1,615 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. If private-equity firms cannot be socially responsible stewards of capital, then Congress will need to act. One possible reform would involve fully taxing the advisory and other fees that private-equity investors extract from the companies they own. Another potential reform would impose restrictions on dividends paid out in the two years following a buyout. Since the current system allows private-equity firms to reap much of the positive gains from successful acquisitions, they could also be required to bear some of the liability for a company’s debt when the buyout ends in bankruptcy.
    1. All we know for certain, through forensic testing, is that the manuscript likely dates to the 15th century, when books were handmade and rare.

      This may provide some additional proof that it's a memory aid in the potential form of a notebook or commonplace book. What were the likelihoods of these being more common that other books/texts? What other codes were used at the time? Was the major system or a variant in use at the time?

    2. a roughly 240-page medieval codex written in an indecipherable language, brimming with bizarre drawings of esoteric plants, naked women, and astrological symbols. Known as the Voynich manuscript, it defies classification, much less comprehension.

      Something I hadn't thought of before, but which could be highly likely given the contents: What if the manuscript is a personal memory palace? Without supporting materials, it's entirely likely that what's left on the page is a substrate to which the author attached the actual content and not having the other half, the entire enterprise is now worthless?

    1. We still don’t really know what it is about ultra-processed food that generates weight gain. The rate of chewing may be a factor. In Hall’s study, during the weeks on the ultra-processed diet people ate their meals faster, maybe because the foods tended to be softer and easier to chew. On the unprocessed diet, a hormone called PYY, which reduces appetite, was elevated, suggesting that homemade food keeps us fuller for longer. The effect of additives such as artificial sweeteners on the gut microbiome is another theory. Later this year, new research from physicist Albert-László Barabási will reveal more about the way that ultra-processing actually alters food at a molecular level.

      Interesting to see Albert-László Barabási pop up here. This isn't his usual area of research. These are some interesting questions though.

    2. A website called Open Food Facts, run by mostly French volunteers, has started the herculean labour of creating an open database of packaged foods around the world and listing where they fit into on the Nova system.
    3. Hall’s study was published in July 2019
    4. The multinational food industry has a vested interest in rubbishing Monteiro’s ideas about how UPFs are detrimental to our health. And much of the most vociferous criticism of his Nova system has come from sources close to the industry. A 2018 paper co-authored by Melissa Mialon, a French food engineer and public health researcher, identified 32 materials online criticising Nova, most of which were not peer-reviewed. The paper showed that, out of 38 writers critical of Nova, 33 had links to the ultra-processed food industry.

      Big corporations at work!

    5. UPFs

      Bee has just introduced the idea of "ultra processed foods" and is already using an acronym for it. The acronymization seems all too apropos as it gives the idea of UPFs an additional layer of verbal processing!

    6. These foods are convenient, affordable, highly profitable, strongly flavoured, aggressively marketed – and on sale in supermarkets everywhere. The foods themselves may be familiar, yet the term “ultra-processed” is less so.

      This idea is immediately familiar to me despite hearing it rarely.

      I commented to an acquaintance just the other day that it seems like a cultural touchstone of American grocery stores that all the processed foods can be found in the center while all the actual foods are found on the outside.

      I make it a point to try to shop only on the outside.

    7. Ultra-processed foods (or UPF) now account for more than half of all the calories eaten in the UK and US, and other countries are fast catching up.
    1. Comments are enabled via Hypothes.is

      This may be the first time I've seen someone explicitly use Hypothes.is as the comment system on their personal website.

      I wonder if Matthew actively monitors commentary on his site, and, if so, how he's accomplishing it?

      The method I've used in the past as a quick and dirty method is Jon Udell's facet tool https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?wildcard_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fmatthewlincoln.net%2F*&max=100, though it only indicates just a few comments so far.

      Use cases like this are another good reason why Hypothes.is ought to support the Webmention spec.

  2. Feb 2020
    1. In some, their spending on goods and services as well as on transfers like unemployment benefits and pensions, accounts for more than half of GDP.

      What is the government's proportion of the US GDP presently?

    2. Yet some things that we value are not private property—for example, the air we breathe and most of the knowledge we use cannot be owned, bought, or sold.
    3. James Bronterre O’Brien, told the people:‘Knaves will tell you that it is because you have no property, you are unrepresented. I tell you on the contrary, it is because you are unrepresented that you have no property …’16

      great quote

    4. Firms should not be owned and managed by people who survive because of their connections to government or their privileged birth: Capitalism is dynamic when owners or managers succeed because they are good at delivering high-quality goods and services at a competitive price. This is more likely to be a failure when the other two factors above are not working well.

      Here is where we're likely to fail in the United States by following the example of Donald Trump, who ostensibly has survived solely off the wealth of his father's dwindling empire. With that empire gone, he's now turning to creating wealth by associating with the government. We should carefully follow where this potentially leads the country.

    5. Figure 1.16

      Note the dramatic inconsistency of the scale on the left hand side. What is going on here?

    6. We should be sceptical when anyone claims that something complex (capitalism) ‘causes’ something else (increased living standards, technological improvement, a networked world, or environmental challenges), just because we can see there is a correlation.

      Great and ridiculous examples of this can be found at https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

    7. Market competition provides a mechanism for weeding out those who underperform.

      Note how this has failed in the current guilded age of the United States where it is possible for things to be "too big to fail".

    8. Capitalism is an economic system that can combine centralization with decentralization.

      How can we analogize this with the decentralization of the web and its economy?

    9. Government bodies also tend to be more limited in their capacity to expand if successful, and are usually protected from failure if they perform poorly.

      They can expand in different ways however. Think about the expansion of empires of Egypt, Rome, and the Mongols in the 12th Century. What caused them to cease growing and decrease? What allowed them to keep increasing?

