24 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2023
    1. 个人学习可能取决于他人行为的主张突出了将学习环境视为一个涉及多个互动参与者的系统的重要性
  2. Apr 2022
    1. Since most of our feeds rely on either machine algorithms or human curation, there is very little control over what we actually want to see.

      While algorithmic feeds and "artificial intelligences" might control large swaths of what we see in our passive acquisition modes, we can and certainly should spend more of our time in active search modes which don't employ these tools or methods.

      How might we better blend our passive and active modes of search and discovery while still having and maintaining the value of serendipity in our workflows?

      Consider the loss of library stacks in our research workflows? We've lost some of the serendipity of seeing the book titles on the shelf that are adjacent to the one we're looking for. What about the books just above and below it? How do we replicate that sort of serendipity into our digital world?

      How do we help prevent the shiny object syndrome? How can stay on task rather than move onto the next pretty thing or topic presented to us by an algorithmic feed so that we can accomplish the task we set out to do? Certainly bookmarking a thing or a topic for later follow up can be useful so we don't go too far afield, but what other methods might we use? How can we optimize our random walks through life and a sea of information to tie disparate parts of everything together? Do we need to only rely on doing it as a broader species? Can smaller subgroups accomplish this if carefully planned or is exploring the problem space only possible at mass scale? And even then we may be under shooting the goal by an order of magnitude (or ten)?

    1. while not required, using a passive reference like ROX dye to normalize data helps achieve a higher level of precision among technical replicates. Without normalization, more replicates may be required to achieve comparable precisions levels, therby increasing the time and resources

      ROX increases precision of technical replicates (which we don't do much of in our lab)

    2. ROX fluorescence is affected by anything else that would alter overall fluorescence readings, such as: • Bubbles in wells • Evaporation • Condensation or droplets • Instrument issues, such as electrical surges

      ROX helps normalize these variations

    1. ROX is normalising for the attributes of the qPCR mixture, such as volume differences, presence of bubble etc.

      passive reference ROX helps with these

    2. differences in reaction volumes due to pipetting errors can bias the results. Also, issues associated with the qPCR instrument, such as the optics, can also influence the fluorescent signal generated.

      passive reference ROX helps with these

  3. Jan 2022
    1. Angel, D. M., Gao, D., DeLay, K., Lin, E. Z., Eldred, J., Arnold, W., Santiago, R., Redlich, C., Martinello, R. A., Sherman, J. D., Peccia, J., & Godri Pollitt, K. J. (2022). Development and Application of a Polydimethylsiloxane-Based Passive Air Sampler to Assess Personal Exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Environmental Science & Technology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00877

  4. Mar 2021
  5. Feb 2021
    1. Popover/Tooltip/Hovercard - These are passive approaches to showing more information. These are used to add simple instructions or explanations or foreshadow what will happen if you click a link.
  6. Jan 2021
    1. Unfortunately, this probably means a death knoll for this gem, at least I predict it will contribute to its slow trajectory towards insignificance/unknownness/lack-of-users.

      Why? Because it is already the less popular option in this comparison: https://ruby.libhunt.com/compare-premailer-rails-vs-roadie-rails

      and being actively maintained is an important factor in evaluating competing options.

      So of course people will see that the premailer option is the option that is still actively maintained, is still continuing to be improved, and they'll see that this one has been relegated to dormancy/stagnancy/neglect/staleness, which will only amplify the degree/sense of abandonment it already has from its maintainer (only now it will be its users that start to abandon it, as I now have).

    2. This gem is now entering passive maintenance mode; I will not be actively maintaining it anymore.
    3. Maintaining open source software requires energy and a "want"/"passion". I've not been using this project myself for years, and I mainly work in other things than Rails at this point. That means I'm far removed from this project and see no personal gain in maintaining the energy to keep this going.
    4. I'm still pretty proud of the project and I don't want to see it gone, so I want to keep updating it when needed. But on the other hand, the feature set is pretty stable and well working now (AFAIK) so I also don't see the need to pretend to be actively maintaining it.
    5. Please: Prompt me when things break and I will probably fix it. I won't guarantee how fast I'll move, but I'll try to make the effort sometimes. The bigger the issue, the more likely it is that I'll do something about it.
  7. Nov 2020
  8. Oct 2018
    1. Learning is a subversive act.

      YES! In American schools you are indoctrinated with the premise: "There is no difficult material. There are only difficult learners." The "trial-by-failure" prevalent in the 70's and 80's, that if you repeat a subject you truly do not nor will not ever understand, Algebra in my case, you are somewhat "subversive" to the rest of classroom, the teacher and especially the school. Report card comments: asks too many questions/asks no questions, disruptive/sleeps in class, no effort given, won't get tutored after school labels the learner without labelling the conformity of the classroom: fit in or be shut out. Excellent point!

  9. Dec 2017
    1. The job doesn’t ever finish, it just takes breaks. Coffee breaks, lunch breaks, night breaks, weekend breaks.

      Going to work is analogous to passive indexing.

  10. Sep 2017
    1. In 2005, the figure had raised to 1%. They are now responsible for more carbon-dioxide emissions per year than Argentina or the Netherlands and, if current trends hold, their emissions will have grown four-fold by 2020, reaching 670m tonnes

      How is information, for example, a conversation accounted for in this model? As we go forward and find more efficient ways to store and convey information in fewer 1s and 0s, must we constantly reevaluate this relationship? Passive vs Active storage of information seems to be key here as well.

  11. Apr 2017
  12. Jul 2016