One more example of a simple approach to this that might help a lot too is add a PORO generator. It could be incredibly basic - rails g poro MyClass yields class MyClass end But by doing that and landing the file in the app/models directory, it would make it clear that was the intended location instead of lib.

So then they put it into lib only to find that they have to manually require it. Then later realize that this also means they now have to reboot their server any time they change the file (after a painfully long debugging time of "why what aren't my changes working?", because their lib folder classes are now second-class citizens). Then they go down the rabbit hole of adding lib to the autoload paths, which burns them because rake tasks then all get eager loaded in production. Then they inevitably realize anything inside app is autoloaded and make an app/lib per Xavier's advice.

I think the symmetry of the naming between lib and app/lib will lead a fresh Rails developer to seek out the answer to “Why are there two lib directories?", and they will become illuminated. And it will prevent them from seeking the answer to “How do I autoload lib?” which will start them on a rough path that leads to me advising them to undo it.

In API design, exceptional use cases may justify exceptional support. You design for the common case, and let the edge case be edge. In this case, I believe lib deserves ad-hoc API that allows users to do exactly that in one shot:

there's a lot of information that is held in this implicit meta communication world

You have not graspeda complex unity if all you know about it is how it is one. Youmust also know how it is many, not a many that consists of alot of separate things, but an organized many. If the partswere not organically related, the whole that they composedwould not be one. Strictly speaking, there would be no wholeat all but merely a collection.

this is like 00:24:33 where this like cusp of a moment as we move this from able to work with lab-like data to real life data that we're about to have access sort of like to the new telescope to look out at 00:24:45 the universe and then to discover all the things that were invisible to us before

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks.

We now take an opinionated stance on which second factor you should set up first – you'll no longer be asked to choose between SMS or setting up an authenticator app (known as TOTP), and instead see the TOTP setup screen immediately when first setting up 2FA.

OpenAI has not detailed in any concrete way who exactly will get to define what it means for A.I. to ‘‘benefit humanity as a whole.’’

Simon Winchester describes the pigeonhole and slip system that professor James Murray used to create the Oxford English Dictionary. The editors essentially put out a call to readers to note down interesting every day words they found in their reading along with examples sentences and references. They then collected these words alphabetically into pigeonholes and from here were able to collectively compile their magisterial dictionary.

In their 1986 book, Thinking in Time, Ernest May and Richard Neustadt showed how bad analogies have led to poor foreign-policy decisions

Kawakatsu et al. (1) make an important ad-vance in the quest for this kind of understanding, pro-viding a general model for how subtle differences inindividual-level decision-making can lead to hard-to-miss consequences for society as a whole.Their work (1) reveals two distinct regimes—oneegalitarian, one hierarchical—that emerge fromshifts in individual-level judgment. These lead to sta-tistical methods that researchers can use to reverseengineer observed hierarchies, and understand howsignaling systems work when prestige and power arein play.

And yet still we have to make the determination: Is this worthy of the bigger process? Our could we just ship it, and see what happens? Knowing when to accept the risk of the latter is part of how you prevent getting bogged down in process for things that just don't merit it. And sometimes you'll get that wrong! Something that looked innocuous will be consequential, and you have to clean it up. That's the nature of the criticality bet. You need to have the stomach to keep playing, even if you occasionally lose a hand. You're playing anyway unless you're doing the crazy multiple-teams-doing-adversarial-solutions stuff that I've heard of in pacemaker development. So don't sweat it, calibrate it!

Ryan Randall @ryanrandall@hcommons.socialEarnest but still solidifying #pkm take:The ever-rising popularity of personal knowledge management tools indexes the need for liberal arts approaches. Particularly, but not exclusively, in STEM education.When people widely reinvent the concept/practice of commonplace books without building on centuries of prior knowledge (currently institutionalized in fields like library & information studies, English, rhetoric & composition, or media & communication studies), that's not "innovation."Instead, we're seeing some unfortunate combination of lost knowledge, missed opportunities, and capitalism selectively forgetting in order to manufacture a market.

“There is no substitute for good decisions at the top—and no remedy for stupid ones.”

I know this is old, but it's ranking well in Google for a search of "List-Unsubscribe" and the provided suggestion isn't quite correct.

Here are some recommended unsubscribe methods: Include a prominent link in the message that takes recipients to a page for unsubscribing. Let recipients review the individual mailing lists they’re subscribed to. Let them unsubscribe from lists individually, or all lists at once. Automatically unsubscribe recipients who have multiple bounced messages. Periodically send a confirmation message to recipients to make sure they still want to get your messages.

Let recipients easily unsubscribe Always give recipients a way to unsubscribe from your messages. Make unsubscribing easy. Letting people opt out of your messages can improve message open rates, click-through rates, and sending efficiency.

Make sure recipients can easily subscribe

Many mail systems allow recipients to report mail as spam or junk, and mail streams from senders whose mail is often reported as junk tend to have poor deliverability. Hence, the mailers want to make it as easy as possible for recipients to unsubscribe; if an unsubscription process is too difficult, the recipient's alternative is to report mail from the sender as junk until the mail no longer appears in the recipient's inbox.