    10. Yet some things that we value are not private property—for example, the air we breathe and most of the knowledge we use cannot be owned, bought, or sold.
    11. First, because capital goods do not fall from the sky: all countries that have successfully moved from poverty to affluence have done so, of necessity, by accumulating large amounts of capital. We will also see that a crucial feature of capitalism is who owns and controls the capital goods in an economy.

      3:11pm

    12. First, because capital goods do not fall from the sky: all countries that have successfully moved from poverty to affluence have done so, of necessity, by accumulating large amounts of capital. We will also see that a crucial feature of capitalism is who owns and controls the capital goods in an economy.
    1. Upon the efficient consumption and summarizing of news from around the world. Remember? from when we though the internet would provide us timely, pertinent information from around the world? How do we find internet information in a timely fashion? I have been told to do this through Twitter or Facebook, but, seriously… no. Those are systems designed to waste time with stupid distractions in order to benefit someone else. Facebook is informative in the same way that thumb sucking is nourishing. Telling me to use someone’s social website to gain information is like telling me to play poker machines to fix my financial troubles.. Stop that.
    2. Facebook is informative in the same way that thumb sucking is nourishing.
    1. Make your own automatic blogroll This is the script I use to generate a blogroll from my OPML: #! /usr/bin/env python3 """ Parse OPML into markdown. """ import sys import re from xml.etree import ElementTree def main(fname): with open(fname, 'r', encoding='utf8') as fp: tree = ElementTree.parse(fp) for cat_node in tree.find('body').findall('outline'): print("\n## {}\n".format(cat_node.get('title'))) for node in cat_node.findall('outline'): name = node.attrib.get('text') feedurl = node.attrib.get('xmlUrl') url = node.attrib.get('htmlUrl') print("* [{}]({}) ([feed]({}))".format(name, url, feedurl)) if __name__ == "__main__": main(*sys.argv[1:])

      This is an awesome little script that may come in handy.

    2. ITBio – Chris Aldrich (feed)

      Hey, wait! He's not only following me, but a very distinct subset of my posts! :)

    1. A statistician is the exact same thing as a data scientist or machine learning researcher with the differences that there are qualifications needed to be a statistician, and that we are snarkier.
    1. Okay this is absolutely blowing up my timeline in the last 24 hrs so I'm gonna bite— *Now brainstorming: 100 opinions on books & reading* (1 like = 1 opinion. Max 100. RT if you'd like some hot takes about antilibraries, bookstores, reading habits & more!)

      Just finished reading this. Some interesting tidbits hiding in it.

    1. Politics is, first and foremost, driven by the people who pay the most attention and wield the most power — and those people opt in to extraordinarily politicized media. They then create the political system they perceive.

      How can we push it back so that the power stems from the people? How could we up-end the current system?

    2. When we talk about political media, we tend to cut a sharp line between the political elites who create the media and the audience that consumes it. But that’s a mistake. No one consumes more political, and politicized, media than political elites. This is part of the reason political media has an enormous effect on politics, even though only a small fraction of the country regularly consumes it.
    3. But we don’t just want people to read our work. We want people to spread our work — to be so moved by what we wrote or said that they log on to Facebook and share it with their friends or head over to Reddit and try to tell the world. That’s how you get those dots to multiply. But people don’t share quiet voices. They share loud voices. They share work that moves them, that helps them express to their friends who they are and how they feel. Social platforms are about curating and expressing a public-facing identity. They’re about saying, “I’m a person who cares about this, likes that, and loathes this other thing.” They are about signaling the groups you belong to and, just as important, the groups you don’t belong to.
    4. Chris Hayes, who anchors MSNBC’s 8 pm newscast and is among the most thoughtful, civic-minded journalists in the industry, referenced a Will Ferrell joke from Anchorman 2 on his podcast, saying, “What if instead of telling people the things they need to know, we tell them what they want to know?” That is, he says, “the creation story of cable news.”
    5. This is a damning result: The more political media you absorb, the more warped your perspective of the other side becomes.
    1. It can be easier to apply for farm subsidies than it is to get SNAP benefits, said Joel Berg, a former official with the Department of Agriculture, the agency that administers both programs.
    2. Debates about how to structure these programs have long been influenced by a related economic assumption: The more people really need a benefit, the more effort they’ll put into getting it. “For decades, economists had this view that burdens could quote-‘help’ separate out those that are what one calls truly disadvantaged versus those who might be more marginally needy,” said Hilary Hoynes, a professor of public policy and economics at the University of California, Berkeley. “Our current research suggests it could be exactly the opposite.” These burdens, she suggested, may instead be tripping up the worst off: hourly workers who can’t shuffle their schedules for a meeting; parents dealing with domestic violence, disabilities or low literacy; families without bank accounts to automate monthly payments; households already facing unpaid bills and late notices when another urgent letter arrives in the mail.
    1. There are other great teams doing similar work: PressBooks uses a Wordpress backend for online book and website development. Booktype, which has been around for a long time, also uses a browser-based editing workflow to produce HTML and PDF books. PubSweet is developing a modular editorial workflow, optimised, for now, for journals and monographs. The MagicBook project is being used at New York University. And our Electric Book workflow uses on- and offline static-site generation to make print and digital books.

      Nice list of tools for digital publishing for the book space.

    2. Books as websites can be public goods in a way that printed books cannot, especially for the poor.
    3. Notice how print books have remained ad-free in an age when every other available surface carries advertising – something about print books has kept them immune from the disease of advertising.
    1. Something important to notice about this article. Not a single person here is linked to using their own website, or via a link to their presence on any of their respective decentralized networks.

      All the people whose names are linked are linked to on Twitter. All of the people who've written pieces or articles linked to in this piece are writing on Medium.com and not on their own sites/platforms.

      How can we honestly be getting anywhere if there isn't even a basic identity for any of these people on any of these decentralized networks?

      At least most of the projects seem to have websites, so that's a start. But are any of them dogfooding their own products to do so? I suspect not.

