118 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2024
    1. “Building housing in existing communities is one of our best climate solutions, and paving over 17,000 acres of non-irrigated farmland is not,

      for - sustainable building - building reuse vs new build - which is better? - California Forever - intentional community - green debate

      sustainable building - building reuse vs new build - which is better? - Study by Preservation Green Lab in 2012 concluded that in most cases, reusing existing buildings is far lower carbon footprint than building new - Research study shows that we cannot expand human activity into intact nature any longer if we are to stay within planetary boundaries - Rockstrom - https://hyp.is/0dbJ4FQSEe-QxY8q4Y3yvw/www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaboF3vAsZs

  2. Jul 2024
    1. To establish a norm of rigorous thinking, you’ll want to encourage your team to speak up if they disagree, and to do so respectfully and openly. And when questions are asked of them, to react positively and see the questions as a gift. This part is important: A team member’s initial reaction may be to feel a little defensive, and that’s natural, but that’s not the reaction to act on. The way to react is to appreciate when a colleague cares enough to speak up.
  3. Jun 2024
    1. nobody's really pricing this in

      for - progress trap - debate - nobody is discussing the dangers of such a project!

      progress trap - debate - nobody is discussing the dangers of such a project! - Civlization's journey has to create more and more powerful tools for human beings to use - but this tool is different because it can act autonomously - It can solve problems that will dwarf our individual or even group ability to solve - Philosophically, the problem / solution paradigm becomes a central question because, - As presented in Deep Humanity praxis, - humans have never stopped producing progress traps as shadow sides of technology because - the reductionist problem solving approach always reaches conclusions based on finite amount of knowledge of the relationships of any one particular area of focus - in contrast to the infinite, fractal relationships found at every scale of nature - Supercomputing can never bridge the gap between finite and infinite - A superintelligent artifact with that autonomy of pattern recognition may recognize a pattern in which humans are not efficient and in fact, greater efficiency gains can be had by eliminating us

  4. May 2024
    1. In Frankreich beginnt in dieser Woche eine öffentliche Debatte um ein großes lithium-bergbauprojekt im zentralmassiv. Der umfassende Artikel beleuchtet eine Vielzahl von Aspekten des lithium-Abbaus und der zunehmenden Opposition dagegen, die eng mit dem Kampf gegen die individuelle motorisierte Mobilität verbunden ist. https://www.liberation.fr/environnement/climat/course-au-lithium-made-in-france-une-opportunite-a-saisir-ou-un-mirage-ecologique-20240310_FQOVXTBNKJC5NJ7EZI2UQKOAIY/in

  5. Feb 2024
    1. McLuhan (2005) once observed that the medium is the message

      This is a complex topic that has significant implications for distance education.

      Also of relevance here is M.G. Moore's Theory of Transactional Distace.

  6. Jan 2024
    1. generally derives from variations in filtering out spurious and low-abundant sequences (e.g. Edgar, 2017; Prodan et al., 2020).

      DADA2 like ASV vs OTU?

      Applying different workflows on the same data will always demonstrate a certain level of variation among pipelines. These variations are usually most obvious in terms of the reported number of features.

  7. Dec 2023
    1. My impression is that human brains arevery much of a pattern, that under thesame conditions they react in the sameway, and that were it not for tradition,upbringing, accidents of circumstance,and particularly of accidental individualobsessions, we should find ourselves-since we all face the same universe-muchmore in agreement than is superficiallyapparent. We speak different languagesand dialects of thought and can even attimes catch ourselves flatly contradictingone another in words while we are doingour utmost to express the same idea.How often do we see men misrepresent-ing one another in order to exaggerate adifference and secure the gratification ofan argumentative victory!

      We're far more alike than we imagine says Wells. Most of our difference is nitpicking for the sake of argument itself rather than actual meaning.

      • for: climate crisis - debate - community action, climate crisis - discussion - community action, indyweb - curation example

      • discussion: effectiveness of community action to address climate crisis

        • This is a good discussion on the effectiveness of community action to address the climate crisis.
        • It offers a diverse range of perspectives that can all be mapped using SRG trailmark protocol and then data visualized within Indyweb via cytoscape
  8. Oct 2023
    1. uggested that it may socially determine what should be ‘normal’ sex for women and men.

      porn acts as guidlines in a way for reality, which links to Baudrillard's impact of media, 2-way transformation

    2. sexual culture which emphasises the private

      is porn a private or public (state) issue? against feminism as personal is political

    3. acceptance of the need to assert women’s sexual pleasure, and the increase of mediated sexual discourses, mean that agendas have shifted and diversified.
    4. feminists’ ‘sex wars’,
    5. individual and society or between freedom and control
    6. The debate over pornography within feminism has been polarized
    7. descriptions both disturbing and arousing
    8. It mentions that some feminists believe pornography harms women and perpetuates inequality, while others argue that it can provide opportunities for empowerment and self-expression.
    9. “Some women who do not support porn politically still enjoy watching it, but they feel conflicted about the contradictions between their beliefs and actions,”
    10. anti-sex

      views about women and sex and sexuality have been debated whether its harmful to the feminist movement

  9. Sep 2023
  10. Jul 2023
    1. Si usted recibe un comentario, Hypothesis le enviará un correo electrónico notificándolo de dicha acción.

