664 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Feb 2021
    1. Howard, J., Huang, A., Li, Z., Tufekci, Z., Zdimal, V., Westhuizen, H.-M. van der, Delft, A. von, Price, A., Fridman, L., Tang, L.-H., Tang, V., Watson, G. L., Bax, C. E., Shaikh, R., Questier, F., Hernandez, D., Chu, L. F., Ramirez, C. M., & Rimoin, A. W. (2021). An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(4). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

    1. [0.4] Controls & Training & Help[0.2] Menu & Settings[0.2] Sound & Music[0.1] Graphics[0.2] Game Design[0.3] Game Story[0.2] Game Content[0.4] Time to complete feels ok? (& if the Game can be repeatedly played again)[0] is it Enjoyable & Fun?[0] Could it hold a spot in Favorites?[0] BONUS point: Multi-Player related[0] BONUS point: Review for VR
    1. The press will tell you that "the concept" is great but the execution is bad. What should I tell you? The experience is shallow. The game is mediocre. But listen carefully, when a game is mediocre and can't even make you feel something then it's the worst kind of gaming. I will give it a 4 out of 10. You know, if this was a test in a school then this game should be marked D (someone answered a few questions, but overall missed the point). I understand that many people care about the "concept" of this game, but why if the experience is just... not here. I'm talking about the experience becaus We. The Revolution tried to be an actual experience. And it fails so badly.
    1. After the first time you use the Create/Update Chargebee Customer option to update a particular Chargebee Customer, updating it thereafter overwrites the customer record in Chargebee with the new inputs from the Salesforce account even if it is more recent than that in the Salesforce account.

      Edited sections are highlighter. Srikrishna please review

    1. The Rights Retention Strategy provides a challenge to the vital income that is necessary to fund the resources, time, and effort to provide not only the many checks, corrections, and editorial inputs required but also the management and support of a rigorous peer review process

      This is an untested statement and does not take into account the perspectives of those contributing to the publishers' revenue. The Rights Retention Strategy (RRS) relies on the author's accepted manuscript (AAM) and for an AAM to exist and to have the added value from peer-review a Version of Record (VoR) must exist. Libraries recognise this fundamental principle and continue to subscribe to individual journals of merit and support lucrative deals with publishers. From some (not all) librarians' and possibly funders' perspectives these statements could undermine any mutual respect.

    1. The Congressional Review Act allows Democrats to roll back regulations enacted in the last few months of Trump’s administration. Right before they left office, Trump and his team pushed through a series of measures designed to limit environmental policies that might constrain businesses. Expect to see congressional Democrats and the Biden administration roll them back as part of their broader agenda to prioritize policies to mitigate climate change.
  3. Jan 2021
    1. 2019-9-1,再次找到第一次看吴军老师写的本质还有见识那种感觉,对科技演进的表述提供了另外一个纬度看历史发展的见解。对能量的使用效率,以及对信息的应用效率解释人类发展史的一切。但这足够么?是个问题。希望下次能够带着问题和其他的见解再读一次。不要让这种收获的感觉来的太简单了,不然就是对书对知识的不负责任!

      2021-1-30,追着书评又来看了一眼这本书。更像是一本科技史百科,中间穿插了很多概念,很多案例,也讲了一个洞察和认知。比如爱因斯坦悖论,比如科学是演进出来的而非发明出来的等等。

      要让我再看一次估计够呛,半个小时翻一下特性的有兴趣的章节倒是没啥问题。可读性在那摆着呢。

    1. 左其盛推荐4星 沟通类书单,可以看,虽然内容比较散乱

      得到的课程之前也买过,没有听完整。这本书应该就是文字版本。两个可以对照的来看

    1. 可证伪这种东西是科学思维的基础,可以应用在所有学科上的

      这本书的内核就是心理学也需要被证明才能叫做科学

      左其盛推荐5星也是我第一次读这本书的原因 总的来说值得读第二遍

    1. ReconfigBehSci [@SciBeh] (2020-01-27) new post on Scibeh's meta-science reddit describing the new rubric for peer review of preprints aimed at broadening the pool of potential 'reviewers' so that students could provide evaluations as well! https://reddit.com/r/BehSciMeta/comments/l64y1l/reviewing_peer_review_does_the_process_need_to/ please take a look and provide feedback! Twitter. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1354456393877749763