    2. Thought leader and tech executive, John Ryan, provided valuable historical context both onstage and in his recent blog. He compared today’s social media platforms to telephone services in 1900. Back then, a Bell Telephone user couldn’t talk to an AT&T customer; businesses had to have multiple phone lines just to converse with their clients. It’s not that different today, Ryan asserts, when Facebook members can’t share their photos with Renren’s 150 million account holders. All of these walled gardens, he said, need a “trusted intermediary” layer to become fully interconnected.

      An apt analogy which I've used multiple times in the past.

    3. Graber helped us understand the broad categories of what’s out there: federated protocols such as ActivityPub and Matrix; peer-to-peer protocols such as Scuttlebutt, and social media apps that utilize blockchain in some way for  monetization, provenance or storage.

      Missing from this list is a lot of interop work done by the IndieWeb over the past decade.

    1. The right to Non-manipulative design.

      see also dark patterns.

    2. We advocate for a Slow Web Movement. We are what we eat, and we are also what we consume online. Data-driven advertising, BlackBox algorithms, and the competition between Big Tech to keep us “engaged“ has created an addiction to low-value content. It is time to reset our digital consumption and create healthier habits. Since the last decade, with a set of guidelines, the Slow Web Movement is changing Software to make it care about us again. Think of it as the equivalent of "Organic" for Technology.

      As solid a pitch for the slow web movement as I've seen yet from an analogy perspective.

    1. Screenshots are disposable, but highlights are forever.

      Highlighting this sentence on the Highly blog (on Medium) ironically using Hypothes.is. I'm syndicating a copy over to my own website because I know that most social services are not long for this world. The only highlights that live forever are the ones you keep on your own website or another location that you own and control.

      RIP Highly. Viva IndieWeb!

  3. Jan 2020
    1. If you have never seen an ice-hockey stick (or experienced ice hockey) this shape is why we call these figures ‘hockey-stick curves’.

      I'm glad they've included an image of a hockey stick to provide the context here, but I've always thought of it rotated so that the blade was on the ground and the sharp angle of the handle itself indicated the exponential growth curve!

    2. A thousand years ago, the world was flat, economically speaking.

      I don't think we have to go back even this far. If I recall correctly, even 150 years ago the vast majority of the world's population were subsistence farmers. It's only been since the 20th century and the increasing spread of the industrial revolution that the situation has changed:

      Even England remained primarily an agrarian country like all tributary societies for the previous 4,000 years, with ca. 50 percent of its population employed in agriculture as late as 1759.

      --David Christian, Maps of Time (pp 401) quoting from Crafts, British Economic Growth, pp. 13–14. (See also Fig 13.1 Global Industrial Potential from the same, for a graphical indicator.

    3. But some have taller skyscrapers at the back, meaning a greater disparity between the top 10% and the rest of the population, whereas others have a less steep profile.

      It might be more interesting if the top decile in each country were broken into tenths to show the even more severe disparities. I suspect that some of the height differences would be even more drastic if we could see the top 1% or even the top 0.1% on these graphs.

    4. PPP

      PPP stands for Purchasing Power Parity

      How to Calculate and Use Purchasing Power Parity – PPP

    5. Cyril Ramaphosa
    1. Why We Don't Live in a PPP World PPP depends on the law of one price. That states that once the difference in exchange rates is accounted for, then everything would cost the same. That's not true in the real world for four reasons. First, there are differences in transportation costs, taxes, and tariffs. These costs will raise prices in a country. Countries with many trade agreements will have lower prices because they have fewer tariffs. Socialist countries will have higher costs because they have more taxes.  A second reason is that some things, like real estate and haircuts, can't be shipped. Only ultra-wealthy global travelers can compare the prices of homes in New York to those in London.  A third reason is that not everyone has the same access to international trade. For example, someone in rural China can't compare the prices of oxen sold throughout the world. But Amazon and other online retailers are providing more real purchasing power parity to even rural dwellers. A fourth reason is that import costs are subject to exchange rate fluctuations. For example, when the U.S. dollar weakens, then Americans pay more for imports.
    2. After the war, the Swedish economist Gustav Cassel suggested multiplying each currency's pre-war value by its inflation rate to get the new parity. That formed the basis for today's PPP.
    1. "Some inequality of income and wealth is inevitable, if not necessary. If an economy is to function well, people need incentives to work hard and innovate.The pertinent question is not whether income and wealth inequality is good or bad. It is at what point do these inequalities become so great as to pose a serious threat to our economy, our ideal of equal opportunity and our democracy." - Robert Reich

      An important observation. What might create such a tipping point? Is there a way to look back at these things historically to determine the most common factors that would create such tipping points?

    1. game theory

      Game theory is the study of mathematical models of strategic interaction among rational decision-makers.[1] It has applications in all fields of social science, as well as in logic, systems science and computer science. Originally, it addressed zero-sum games, in which each participant's gains or losses are exactly balanced by those of the other participants. Today, game theory applies to a wide range of behavioral relations, and is now an umbrella term for the science of logical decision making in humans, animals, and computers.

      --Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

  4. www.core-econ.org www.core-econ.org
    1. Read now

      The textbook for Marketplace's Econ Extra Credit program. (#)

      Here's a link to an .epub version and a .mobi (Kindle) version. For those who prefer a physical copy, Oxford has published it.

      There are also app versions: Google Play, iBooks, and Windows App.

      (Originally published at https://boffosocko.com/2020/01/28/economy-society-and-public-policy-electric-book-works/)

    2. Economy, Society, and Public Policy

      David Brancaccio and the kind folks at Marketplace are doing a public virtual bookclub with this book as their text for twelve weeks through the Spring of 2020.

      Given the complexity of the subject and the public nature, I might suggest that they consider using the opensource and free Hypothes.is platform as an academic discussion tool for allowing everyone to highlight, annotate, and respond to the text and conversations.

      I suspect the Hypothesis team would be happy to do a quick run through of their platform as well as potentially creating a private group if they preferred.

