguments are starting to become repetitive (they "reach a steady state") the RFC goes into "final comment period", allowing people who weren't paying close attention to every proposal to have a chance to weigh in with new arguments. assuming no new arguments are presented, the RFC is merged by consensus of the core team and the feature is implemented. All changes, regardless of their source, go through this process, giving active community members who aren't on the core team an opportunity to participate directly in the future direction of the project. (both because of proposals they submit and ones from the core team that they contribute to)
  9. Oct 2020
  10. Aug 2020
  11. Jul 2020
    1. Bex, F., Lawrence. J., Snaith. M., Reed. C., (2013) implementing the Argument Web. Communications of the ACM. (56). (10). Retrieved from chrome-extension://bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=http%3A%2F%2Farg-tech.org%2Fpeople%2Fchris%2Fpublications%2F2013%2FbexCACM.pdf

  12. Jun 2020
    1. Un planteamiento semejante impulsa a tener en cuenta la posibilidad de consecuencias imprevistas, a hacer explí-citos los aspectos normativos que se esconden en las decisiones técnicas, a reconocer la necesidad de puntos de vista plurales y aprendizaje colectivo

      Esta idea está relacionada con la referencia a la novela Hyperión, la inteligencia artificial que determinó que para seguir evolucionando necesitaba un par que lo confrontara en debate.

  13. May 2020
  14. Jan 2019
    1. Curiosity Is as Important as Intelligence

      This one is a pretty bold statement to make, in general.

      Mike Johansson, at Rochester Institute of Technology, makes the case that curiosity is the key to enabling both Creative and Critical Thinking for better problem solving, in general.

      What are some of your ideas?

    2. Although IQ is hard to coach, EQ and CQ can be developed.

      This one is an interesting phrasing -- there's a lot of debate going on about IQ being an outdated metric already.

      For example, N. Taleb is very vocal that IQ simply does not make sense in today's society.

      What do you think? Is IQ overrated?

  15. Apr 2018
    1. In contemporary debates, gun control advocates often respond to assertion of second amendment individual rights to gun ownership by emphasizing the amendment’s reference to a “well regulated militia.”

      Hopefully this suggestion will be accepted in the spirit it is offered (gently!) and if acted upon, would not lengthen the intro too much, but rather help clarify the "anticipatory set" of the reading. Although the first sentence is quite accurate, as someone who has been doing extensive reading on the 2nd Amendment lately, I had to re - read this to be sure I understood the assertion. Bouncing back & forth from references to 1) gun control advocates 2) individual rights to gun ownership and back to 3) reference to a well regulated militia is likely to confuse H.S. readers who may have little interest or grasp of the ideas.

      Suggest: First of all - since it is so brief, it might be useful to actually provide the complete wording of Amendment Two. (Perhaps above the green "About this text" box.)

      Secondly - a note suggesting that gun control advocates tend to focus upon the "militia" clause while gun owner rights advocates often prefer to focus on the second clause re: right to own.

      Thirdly - a (brief) suggestion that the two sides do not even agree upon what constitutes a "militia" and that the context and historical evidence for each side's arguments are lengthy and complex.

      The second sentence beginning " In the excerpt below, is critical to help set the context of the reading, however, there seems to be room to minimize the verbiage without losing meaning.