      Esto es perfecto; el débate que se genera a partir de nuestros comentarios es la mejor forma de interactuar en la academia.

    1. length of life is not by a million miles as important as the quality of that life and we will all die of something one day we must focus on quality not quantity of 00:12:55 life
      • comment
        • we need to have a Deep Humanity dive on
          • quality of life vs quantity of life
          • if we acknowledge and face our mortality,
            • how would that change the QUALITY of our life?
  11. Mar 2023
  12. Feb 2023
    1. Fast, Sascha. “No, Luhmann Was Not About Folgezettel.” Topical Blog. Zettelkasten Method, October 31, 2015. https://zettelkasten.de/posts/luhmann-folgezettel-truth/.

    2. I don’t think it is the best choice to realize Luhmann’s principles. Yet it is the best application adapting his techniques I know so far.

      Sascha Fast appreciated Lüdecke's ZKN3 application as one of the best for adapting Luhmann's techniques to a digital space, but felt that it could have gone further in realizing Luhmann's principles.


      Some of the tension in this debate is that between the affordances of analog (paper) versus digital information storage and tagging.

      Paper lacks easy corpus text search while simultaneously requiring additional manual indexing to make up for it. Paper also doesn't have the discovery value of autocomplete. On the opposite end paper forces one to more regularly review physical associative trails through one's past work while digital allows one to skip over some of this review process.

    3. One piece of clutter was the concept of Folgezettel.

      Sascha Fast felt in 2015 that the idea of Folgezettel within a zettelkasten was unnecessary "clutter".

      Did he later change his mind after further discussion?

      check this for further arguments: https://hypothes.is/a/xzuclLbBEe2Ov4viA3XOkQ

    4. Update 2020-04-15: The topic re-emerged after a couple of years. There is quite some discussions in the forum. For example: Here, here and here. See this new post from 2020 for an expansion on that topic.
    1. Not sure I completely follow the logic of the debate between Sascha and taurusnoises (Bob Doto) here. I'll have to look closer.

      Perhaps mapping out the 1-1 distinctions between the digital and the analog here would be helpful. What structures would be needed to make them 1-1?

    2. fz is less about the tree (though that is important) and more about the UX.

      I do like the framing of folgezettel as a benefit with respect to user experience.


      There is a lot of mention of the idea of trees within the note taking and zettelkasten space, but we really ought to be looking more closely at other living systems models like rhizomes and things which have a network-like structure.

    1. Part 1: What Do We Need? Denote as a Zettelkasten, 2023. https://share.tube/w/mu7fMr5RWMqetcZRXutSGF.

      It starts and ends with Denote, but has an excellent overview of the folgezettel debate (or should one use Luhmann-esque identifiers within their digital zettelkasten system?)


      Some of the tension within the folgezettel debate comes down to those who might prefer more refined evergreen (reusable) notes in many contexts, or those who have potentially shorter notes that fit within a train of thought (folgezettel) which helps to add some of the added context.

      The difference is putting in additional up-front work to more heavily decontextualize excerpts and make them reusable in more contexts, which has an uncertain future payoff versus doing a bit less contextualization as the note will speak to it's neighbors as a means of providing some of this context. With respect to reusing a note in a written work, one is likely to remove their notes and their neighbors to provide this context when needed for writing.


      (apparently I didn't save this note when I watched it prior to number 2, blech....)

  13. Dec 2022
    1. So have you developed such a hierarchy of 00:20:37 the things that we're absolutely going to need? Simon Michaux: Yeah. So I started thinking about it. If I have a plan, that's okay. But we've got to put it in the arena, and we've all got to discuss it, rip it apart, and put it back together. So my plan becomes our plan. So I'm putting forward some ideas, but I see this as the start of the conversation, not the actual solution.

      !- summary : open, inclusive debate required! - indyweb can be perfect space

    1. The Gish gallop /ˈɡɪʃ ˈɡæləp/ is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. In essence, it is prioritizing quantity of one's arguments at the expense of quality of said arguments. The term was coined in 1994 by anthropologist Eugenie Scott, who named it after American creationist Duane Gish and argued that Gish used the technique frequently when challenging the scientific fact of evolution.[1][2] It is similar to another debating method called spreading, in which one person speaks extremely fast in an attempt to cause their opponent to fail to respond to all the arguments that have been raised.

      I'd always known this was a thing, but didn't have a word for it.

    1. A lot has changed about our news media ecosystem since 2007. In the United States, it’s hard to overstate how the media is entangled with contemporary partisan politics and ideology. This means that information tends not to flow across partisan divides in coherent ways that enable debate.

      Our media and social media systems have been structured along with the people who use them such that debate is stifled because information doesn't flow coherently across the political partisan divide.