    1. I think I know why personal websites aren't popular anymore. It's the same reason retro video games aren't as fun as they were when they came out.What's missing is the context of the time when they were popular. They were new and had a high-tech aura about them.Nowadays making a website doesn't differentiate you in a good way unless you have a super creative way of coming up with the website and a lot of content to fill it with.Nowadays you have to take it to the next level. What's a skill that's beyond the reach of most people? This could be why PCB business cards are so appealing. Because it's a thing most people can't do and if you can do it it shows your technical prowess. I think that's my personal web pages were popular back then and why they won't ever be popular again.
    1. This piece makes a fascinating point about people and interactions. It's the sort of thing that many in the design and IndieWeb communities should read and think about as they work.

      I came to it via an episode of the podcast The Happiness Lab.

    2. A version of this piece originally appeared on his website, davidbyrne.com.

      This piece seems so philosophical, it seems oddly trivial that I see this note here and can't help but think about POSSE and syndication.

    3. Remove humans from the equation, and we are less complete as people and as a society.
    4. And in the meantime, if less human interaction enables us to forget how to cooperate, then we lose our advantage.

      It may seem odd, but I think a lot of the success of the IndieWeb movement and community is exactly this: a group of people has come together to work and interact and increase our abilities to cooperate to make something much bigger, more diverse, and more interesting than any of us could have done separately.

    5. Antonio Damasio, a neuroscientist at USC wrote about a patient he called Elliot, who had damage to his frontal lobe that made him unemotional. In all other respects he was fine—intelligent, healthy—but emotionally he was Spock. Elliot couldn’t make decisions. He’d waffle endlessly over details. ­Damasio concluded that although we think decision-­making is rational and machinelike, it’s our emotions that enable us to actually decide.
    6. “Social” media: This is social interaction that isn’t really social. While Facebook and others frequently claim to offer connection, and do offer the appearance of it, the fact is a lot of social media is a simulation of real connection.

      Perhaps this is one of the things I like most about the older blogosphere and it's more recent renaissance with the IndieWeb idea of Webmentions, a W3C recommendation spec for online interactions? While many of the interactions I get are small nods in the vein of likes, favorites, or reposts, some of them are longer, more visceral interactions.

      My favorite just this past week was a piece that I'd worked on for a few days that elicited a short burst of excitement from someone who just a few minutes later wrote a reply that was almost as long as my piece itself.

      To me this was completely worth the effort and the work, not because of the many other smaller interactions, but because of the human interaction that resulted. Not to mention that I'm still thinking out a reply still several days later.

      This sort of human social interaction also seems to be at the heart of what Manton Reece is doing with micro.blog. By leaving out things like reposts and traditional "likes", he's really creating a human connection network to fix what traditional corporate social media silos have done to us. This past week's episode of Micro Monday underlines this for us.

    7. What I’m seeing here is the consistent “eliminating the human” pattern.

      This seems as apt a name as any.

    8. Most of the tech news we get barraged with is about algorithms, AI, robots, and self-driving cars, all of which fit this pattern. I am not saying that such developments are not efficient and convenient; this is not a judgment. I am simply noticing a pattern and wondering if, in recognizing that pattern, we might realize that it is only one trajectory of many. There are other possible roads we could be going down, and the one we’re on is not inevitable or the only one; it has been (possibly unconsciously) chosen.
    9. The consumer technology I am talking about doesn’t claim or acknowledge that eliminating the need to deal with humans directly is its primary goal, but it is the outcome in a surprising number of cases. I’m sort of thinking maybe it is the primary goal, even if it was not aimed at consciously.
    1. Audiences had strong reactions to the new disturbing themes the horror plays presented. One of the most prevalent themes staged at the Grand-Guignol was the demoralization and corruption of science. The "evil doctor" was a reoccurring trope in the horror shows performed.

      Development idea: Bring back the Grand Guignol, but have evil politicians instead.

    1. “To affirm freedom is not to applaud that which is done under its sign,” Lelyveld writes.
    2. Axel Bruns’ dismantling of the filter bubble.

      research to read

    3. there must be other factors that got us Trump

      Primarily people not really knowing how racisit and horrible he really was in addition to his inability to think clearly, logically, or linearly. He espoused a dozen or so simple aphorisms like "Build the wall," but was absolutely unable to indicate a plan that went beyond the aphorism. How will it be implemented, funded, what will the short and long term issues that result. He had none of those things that many others presumed would be worked out as details by smart and intelligent people rather than the "just do it" managerial style he has been shown to espouse.

      Too many republicans, particularly at the end said, "he's not really that bad" and now that he's in power and more authoritarian than they expected are too weak to admit their mistake.

    4. Of course, it’s even more absurd to expect Facebook or Twitter or Youtube to know and act on every word or image on their services than it was to expect bookseller Eleazer Smith to know the naughty bits in every book on his shelves.

      Here's the point! We shouldn't expect them to know, but similarly if they don't know, then they should not be allowed to randomly privilege some messages over others for how those messages are distributed on the platform. Why is YouTube accelerating messages about Nazis instead of videos of my ham sandwich at lunch? It's because they're making money on the Nazis.

    5. The Twenty-Six Words that Created the Internet is Jeff Kosseff’s definitive history and analysis of the current fight over Section 230, the fight over who will be held responsible to forbid speech. In it, Kosseff explains how debate over intermediary liability, as this issue is called, stretches back to a 1950s court fight, Smith v. California, about whether an L.A. bookseller should have been responsible for knowing the content of every volume on his shelves.

      For me this is the probably the key idea. Facebook doesn't need to be responsible for everything that their users post, but when they cross the line into actively algorithmically promoting and pushing that content into their users' feeds for active consumption, then they do have a responsibility for that content.

      By analogy image the trusted local bookstore mentioned. If there are millions of books there and the user has choice when they walk in to make their selection in some logical manner. But if the bookseller has the secret ability to consistently walk up to children and put porn into their hands or actively herding them into the adult sections to force that exposure on them (and they have the ability to do it without anyone else realizing it), then that is the problem. Society at large would further think that this is even more reprehensible if they realized that local governments or political parties had the ability to pay the bookseller to do this activity.