Let’s say the recipient is considering unsubscribing. He or she may be too busy to search through the email to find the unsubscribe link, so he or she just clicks “Report as SPAM” to stop the emails from coming. This is the last thing any marketer wants to see happen. It negatively impacts sender reputation, requiring extra work to improve email deliverability. With the list-unsubscribe header, you will avoid getting into this kind of trouble in the first place.

So far for the obligatory warning. I get the point, I even agree with the argument, but I still want to send a POST request. Maybe you are testing an API without a user interface or you are writing router tests? Is it really impossible to simulate a POST request with Capybara? Nah, of course not!

This is ugly by design, as an inducement to test properties instead of specifics.

Good commit hygiene is considered a best practice. GitLab should encourage and enable these kinds of best practices. This feature currently creates a problem and requires workarounds that remove information, or significant manual work.

Nobody ever says rubber ducky debugging involves writing memos to your preferred duck, after all.

And this is the art-the skill or craftthat we are talking about here.

The point to recognize is that these notes primarily concern the structure of the book, and not its substance-at leastnot in detail. We therefore call this kind of note-making structural.

The Three Kinds of N o te-making

I've edited the title slightly to make the intent of the question more obvious.

November 7, 1916: "I expect to vote for Woodrow Wilson

Boosting Human Decision‑making with AI‑Generated Decision Aids

Bilingual Antinet?

William Petty, a doctor in Cromwell’s army in 1647, noted that ‘...we seechildren do delight in drums, pipes, fiddles, guns made of elder sticks, andbellowes noses, piped keys, etc., painting flags and ensigns with elder-berriesand corn poppy, making ships with paper, and setting even nut-shells aswimming, handling the tools of workmen as soon as they turn their backs, andtrying to work themselves’ (reported in the Harleian Miscellany, 1810).

The nature of physics problem-solvingBelow are 29 sets of questions that students and physicists need to ask themselves during the research process. The answers at each step allow them to make the 29 decisions needed to solve a physics problem. (Adapted from reference 33. A. M. Price et al., CBE—Life Sci. Edu. 20, ar43 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-12-0276.)A. Selection and planning1. What is important in the field? Where is the field heading? Are there advances in the field that open new possibilities?2. Are there opportunities that fit the physicist’s expertise? Are there gaps in the field that need solving or opportunities to challenge the status quo and question assumptions in the field? Given experts’ capabilities, are there opportunities particularly accessible to them?3. What are the goals, design criteria, or requirements of the problem solution? What is the scope of the problem? What will be the criteria on which the solution is evaluated?4. What are the important underlying features or concepts that apply? Which available information is relevant to solving the problem and why? To better identify the important information, create a suitable representation of core ideas.5. Which predictive frameworks should be used? Decide on the appropriate level of mechanism and structure that the framework needs to be most useful for the problem at hand.6. How can the problem be narrowed? Formulate specific questions and hypotheses to make the problem more tractable.7. What are related problems or work that have been seen before? What aspects of their problem-solving process and solutions might be useful?8. What are some potential solutions? (This decision is based on experience and the results of decisions 3 and 4.)9. Is the problem plausibly solvable? Is the solution worth pursuing given the difficulties, constraints, risks, and uncertainties?Decisions 10–15 establish the specifics needed to solve the problem.10. What approximations or simplifications are appropriate?11. How can the research problem be decomposed into subproblems? Subproblems are independently solvable pieces with their own subgoals.12. Which areas of a problem are particularly difficult or uncertain in the solving process? What are acceptable levels of uncertainty with which to proceed at various stages?13. What information is needed to solve the problem? What approach will be sufficient to test and distinguish between potential solutions?14. Which among the many competing considerations should be prioritized? Considerations could include the following: What are the most important or most difficult? What are the time, materials, and cost constraints?15. How can necessary information be obtained? Options include designing and conducting experiments, making observations, talking to experts, consulting the literature, performing calculations, building models, and using simulations. Plans also involve setting milestones and metrics for evaluating progress and considering possible alternative outcomes and paths that may arise during the problem-solving process.B. Analysis and conclusions16. Which calculations and data analysis should be done? How should they be carried out?17. What is the best way to represent and organize available information to provide clarity and insights?18. Is information valid, reliable, and believable? Is the interpretation unbiased?19. How does information compare with predictions? As new information is collected, how does it compare with expected results based on the predictive framework?20. If a result is different from expected, how should one follow up? Does a potential anomaly fit within the acceptable range of predictive frameworks, given their limitations and underlying assumptions and approximations?21. What are appropriate, justifiable conclusions based on the data?22. What is the best solution from the candidate solutions? To narrow down the list, decide which of those solutions are consistent with all available information, and which can be rejected. Determine what refinements need to be made to the candidate solutions. For this decision, which should be made repeatedly throughout the problem-solving process, the candidate list need not be narrowed down to a single solution.23. Are previous decisions about simplifications and predictive frameworks still appropriate in light of new information? Does the chosen predictive framework need to be modified?24. Is the physicist’s relevant knowledge and the current information they have sufficient? Is more information needed, and if so, what is it? Does some information need to be verified?25. How well is the problem-solving approach working? Does it need to be modified? A physicist should reflect on their strategy by evaluating progress toward the solution and possibly revising their goals.26. How good is the chosen solution? After selecting one from the candidate solutions and reflecting on it, does it make sense and pass discipline-specific tests for solutions to the problem? How might it fail?Decisions 27–29 are about the significance of the work and how to communicate the results.27. What are the broader implications of the results? Over what range of contexts does the solution apply? What outstanding problems in the field might it solve? What novel predictions can it enable? How and why might the solution be seen as interesting to a broader community?28. Who is the audience for the work? What are the audience’s important characteristics?29. What is the best way to present the work to have it understood and to have its correctness and importance appreciated? How can a compelling story be made of the work?