  16. Jan 2017
    1. A person with oppositional conversational style is a person who, in conversation, disagrees with and corrects whatever you say. He or she may do this in a friendly way, or a belligerent way, but this person frames remarks in opposition to whatever you venture.
  17. Oct 2016
    1. Clinton says Trump has called the election ‘rigged’, while Trump says he won’t necessarily accept the election results All available evidence shows that in-person voter fraud is exceedingly rare: you are more likely to be struck by lightning in the next year (a one in 1,042,000 chance, according to Noaa) than to find a case of voter fraud by impersonation (31 possible cases in more than a billion ballots cast from 2000 to 2014, according to a study by Loyola Law School). The man who cried rigged: the problem with Trump’s election claims Whenever Donald Trump is cornered, he accuses his opponents of fighting dirty. This time, he might be right to say there’s voter fraud – but for the wrong reasons Read more Voter fraud would have to happen on an enormous scale to sway elections, because the electoral college system decentralizes authority: each of the 50 states has its own rules and local officials, not federal ones, run the polls and count the ballots. This complexity makes the notion of a “rigged” national election, at least in the US, logistically daunting to the point of practical impossibility. Thirty-one states have Republican governors, including the swing states of Florida, North Carolina, Iowa, Nevada and Ohio; Pennsylvania only elected a Democratic governor in 2015. Polls show Trump losing even in some states where governors have strongly supported him. In Maine, for instance, the Real Clear Politics average shows him down five points. About 75% of the ballots cast in federal elections have paper backups, and most electronic voting machines are not connected to the internet – though they have other flaws and may be vulnerable to tampering. But voter fraud to swing a major election, whether by tampering, buying votes or official wrongdoing, would quickly attract attention by its necessarily large scale. AdvertisementIf Trump loses the presidential election, it will be because American voters do not want him in the White House, not because of a conspiracy involving Republicans and Democrats alike at state and city levels around the nation – a conspiracy for which Trump has provided no evidence.

      Analysis of Trump's claim that the election is rigged.

  18. Jun 2016
    1. his has certainly been the tendency in rhetoric and composition, whose primary debate has been between two opposing methods for simplifying the complexity of writ ing.

      On-going debate

  19. Apr 2016
    1. Jon Udell on productive social discourse.

      changeable minds<br> What’s something you believed deeply, for a long time, and then changed your mind about?

      David Gray's Liminal Thinking points out that we all have beliefs that are built on hidden foundations. We need to carefully examine our own beliefs and their origins. And we need to avoid judgment as we consider the beliefs of others and their origins.

      Wael Ghonim asks us to design social media that encourages civility, thoughtfulness, and open minds rather than self-promotion, click-bait, and echo chambers.

  20. Jul 2015
    1. Twitter is an "argument machine"

      Maybe annotation could put "tweet" sized things into context and thereby avoid the "argument machine."

      Rashly assuming anyone will actually take time to read the context and the comment...

  21. Feb 2014
    1. For instance, if a certain individual owns the idea for airplanes, there are always ideas for gliders, helicopters, and devices yet unknown for other individuals to own. On the other hand, each idea is unique, so the taking of any idea as private property leaves none of that idea for others (Locke, 1690, Chap. V, Sect. 27). The first perspective would assert that there are always other ideas, while the second perspective would assert that ideas build upon each other, and that just because ideas are similar in one respect does not mean they are similar in other respects. Under the first perspective, the taking of intelle ctual property passes the Lockean Proviso, and under the second perspective, it fails.
    2. This is understatement to be sure, but the debate has been principally between two theories: a utilitarian policy theory, and a rights - based , non - utilitarian property theory (Long, 1995, n.pag.) .

      The debate in intellectual property law has centered around utilitarian policy theory and a rights-based non-utilitarian property theory.

  22. Jan 2014
  23. Dec 2013
    1. But even those accomplishments could be thwarted by a basic political calculation: Many Republicans believe they are getting such good traction from their attacks on President Obama’s stumbling health care law that they feel less compelled to produce results. Any public fight over legislative compromises could take away from the focus Republicans have kept on the health care law.

      Interesting

  24. Sep 2013
    1. I am one of those who are very willing to be refuted if I say anything which is not true, and very willing to refute any one else who says what is not true, and quite as ready to be refuted as to refute; for I hold that this is the greater gain of the two, just as the gain is greater of being cured of a very great evil than of curing another. For I imagine that there is no evil which a man can endure so great as an erroneous opinion about the matters of which we are speaking; and if you claim to be one of my sort, let us have the discussion out, but if you would rather have done, no matter;—let us make an end of it.

      Socrates is willing to accept when he is wrong, he just wants to understand what Gorgias is saying. He thinks Gorgias is inconsistent and wants clarity.

    2. SOCRATES: And will you continue to ask and answer questions, Gorgias, as we are at present doing, and reserve for another occasion the longer mode of speech which Polus was attempting? Will you keep your promise, and answer shortly the questions which are asked of you?

      What might Socrates be doing here?