      In case the reader isn't following the analogy, this is exactly what some social platforms like Facebook are allowing our politicans to do. They're taking payment from politicans to actively lie, tell untruths, and create fear in a highly targeted manner without the rest of society to see or hear those messages. Some of these sorts of messages are of the type that if they were picked up on an open microphone and broadcast outside of the private group they were intended for would have been a career ending event.

      Without this, then we're actively stifling conversation in the public sphere and actively empowering the fringes. This sort of active targeted fringecasting is preventing social cohesion, consensus, and comprimise and instead pulling us apart.

      Perhaps the answer for Facebook is to allow them to take the political ad money for these niche ads and then not just cast to the small niche audience, but to force them to broadcast them to everyone on the platform instead? Then we could all see who our politicians really are?

    6. “Privacy in law means various things,” he writes; “and one of the things it means is protection from intrusion.” He argues that in advertising, open performance, and public-address systems, “these may validly be regulated” to prevent porn from being thrust upon the unsuspecting and unwilling. It is an extension of broadcast regulation. And that is something we grapple with still: What is shown to us, whether we want it shown to us, and how it gets there: by way of algorithm or editor or bot. What is our right not to see?

      Privacy as freedom from is an important thing. I like this idea.

    7. As an American and a staunch defender of the First Amendment, I’m allergic to the notion of forbidden speech. But if government is going to forbid it, it damned well better clearly define what is forbidden or else the penumbra of prohibition will cast a shadow and chill on much more speech.

      Perhaps it's not what people are saying so much as platforms are accelerating it algorithmically? It's one thing for someone to foment sedition, praise Hitler, or yell their religious screed on the public street corner. The problem comes when powerful interests in the form of governments, corporations, or others provide them with megaphones and tacitly force audiences to listen to it.

      When Facebook or Youtube optimize for clicks keyed on social and psychological constructs using fringe content, we're essentially saying that machines, bots, and extreme fringe elements are not only people, but that they've got free speech rights, and they can be prioritized with the reach and exposure of major national newspapers and national television in the media model of the 80's.

      I highly suspect that if real people's social media reach were linear and unaccelerated by algorithms we wouldn't be in the morass we're generally seeing on many platforms.

    8. Truth is hard.
    9. Many of the book’s essayists defend freedom of expression over freedom from obscenity. Says Rabbi Arthur Lelyveld (father of Joseph, who would become executive editor of The New York Times): “Freedom of expression, if it is to be meaningful at all, must include freedom for ‘that which we loathe,’ for it is obvious that it is no great virtue and presents no great difficulty for one to accord freedom to what we approve or to that to which we are indifferent.” I hear too few voices today defending speech of which they disapprove.

      I might take issue with this statement and possibly a piece of Jarvis' argument here. I agree that it's moral panic that there could be such a thing as "too much speech" because humans have a hard limit for how much they can individually consume.

      The issue I see is that while anyone can say almost anything, the problem becomes when a handful of monopolistic players like Facebook or YouTube can use algorithms to programattically entice people to click on and consume fringe content in mass quantities and that subtly, but assuredly nudges the populace and electorate in an unnatural direction. Most of the history of human society and interaction has long tended toward a centralizing consensus in which we can manage to cohere. The large scale effects of algorithmic-based companies putting a heavy hand on the scales are sure to create unintended consequences and they're able to do it at scales that the Johnson and Nixon administrations only wish they had access to.

      If we look at as an analogy to the evolution of weaponry, I might suggest we've just passed the border of single shot handguns and into the era of machine guns. What is society to do when the next evolution occurs into the era of social media atomic weapons?

    10. McCarthy next asks: “Who selects what is to be recorded or transmitted to others, since not everything can be recorded?” But now, everything can be recorded and transmitted. That is the new fear: too much speech.
    11. The fear then was the corruption of the masses; the fear now is microtargeting drilling directly into the heads of a strategic few.
    12. One of the essays comes from Charles Keating, Jr., a conservative whom Nixon added to the body after having created a vacancy by dispatching another commissioner to be ambassador to India. Keating was founder of Citizens for Decent Literature and a frequent filer of amicus curiae briefs to the Supreme Court in the Ginzberg, Mishkin, and Fanny Hill obscenity cases. Later, Keating was at the center of the 1989 savings and loan scandal — a foretelling of the 2008 financial crisis — which landed him in prison. Funny how our supposed moral guardians — Nixon or Keating, Pence or Graham — end up disgracing themselves; but I digress.
    13. For the parallels between the fight against harmful and hateful speech online today and the crusade against sexual speech 50 years ago are stunning: the paternalistic belief that the powerless masses (but never the powerful) are vulnerable to corruption and evil with mere exposure to content; the presumption of harm without evidence and data; cries calling for government to stamp out the threat; confusion about the definitions of what’s to be forbidden; arguments about who should be responsible; the belief that by censoring content other worries can also be erased.
    1. One thing that using this tool has highlighted for me is that there are a lot of things happening in our community every day, between news, announcements, events and other stuff. If you only rely on what your social media service of choice has decided is worth knowing because it’s generating clicks or discussion, you’re likely to miss something important. Also, do you really want to get your news crammed in between cat videos and political rants from distant acquaintances?
    1. Timothy Morton is Rita Shea Guffey Chair in English at Rice University in Houston. He is the author of Realist Magic: Objects, Ontology, Causality and Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End Of The World.

      want to read these

    2. Or global warming. I can’t see or touch it. What I can see and touch are these raindrops, this snow, that sunburn patch on the back of my neck. I can touch the weather. But I can’t touch climate. So someone can declare: “See! It snowed in Boise, Idaho, this week. That means there’s no global warming!” We can’t directly see global warming, because it’s not only really widespread and really really long-lasting (100,000 years); it’s also super high-dimensional. It’s not just 3-D. It’s an incredibly complex entity that you have to map in what they call a high-dimensional- phase space: a space that plots all the states of a system. In so doing, we are only following the strictures of modern science, laid down by David Hume and underwritten by Immanuel Kant. Science can’t directly point to causes and effects: That would be metaphysical, equivalent to religious dogma. It can only see correlations in data. This is because, argues Kant, there is a gap between what a thing is and how it appears (its “phenomena”) that can’t be reduced, no matter how hard we try. We can’t locate this gap anywhere on or inside a thing. It’s a transcendental gap. Hyperobjects force us to confront this truth of modern science and philosophy.

