bias against small players?

Ausführlicher Kommentar zu den 2,4 Billionen (Tausend Milliarden, im Artikel falsch übersetzt) Dollar, die laut dem COP27-Bericht von 2022 erforderlich sind, um Klimaschutz und -Anpassung in den Ländern des globalen Südens (außer China) zu finanzieren. Der auf Konsens ausgerichtete COP-Prozess sei außerstande, die nötigen Entscheidungen zu treffen. Der Betrag entspricht grob den aktuellen weltweiten Militärausgaben. https://www.repubblica.it/commenti/2023/11/19/news/cambiamenti_climatici_spesa_annua-420689085/?ref=RHRT-BG-I279994148-P4-S3-T1

There is a difference between the sorts of links one might make when placing an idea into an (analog) zettelkasten. A folgezettel link is more valuable than a simple tag/category link because it places an idea into a more specific neighborhood than any handful of tags. This is one of the benefits of a Luhmann-artig ZK system over a more traditional commonplace one, particularly when the work is done up front instead of being punted to a later time.

For those with a 1A2B3Z linking system (versus a pure decimal system), it may be more difficult to insert a card before other cards rather than after them because of the potential gymnastics of numbering and the natural tendency to put things into a continuing linear order.

See also: - https://hypothes.is/a/ToqCPq1bEe2Q0b88j4whwQ - https://hyp.is/WtB2AqmlEe2wvCsB5ZyL5A/docdrop.org/download_annotation_doc/Introduction-to-Luhmanns-Zette---Ludecke-Daniel-h4nh8.pdf

• for: never say never, scaling organic production
• comment
  • claims true at one time in history, may not be true for a later time as progress develops new solutions that make yesterday's impossible, today's possible.

fascinating example of anti toxic capitalism...

Sounds interesting. Add to feeds. Wrt [[Invisible hand of networks 20180616115141]] scaling comes from moving sideways, repetition and replication. And that takes gathering and sharing (through the network) of examples. Vgl [[OurData.eu Open Data Voorbeelden 20090720142847]] but for civic tech, socsoft? What would it look like?

Alternate sort orders for the slips for the Wb include chronological, grammatical, semantic, and graphic, but for teasing out the meanings the original sort order was sufficient. Certainly other sort orders may reveal additional subtleties.

Do folgezettel in combination with an index help to prevent over-indexing behaviors? Or the scaling problem of categorization in a personal knowledge management space?

Where do subject headings within a zettelkasten dovetail with the index? Where do they help relieve the idea of heavy indexing or tagging? How are the neighborhoods of ideas involved in keeping a sense of closeness while still allowing density of ideas and information?

Having digital search views into small portions of neighborhoods like gxabbo suggested can be a fantastic affordance. see: https://hypothes.is/a/W2vqGLYxEe2qredYNyNu1A

For example, consider an anthropology student who intends to spend a lifetime in the subject and its many sub-areas. If they begin smartly tagging things with anthropology as they start, eventually the value of the category, any tags, or ideas within their index will eventually grow without bound to the point that the meaning or value as a search affordance within their zettelkasten (digital or analog) will be utterly useless. Let's say they fix part of the issue by sub-categorizing pieces into cultural anthropology, biological anthropology, linguistic anthropology, archaeology, etc. This problem is fine while they're in undergraduate or graduate school for a bit, but eventually as they specialize, these areas too will become overwhelming in terms of search and the search results. This problem can continue ad-infinitum for areas and sub areas. So how can one solve it?

Is a living and concatenating index the solution? The index can have anthropology with sub-areas listed with pointers to the beginnings of threads of thought in these areas which will eventually create neighborhoods of these related ideas.

The solution is far easier when the ideas are done top-down after-the-fact like in the Dewey Decimal System when the broad areas are preknown and pre-delineated. But in a Luhmann-esque zettelkasten, things grow from the bottom up and thus present different difficulties from a scaling up perspective.

How do we classify first, second, and third order effects which emerge out of the complexity of a zettelkasten? - Sparse indexing can be a useful long term affordance in the second or third order space. - Combinatorial creativity and ideas of serendipity emerge out of at least the third order. - Using ZK for writing is a second order affordance - Storage is a first order affordance - Memory is a first order affordance (related to storage) - Productivity is a second+ order (because solely spending the time to save and store ideas is a drag at the first order and doesn't show value until retrieval at a later date). - Poor organization can be non-affordance or deterrent which results in a scrap heap - lack of a reason why can be a non-affordance or deterrence as well - cross reference this list and continue on with other pieces and affordances

Scaling pas necessaire en rule based algo

!- key point : Sweden's net zero plan scaled globally - would result in a 2.5 deg C or greater world

Ein neuer britischer Report stellt fest, dass das reichste Prozent der Weltbevölkerung doppelt so viel CO2-Emissionen verursacht wie die ärmsten 50% zusammen. Cambridge Sustainability Commission on Scaling Behaviour Change

The solution to any sort of global leaderboard thing - like Mendeley most read or most cited - is to break it up into local communities - most read among your friends or most cited within only the outer leaves of the topic tree.

Waites, W., Cavaliere, M., Manheim, D., Panovska-Griffiths, J., & Danos, V. (2020). Scaling up epidemiological models with rule-based modelling. ArXiv:2006.12077 [q-Bio]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12077

Altmann, E. G. (2020). Spatial interactions in urban scaling laws. ArXiv:2006.14140 [Physics]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.14140

The reason the conceptual architecture tends to freeze is because there is a tradeoff between a large user base and the ability to run radical experiments. If you've got a lot of users, there will always be a critical mass of complaints when the experiment blows up.

Secondly, it takes a lot of time to scale up. This is time that you cannot spend experimenting.

Andy here is basically advocating remaining in Explore mode a little bit longer than is usually recommended. Doing so will increase your chances of climbing the highest peak during the Exploit mode.

One a prototype gains some traction, conventional Silicon Valley wisdom says to scale it up. This, according to Andy Matuschak has certain disadvantages. The main drawback is that it tends to freeze the conceptual architecture of the system.

Scaling shall be done with cloud abstractions

Use min-max scaling for image processing & neural networks.

On "scaling-in" rather than "scaling-up".

Related to Vijay Kumar's iron triangle. You can't increase the number of students without sacrificing quality or increasing costs.

Feature scaling in depth tutorial