An adviser should have their students explicitly practice decisions 25 and 26, test their solutions, and try to come up with the ways their decisions could fail, including alternative conclusions that are not the findings that they were hoping for. Thinking of such failure modes is something that even many experienced physicists are not very good at, but our research has shown that it can be readily learned with practice.

The third and probably most serious difficulty in making good reflective decisions is confirmation bias.

To be a successful physicist requires mastering how to make all 29 decisions, but the reflection decisions (decisions 23–26) are arguably the most difficult to learn.

My research group interviewed some 50 skilled scientists and engineers (“experts”), including physicists, on how they solved authentic problems in their discipline. We analyzed the interviews in terms of the decisions made during the solving process. Decisions were defined as instances when an expert selected between competing alternatives before taking some action. To my surprise, we found that the same set of 29 decisions occurred over and over (see the box on page 50). Nearly all of them showed up in every interview, and they essentially defined the problem-solving process.3

Why%do%I%write?

Do yourself and your peers a favor, write code with them in mind.

PRs will introduce various mechanisms step by step. Some of these have issues already. A possible breakdown could be: Annotation collection using instance values (links also does this) Defining annotations to which multiple keywords contribute (this is new, see Need more details of annotation collection #530) Defining subschema and keyword processing results to include annotations Processing sequence for keywords that dynamically rely on the results of static keywords The actual definition of unevaluatedProperties An example of unevaluatedProperties

It's a great way to test various limits. When you think about this even more, it's a little mind-bending, as we're trying to impose a global clock ("who is the most up to date") on a system that inherently doesn't have a global clock. When we scale time down to nanoseconds, this affects us in the real world of today: a light-nanosecond is not very far.

There are many questions we can ask and answer about branch names. Each one is specific to one particular repository because all branch names are local to that particular repository. Any changes anyone makes in that repository affect only that one repository, at least at the time they make them.

“Taking Notes” rather than what I typically say, MakingNotes.

A “razor” is a rule of thumb that simplifies decision making. The most powerful razors I’ve found:

This eventof cognition, or better yet the event of making sense – the primal mental event, allencompassing, both forming and dissolving boundaries, multiple4 and affirming, Ifind to be the proper stage to present my research

My interest goes yet further, to the metaphysical ground of cognition andmental processes and how they reflect on existence, meaning and value. There is anobvious and unavoidable strange loop (Hofstadter, 2013) here: the cognitive think-ing agent trying to make sense of these same sense-making processes that bring forthboth her as a subject and the objects of her observation while these are being broughtforth.

5.10 Believability weight your decision making.

5.1 Recognize that 1) the biggest threat to good decision making is harmful emotions, and 2) decision making is a two-step process (first learning and then deciding).

By dropping or reducing or postponing the least importantparts, we can unblock ourselves and move forward even when timeis scarce.

Making MoneySerializer reloadable would be confusing, because reloading an edited version would have no effect on that class object stored in Active Job.

Indeed, if MoneySerializer was reloadable, starting with Rails 7 such initializer would raise a NameError.

“Scarcity: WhyHaving Too Little Means So Much” (2013) by Mullainathan andShafir. They investigate how the experience of scarcity has cognitiveeffects and causes changes in decision-making processes.

Even though results of these studies are currently under intensescrutiny and have to be taken with a grain of salt (Carter andMcCullough 2014; Engber and Cauterucci 2016; Job, Dweck andWalton 2010), it is safe to argue that a reliable and standardisedworking environment is less taxing on our attention, concentration

Women’s rights and family matters

Decision-making

matters that pertain to the children.

the eldest son makes all the major decisions

In a period of prolonged change, digital theory is more than an academic exercise. Digital media impacts all aspects of western society, from education to politics, from business to the arts. Journalists, science fiction writers, ideologues, entrepreneurs, activists, classroom teachers, rock stars, Supreme Court judges, government regulators are both consumers and producers of digital theory. For many, theorizing restores predictability and stability to a world rocked by radical change, while for others, theory fuels change, directing the energies unleashed by the digital revolution towards altering the nature of political life or personal identity. Our fantasies and fears about change shape our theories (including supposedly disinterested academic theories) as much as our theories help master those fears and fulfill those fantasies.

Values, rather than numbers, should drive decision-making. Ask whether what you measure accurately reflects your priorities. Many of our most cherished values are not amenable to quantitative measurement.

The tools of writing have seldom been designed with writers in mind.