      A short, and very cogent argument here.

    3. It’s very difficult to talk about something you cannot see or touch, yet we are obliged to do so, since global warming affects us all.

      It's also difficult to interact with those things when we're missing the words and vocabulary to talk about them intelligently.

    4. We are obliged to do something about them, because we can think them.
    1. Robin brings a helpful name to this problem, by way of the philosopher Timothy Morton: hyperobject. A hyperobject is an entity whose scale is too big, too sprawling for any single person to fully appreciate their scale. Climate change, financial markets, socioeconomic classes, design systems—they’re systems we move through, but their scale dwarfs our own.

      hyperobject

    1. Christian Nestell Bovee often receives credit for the quote. “Kindness: a language which the dumb can speak and the deaf can understand,” he wrote in his 1857 book “Thoughts, Feelings, and Fancies.”
    1. Create an IFTTT.com recipe to port your Hypothesis RSS feed into WordPress posts. Generally chose an “If RSS, then WordPress” setup and use the following data to build the recipe: Input feed: https://hypothes.is/stream.atom?user=username (change username to your user name) Optional title: {{EntryTitle}} Body: {{EntryContent}} from {{EntryUrl}} <br />{{EntryPublished}} Categories: Highlight (use whatever categories you prefer, but be aware they’ll apply to all your future posts from this feed) Tags: hypothes.is Post status (optional): I set mine to “Draft” so I have the option to keep it privately or to publish it publicly at a later date.

      Posting this solely to compare my Hypothes.is highlights and annotations on my website with Will's version.

      I'm still tinkering with mine and should have a Micropub based version using IFTTT and Webhooks done soon.

    1. My friend Marc again to the rescue. He suggested that since there was 10,000+ people RT'ing and following, I could just pick a random follower from my current total follower list (78,000 at this point), then go to their profile to check if they RT'd it and see. If they didn't, get another random follower and repeat, until you find someone. With 78,000 followers this should take about ~8 tries.

      Technically he said it would be random among those who retweeted, but he's chose a much smaller subset of people who are BOTH following him and who retweeted it. Oops!

    1. “The textbook companies are not gearing their textbooks toward teachers; they’re gearing their textbooks toward states,” she said.

      And even at this they should be gearing them honestly and truthfully toward the students.

    2. How Textbooks are Produced 1 Authors, often academics, write a national version of each text. 2 Publishers customize the books for states and large districts to meet local standards, often without input from the original authors. 3 State or district textbook reviewers go over each book and ask publishers for further changes. 4 Publishers revise their books and sell them to districts and schools.

      This is an abominable process for history textbooks to be produced, particularly at mass scale. I get the need for broad standards, but for textbook companies to revise their books without the original authors is atrocious. Here again, individual teachers and schools should be able to pick their own texts if they're not going to--ideally--allow their students to pick their own books.

    3. Publishers are eager to please state policymakers of both parties, during a challenging time for the business. Schools are transitioning to digital materials. And with the ease of internet research, many teachers say they prefer to curate their own primary-source materials online.

      Here's where OER textbooks might help to make some change. If free materials with less input from politicians and more input from educators were available. But then this pushes the onus down to a different level with different political aspirations. I have to think that taking the politicization of these decisions at a state level would have to help.

    4. Pearson, the publisher whose Texas textbook raises questions about the quality of Harlem Renaissance literature, said such language “adds more depth and nuance.”

      If they wanted to add more "depth and nuance" wouldn't they actually go into greater depth on the topic by adding pages instead of subtly painting it such a discouraging light?

      But Texas students will read that some critics “dismissed the quality of literature produced.”

    5. Conservatives have fought for schools to promote patriotism, highlight the influence of Christianity and celebrate the founding fathers. In a September speech, President Trump warned against a “radical left” that wants to “erase American history, crush religious liberty, indoctrinate our students with left-wing ideology.”

      I can't help but think here about a recent "On The Media" episode A Civilization As Great As Ours which highlighted changes in how history is taught in India. This issue obviously isn't just relegated to populist India.

    1. use the services of the OpenETC

      What would constitute a full list of the services of OpenETC? Is it just this website, or does it include email lists, chat rooms, a Slack room, other services? The CoC should apply to all these areas listed.

      (Original annotation at https://boffosocko.com/2020/01/10/code-of-conduct-openetc/#use%20the%20services%20of%20the%20OpenETC)

    2. Guidelines

      These are some generally useful guidelines, but it would be nice to have a section on where to go or who to contact for help and conflict resolution. What should someone who notices a violation do? Where should they turn for help?

      (Original annotation at https://boffosocko.com/2020/01/10/code-of-conduct-openetc/#Guidelines)

    3. Temporary access

      Large portions of the material below this read more like a Terms of Service than a Code of Conduct. It might be more useful to split these into two pages to better delineate the two ideas.

      (Original annotation at https://boffosocko.com/2020/01/10/code-of-conduct-openetc/#Temporary%20access)

    4. draft of the proposed OpenETC code of conduct

      When making a CoC, it's always nice to spend some time researching others.

      Here's a copy of the IndieWeb's CoC, which I've liked. They also documented a list of other CoC's for other communities that might be worth looking at as well. Most of them have licenses for ease of cutting/pasting for reuse.

