19 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2022
    1. The physical reality of packed switched routing, the awkward unlikely miracle of a bunch of computers – rocks we flattened and jammed lightning into – talking to each other. Interacting.

      This is a version of talking rocks in a whole different manner, but it reminds me of the book title The Pattern on the Stone about digital communications.

  2. Dec 2021
    1. Neither, we think, would anyonewho has ever learned a truly alien language deny that doing so takesa great deal of imaginative work, trying to grasp unfamiliar concepts.

      Learning and mastering an alien language takes a tremendous amount of work, taxing one's imagination attempting to come to terms with similarly alien cultural concepts.

    2. Already tens of thousands of years ago, one can find evidence ofobjects – very often precious stones, shells or other items ofadornment – being moved around over enormous distances. Oftenthese were just the sort of objects that anthropologists would laterfind being used as ‘primitive currencies’ all over the world.

      Is it also possible that these items may have served the purpose of mnemonic devices as a means of transporting (otherwise invisible) information from one area or culture to another?

      Can we build evidence for this from the archaeological record?

      Relate this to the idea of expanding the traditional "land, labor, capital" theory of economics to include "information" as a basic building block

    1. there's an exception ah yes indeed there is an exception to that which is largely 00:08:28 when you're talking to someone else so in conversation and in dialogue you're actually can maintain consciousness for very long periods of time well which is why you need to imagine you're talking 00:08:41 to someone else to really be able to think out a problem

      Humans in general have a seven second window of self-consciousness. (What is the reference for this? Double check it.) The exception is when one is in conversation with someone else, and then people have much longer spans of self-consciousness.

      I'm left to wonder if this is a useful fact for writing in the margins in books or into one's notebook, commonplace book, or zettelkasten? By having a conversation with yourself, or more specifically with the imaginary author you're annotating or if you prefer to frame it as a conversation with your zettelkasten, one expands their self-consciousness for much longer periods of time? What benefit does this have for the individual? What benefit for humanity in aggregate?

      Is it this fact or just coincidence that much early philosophy was done as dialectic?

      From an orality perspective, this makes it much more useful to talk to one's surroundings or objects like rocks. Did mnemonic techniques help give rise to our ability to be more self-conscious as a species? Is it like a muscle that we've been slowly and evolutionarily exercising for 250,000 years?

    1. With secondary sources, I like to check and see what the author is doing with the information. It's standard to refer to interpretations that agree with yours, but often even more interesting when the new interpretation is arguing with, modifying, or "complicating" the previous one.

      I have noticed in some anthropological literature that it appears that the authors completely missed the boat as the result of the lack of ability to communicate with their subjects or better understand their broader basic contexts.

      Particular examples of this: -1930s: A. Irving Hallowell conversations with William Berens, Chief of the Berens River Anishinaabe about rocks

      • Robin Wall Kimmerer mentions in Braiding Sweetgrass that the new American immigrants looked down on the indigenous people for not "giving thanks" for their food, when in fact it was so embedded into their general culture that it should never have been in question. The immigrants just didn't possess the ability to see the how the thanks had been given.
  3. Nov 2021
    1. In the words of Madonna music makes the people come together. In this case drums with the communication. Of culture in Africa. They were many ways of communicating through drums. Dancing for a date. Dancing to celebrate a wedding. Dancing to celebrate someone’s birthday if they have birthdays. Or dancing for a funeral. In America that would be morbid. But in other cultures that is a sign of respect and a symbol of that’s becoming life again.

  4. Jun 2021
    1. "In Colormute, Pollock(2004) makes specific suggestions for addressing the fear of talking about race: “In all conversations about race, I think, educators should be prepared to do three things:ask provocative questions, navigate predictable debates,and talkmore about talking”(p. 221, italics in original)"

    2. "Although in the United States it is common to use the term multiculturalism to refer to both liberal forms of multiculturalism and to describe critical multicultural pedagogies, in Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and other areas,anti-racism refers to those enactments of multiculturalism grounded in critical theory and pedagogy. The term anti-racism makes a greater distinction, in my opinion, between the liberal and critical paradigms of multiculturalism, and is one of the reasons I find the anti-racism literature useful for analyzing multiculturalism in music education."

  5. May 2021
  6. Mar 2021
    1. I don't understand why this isn't being considered a bigger deal by maintainrs/the community. Don't most Rails developers use SCSS? It's included by default in a new Rails app. Along with sprockets 4. I am mystified how anyone is managing to debug CSS in Rails at all these days, that this issue is being ignored makes sprockets seem like abandonware to me, or makes me wonder if nobody else is using sprockets 4, or what!
    1. Maa ngiy waxtaan ak sama xarit.

      Je parle avec mon ami.

      (Note: it says "walking with" but should say "talking with" -- might've been fixed by the time you read this!)

      maa -- me.

      ngiy -- I am.

      waxtaan v. -- conversation, chat, interview. 💬

      ak -- and, with.

      sama -- my.

      xarit bi -- part of a split set; friend. 👯

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQiWG98Bsys

  7. Nov 2020
    1. Man, for some reason, I really like this answer. I recognize it's a bit more complicated, but it seems so useful. And given that I'm no bash expert, it leads me to believe that my logic is faulty, and there's something wrong with this methodology, otherwise, I feel others would have given it more praise. So, what's the problem with this function? Is there anything I should be looking out for here?

      I think the main thing wrong with it is the eval (which I think can be changed to $("$@") and it's pretty verbose.

      Also, there are more concise ways to do it that would probably appeal more to most bash experts...

      like set -x

      and it does unnecessary things: why save output to a variable? Just let output go to where it would normally go...

      So yeah, I can see why this solution isn't very popular. And I'm rather surprised by all the praise comments it's gotten.

  8. Aug 2019
    1. I am confused by the fact that people do not seem to be discussing which one to use according to these criteria. Most article I find are talking about arguments like speed or compatibility. But is this not the most relevant point?
  9. May 2017
    1. learns to talk

      I have to disagree with this point that writing cannot be "natural." Yes, generally everyone learns how to speak, while some don't event learn how to write. But, the percent that do learn about writing can translate information more "naturally" because they can better explain their thoughts. If he the point is that talking is more a "natural" function, but it has to be learned just like writing. Just not as intense.

  10. Feb 2014
    1. You're as bad as that character in Moliere who didn't know he was talking prose! You've b een committing philosophical nonsense with your \rigorous pro ofs of existence". Don't you know that what exists has to b e observed, or at least observable?