  14. Nov 2022
    1. Trope, trope, trope, strung into a Gish Gallop.

      One of the issues we see in the Sunday morning news analysis shows (Meet the Press, Face the Nation, et al.) is that there is usually a large amount of context collapse mixed with lack of general knowledge about the topics at hand compounded with large doses of Gish Gallop and F.U.D. (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

  15. Sep 2022
  16. Aug 2022
  17. May 2022
    1. What did Franklin himself think about abortions? In 1728 during his early years as a printer, he generated controversy over something he would end up doing himself. According to “Benjamin Franklin: An American Life” by Walter Isaacson, he “manufactured” an abortion debate, largely because he wanted to crush a rival, but his own opinions may not have been too strong about it. Franklin wrote a series of anonymous letters for another paper to draw attention away from Samuel Keimer’s paper: The first two pieces were attacks on poor Keimer, who was serializing entries from an encyclopedia. His initial installment included, innocently enough, an entry on abortion. Franklin pounced. Using the pen names “Martha Careful” and “Celia Shortface,” he wrote letters to Bradford’s paper feigning shock and indignation at Keimer’s offense. As Miss Careful threatened, “If he proceeds farther to expose the secrets of our sex in that audacious manner [women would] run the hazard of taking him by the beard in the next place we meet him.” Thus Franklin manufactured the first recorded abortion debate in America, not because he had any strong feelings on the issue, but because he knew it would help sell newspapers.

      Benjamin Franklin manufactured the first recorded abortion debate in America to help sell his newspapers and to crush a rival.

  18. Apr 2022
    1. Brianna Wu. (2021, June 5). MRNA is unbelievably fragile. The enzymes that degrade it are literally everywhere. That’s why they had to develop specialized lipid nanoparticles to deliver it. It would last two seconds in a sewer system. Also, it gets separated from the delivery system after it’s injected. Https://t.co/35dZ6r6UAq [Tweet]. @BriannaWu. https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1400998163968933888

  19. Mar 2022
    1. James Heathers. (2021, October 26). Perish the thought I would be as peremptory as @GidMK. No, I’m going to hector, mock, or annoy those replies, THEN ask for money, THEN block you when I get bored. See, these aren’t rebuttals. No-one’s said anything about the actual work. Nothing. Not a sausage. [Tweet]. @jamesheathers. https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1452980059497762824

  20. Feb 2022
  21. Jan 2022
    1. It was largely the speakers of Iroquoian languages such as theWendat, or the five Haudenosaunee nations to their south, whoappear to have placed such weight on reasoned debate – evenfinding it a form of pleasurable entertainment in own right. This factalone had major historical repercussions. Because it appears tohave been exactly this form of debate – rational, sceptical, empirical,conversational in tone – which before long came to be identified withthe European Enlightenment as well. And, just like the Jesuits,Enlightenment thinkers and democratic revolutionaries saw it asintrinsically connected with the rejection of arbitrary authority,particularly that which had long been assumed by the clergy.

      The forms of rational, skeptical, empirical and conversational forms of debate popularized by the Enlightenment which saw the rejection of arbitrary authority were influenced by the Haudenosaunee nations of Americans.


      Interesting to see the reflexive political fallout of this reoccurring with the political right in America beginning in the early 2000s through the 2020s. It's almost as if the Republican party and religious right never experienced the Enlightenment and are still living in the 1700s.


      Curious that in modern culture I think of the Jesuits as the embodiment of rationalist, skeptical argumentation and thought now. Apparently they were dramatically transformed since that time.

  22. Dec 2021
    1. Timothy Caulfield. (2021, December 30). #RobertMalone suspended by #twitter today. Reaction: 1) Great news. He has been spreading harmful #misinformation. (He has NOT contributed to meaningful/constructive scientific debate. His views demonstrably wrong & polarizing.) 2) What took so long? #ScienceUpFirst [Tweet]. @CaulfieldTim. https://twitter.com/CaulfieldTim/status/1476346919890796545

  23. Nov 2021
    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2021, November 1). 2/2 from the paper ‘We speculate that the extraordinarily high antibody titers observed in vaccinated individuals who develop breakthrough infections may lead to subsequent long-term protection in those individuals.’ [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1455104597454954497

  24. Oct 2021
  25. Sep 2021
    1. If you have always wanted to know what it feels like to get stuck in a nonconsensual, one-way conversation with a libertarian high-school debate captain who’s more in love with his own brain than you will ever be with anyone or anything, Greenwald has just done you a great service. (I can already hear the debate captain shouting “point of personal privilege,” so I’ll try to steer clear of ad hominem from here on out.)
  26. Aug 2021
  27. Jul 2021
    1. The incontestable principle of inclusion drove the changes, which smuggled in more threatening features that have come to characterize identity politics and social justice: monolithic group thought, hostility to open debate, and a taste for moral coercion.
    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

  28. Jun 2021
  29. 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

  30. Apr 2021
  31. 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.
  32. 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.
  33. Dec 2020
  34. 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)
  35. Oct 2020
  36. Aug 2020
  37. 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

  38. 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.

  39. May 2020
  40. 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?

  41. 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.

  42. 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.
  43. 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.

  44. 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

  45. 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.

  46. 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...

  47. 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.

  48. Jan 2014
  49. 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

  50. 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?