      I don't see a license on this draft, but it would be nice if you provided a CC0 license for it.

      (Original annotation at https://boffosocko.com/2020/01/10/code-of-conduct-openetc/#draft%20of%20the%20proposed++1)

    1. Black artists and cultural leaders have been compiling documents of this sort since the 1700s, first as part of an ongoing argument against White supremacy and slavery. Later, during Reconstruction, as a reminder to the newly literate Black population “that they were not alone.” Later still, to catalog the abundance of the Harlem Renaissance

      I'd love to have copies of these lists. Or perhaps even an anthology of works that appear on them?

      Perhaps it would be useful to publish an entire series of these works under a bigger banner? Perhaps an OER edition that could be shared?

    2. he ZORA Canon, our list of the 100 greatest books ever written by African American women, is one of a kind, yet it exists within a rich cultural tradition.
    1. I have several events scheduled for the Lurking book tour including Books are Magic (Brooklyn Feb 27), Harvard Bookstore (Cambridge March 5), RiffRaff (Providence March 11), and Skylight (Los Angeles April 8).
    1. It’s been long enough now that people look back on blogging fondly, but the next generation of blogs will be shaped around the habits and conventions of today’s internet. Internet users are savvier about things like context collapse and control (or lack thereof) over who gets to view their shared content. Decentralization and privacy are other factors. At this moment, while so much communication takes place backstage, in group chats and on Slack, I’d expect new blogs to step in the same ambiguous territory as newsletters have — a venue for material where not everyone is looking, but privacy is neither airtight nor expected.

      She doesn't have the technical terminology many use, but she's describing the IndieWeb community pretty well here.

    2. But tell them you’re launching a blog and see how that goes: Huh. Really, a blog? In 2020? Wow.
    1. In the meantime, stay in touch with Crosscut by: Liking us on Facebook  Following us on Twitter  Following us on Instagram Chatting with us on Reddit Signing up for one (or all) of our newsletters 

      It seems like they've chose a solution for their community that boils down to pushing the problem(s) off onto large corporations that have shown no serious efforts at moderation either?

      Sweeping the problem under the rug doesn't seem like a good long term answer. Without aggregating their community's responses, are they really serving their readers? How is the community to know what it looks like? Where is it reflected?

      I wonder what a moderated IndieWeb solution for them might look like?

    2. We analyzed our Disqus data and we found that roughly 17,400 comments were made on our site in 2019, but 45% came from just 13 people. That data tells us that social media, email, phone calls, letters to the editor, our Crosscut events and an occasional visit to the newsroom are far better tools for us to hear about your concerns, story ideas, feedback and support.

      The Disqus data statistics here are fascinating. It also roughly means that those 13 people were responsible for 600+ comments on average or roughly 2 a day every day for the year. More likely it was a just a handful responsible for the largest portion and the others tailing off.

      Sadly missing are their data about social media, email, phone, and letters to the editor which would tell us more about how balanced their decision was. What were the totals for these and who were they? Were they as lopsided as the Disqus numbers?

    1. It just makes sense that news outlets and libraries collaborate. That’s something we at the News Co/Lab have believed from the beginning, and it’s something we’ve seen work very well in our partnerships

      Perhaps this is a good incubator for the idea Greg McVerry and I have been contemplating in which these institutions help to provide some of the help and infrastructure for the future of IndieWeb.

  5. Dec 2019
    1. And that’s why I find the Indie Web movement so interesting — not as a rejection of the corporate influence, but as a much needed counterbalance that provides the technology for people, should they so choose, to build an online presence of their own devising without giving up the communities and the connections that they have built on existing networks.

      Simultaneously it's also the "old" internet that is simultaneously experimenting and pushing a lot of interesting new innovation at the same time.

    2. I’m not one of them: the internet would be a far poorer place without the innovation of Google and Facebook and the many companies that went before and didn’t make it to 2017.

      Some might argue that we're actually in a poorer place because many of these companies provide far too many restrictions on our creativity. See: https://marinintim.com/2019/indieweb/20/ (in Russian).

      I will grant that many of these companies accelerated access. Sadly they're not working to fix the second and third order problems they've created because they're too incentivized to ignore them.

    3. There’s no doubt that the web would not be where it is today without companies like Facebook, Google, Yahoo!, and even AOL. Corporations have driven growth, investment, and innovation on the web, and social media networks have made the web a part of everyone’s lives.

      Yes, they've done some of these things, but I'd argue they didn't do much of the actual innovation. Most of what they had done was being done in other areas of the web before them and they just paved the cow paths.

      Potentially worse, their only innovation was to silo all the value for themselves and then externalize all the costs and issues back into society so they don't have to pay for them themselves.

    1. Samizdat is chaos, chaos means lack of format, lack of format gives rise to a new format.
    2. Seriousness is bad. It does not allow to go beyond what is accepted now , so there is a risk of being stuck in a local maximum. At first, the new formats seem ridiculous and incomprehensible (see, for example, a twitter feed from a decade ago ), but only in this way do we find something truly working.
    1. A blogchain is longform by other means. Containerized longform if you like. A themed blog-within-a-blog, built as a series of short, ideally fixed-length posts (we’re trying to standardize on 300 words as one container size).
    2. Think STACK (Spiral-Staircased Territories Abstracting Constructionist Knowledge), not MECE (Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive).
    3. retcon
    4. EIRP

      experiments in refactored perceptions

    1. the first rule of technology: What can be done will be done—until people realize what shouldn't be done. Example one: nuclear power.
    1. We are barrelling toward a country with 350 million serfs serving 3 million lords. We attempt to pacify the serfs with more powerful phones, bigger TVs, great original scripted television, and Mandalorian action figures delivered to your doorstep within the hour. The delivery guy might be forced to relieve himself in your bushes if not for the cameras his boss installed on every porch.
    2. Shopify-Ex would offer retailers something they don’t get from Amazon: partnership. Newco would provide merchants a lot of the great taste of Amazon (robust e-commerce tools and fulfillment) without the calories (merchants keep their data, control the customer, branding, no private label launches on backs of merchant data).