    1. 左其盛4星,我感觉就三星把

      一样,可以扫读,结构性阅读。做好笔记和书摘就行。之后当成素材库就行。

    1. 左其盛4星 看过一遍,做过批注,但是批注找不到了 没关系,再一个小时的事情。而且是可以作为日常出现沟通问题时找答案的一本书 但是就通读一下,梳理一下结构。梳理完了以后结合公司现状做个培训 p2把,找个书友一起看,一起输出

    1. 4星,值得看,且值得在摸清商业模式准备好融资架构的前提下,最早看的一本关于融资的书

    1. 可看,大概在年中的时候必看。 因为要设计公司结构了,前提是明确业务方向、目标、模型的洞察,以及对团队能力的深度了解。

    1. 网上找不到资源,已经在知乎上问作者要了。

      目测是一本好的入门书籍。 给人的最大的价值是区分好钱还钱,以及明确一些坑。

    1. 针对基金投资者的书籍,也针对那些已经ipo的或者将要ipo的证券部门负责人看会更合适。

      至于对那些想要了解投资人逻辑,定位产品和企业商业价值的初期产品经理来讲,没有太大价值。

      不涉及到财务洞见,也不涉及到创新的偏好。这本书更重的实际还是资本逻辑。创新也只是一个边界条件而已。

    1. 有帮助,有一定的借鉴价值,但是总体来说要看的优先级不高

      书本身是5星,对我来讲可能近期只有3星

    1. Mambrini. A. Baronchelli. A. Starnini. M. Marinazzo. D. De Domenico, M. (2020) .PRINCIPIA: a Decentralized Peer-Review Ecosystem. Retrieved from: chrome-extension://bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F2008.09011.pdf

    1. (2) Notwithstanding the above, however, five per cent of the qualified voters of the City may petition for referendum review of the action by the City Council. Any such request for referendum review shall be in accordance with and governed by the procedures specified in section 63 of this charter for borrowing on behalf of Burlington Electric Department.

      Burlington

      referendum review of credit pledge

  4. Dec 2020
  5. Nov 2020
  6. Oct 2020
    1. Nevertheless, the very fact that I am going through my notes reflects a new habit I am trying to build, of setting time aside every week, and sometimes more often, deliberately to tend the oldest notes I have and the notes I created or edited in the past week. Old notes take longer, because I have to check old links and decide what to do if they have rotted away. Those notes also need to be reshaped in line with zettelkasten principles. That means deciding on primary tags, considering internal links, splitting the atoms of long notes and so on. At times it frustrates me, but when it goes well I do see structure emerging and with it new thoughts and new directions to follow.

      This is reminiscent of the idea that indigenous peoples regularly met at annual feasts to not only celebrate, but to review over their memory palaces and perform their rituals as a means of reviewing and strengthening their memories and ideas.

    1. Senior colleagues indicate that I should not have to balance out publishing in “traditional, peer-reviewed publications” as well as open, online spaces.

      Do your colleagues who read your work, annotate it, and comment on it not count as peer-review?

      Am I wasting my time by annotating all of this? :) (I don't think so...)

    1. Julie Beck argues that unless we do something with what we have read within 24-hours then we often forget it.

      For a while I've been doing PESOS from reading.am to my website privately. Then a day or so later I come back to the piece to think about it again and post any additional thoughts, add tags, etc. I often find that things I missed the first time around manage to resurface. Unless I've got a good reason not to I usually then publish it.

  7. Sep 2020
    1. Siemieniuk, R. A., Bartoszko, J. J., Ge, L., Zeraatkar, D., Izcovich, A., Kum, E., Pardo-Hernandez, H., Rochwerg, B., Lamontagne, F., Han, M. A., Liu, Q., Agarwal, A., Agoritsas, T., Chu, D. K., Couban, R., Darzi, A., Devji, T., Fang, B., Fang, C., … Brignardello-Petersen, R. (2020). Drug treatments for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ, 370. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2980

  8. Aug 2020