      Potentially an IndieWeb-ification for business?

    3. “Deliver with Amazon. Be your own boss. Great earnings. Flexible hours. Make more time for whatever drives you.” Amazon has taken a page from Uber and is leveraging the romanticization of entrepreneurship, the need for flexibility, and the decreasing options of non-degreed workers in rural areas. There are already stories depicting breakneck delivery schedules that obviate luxuries such as bathroom breaks. FedEx drivers get paternity leave and (gasp) health insurance.

      Again, it's the ability to canibalize at the lowest levels that helps tech companies to out-compete their rivals. Companies should be regulated away from being able to do this, particularly for non-employees.

    1. On the right — that’s what democracy looks like. At City Bureau we believe the future of journalism looks more like this. It’s made of networks, it’s collaborative, it practices radical transparency and it equips people to be makers.

      This chart is very reminiscent of a similar chart I saw just this morning that was looking at the differences between unicorns and zebras within an economic framing.

    2. n their book “New Power,” Henry Timms and Jeremy Heimans lay out the characteristics of old and new power.<img class="ex t u je ak" src="https://miro.medium.com/max/1862/1*jmW_5ey9vS_fNMPt5qO5Cg.png" width="931" height="522" role="presentation"/>
    3. We need citizens to be equipped to navigate the world around us. Because good journalism is great for democracy but a citizenry equipped to meet the challenges of democracy is necessary for democracy.
    4. Equipping, however, is about agency. It’s about providing access and opportunities for public participation and production. Equipping is about teaching and interconnected learning. It’s about exchanging skills and resource. It’s a redistribution of power between institutions and individuals.And it scares the hell out of people in power.I’ll offer a bit more definition here on what equipping is not. Equipping is not the same as empowerment because, much like the phrase “giving voice to the voiceless” assumes that people are voiceless, empowerment often assumes that people are powerless.

      This is also a useful concept for teaching as well.

    5. Engagement is a growing field in journalism that many of us practice. The core tenets of which can be described many ways but one of my favorites is that it builds relationships with “the people formerly known as the audience.”
    1. This is probably my dozenth attempt at a “what would it look like to track some notes over the week and schedule it to publish on Friday” post. We’ll see if it works. I even put little separators in between the notes.

      This is an interesting format. Reminds me a bit of the way Dave Winer blogs, though he posts his notes contemporaneously. It's also not too dissimilar to how Colin Walker posts where his website shows the last day on the front page with a list of all his posts (or the last three, if there's nothing posted yet for today).

    1. American People

      Here's another case of the mis-capitalization. American should be capitalized, but people should not.

    2. Impeachment Fever

      There are several instances in this document where words are improperly capitalized, presumably in an attempt to make them stand out and make them more memorable.

    3. !

      He really used 8 exclamation marks in a six page letter. Has any president used this many in an entire term I wonder?

    1. 2020 will also bring a more concerted effort on my part to both amplify the women in my network who blog, and both comment and refer back to their blogs. To use what they write as a starting off point for my own posts more.
    2. I still find blogging one of the most professionally satisfying things I do. It is a powerful thing to feel like you have a voice.
    3. And I am planning on cutting back on my personal use of social media (easier said than done) and want to try to return to using my blog more than Twitter for sharing.

      certainly a laudable goal!

      It helped me a lot to simply delete most of the social media apps off of my phone. I scribbled a bit about the beginning of the process back in November and there's a link there to a post by Ben doing the same thing on his own website.

      More people are leaving social feeds for RSS feeds lately. I've recently started following Jeremy Felt who is taking this same sort of journey himself. See: https://jeremyfelt.com/tag/people-still-blog/

      Kudos as well to making the jump here:

      Taking a bit of a Twitter break. I'm going to try to stay off until the new year, but likely lack the willpower to stay off for more than a few hours. Wish me luck!<br><br>....but silently. Not via reply to to this tweet. Cause that'll just suck me back into the vortext.

      — Clint Lalonde (he/him) (@edtechfactotum) December 19, 2019
      <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

      In part, it's what prompted me to visit your site to write a comment. (Sorry for upping your cis-gendered white male count, but 2019 was a bad year, and hopefully we can all make 2020 better as you've indicated.)

    4. Most of the convo, if any, seems to happen on the socials vs comments left on the blog these days.

      The sad part of this is how painfully limiting the conversation can be on social with the character limitations and too many issues with branching conversations and following all the context.

      I find that using Webmentions on my site adds a lot of value because it brings all the conversation back to my site, where it really should be for more context.

    5. By the numbers

      I'm curious what things would look like if you similarly did an analysis of Twitter, Facebook, etc.? Where are you putting more time? What's giving you the most benefit? Where are you getting value and how are you giving it back?

    1. The part I got hung up on the most here was actually adding my name in the RSVP. The code seemed to suggest that adding {{Jeremyfelt.com}} would work, but it kept showing me “Template:Jeremyfelt.com” instead. I then poked around and saw that others had redirects setup, so I created a page titled “jeremyfelt” and added a wiki redirect to my user page and changed the code to {{jeremyfelt}}, but it then said “Template:jeremyfelt” and I knew I was going nowhere. Finally, I updated it with standard URL syntax: [[jeremyfelt|Jeremy Felt]] and my name appeared as expected. No cool picture next to it or anything, but I’ll figure that at some point. This is all wiki stuff I probably used to know but have completely forgotten.

      Some of this is relatively arcane and custom templated MediaWiki business. Here's a link that explains most of it: https://indieweb.org/wikifying#How_to_Join_the_IndieWeb_Wiki

      Feel free to hop into the helpful chat and most are ready and happy to try to help you out when you get stuck or provide pointers.

    1. Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial

      I'm gearing up my reading list for the holidays. I wanted to add An Urgency of Teachers: the Work of Critical Digital Pedagogy by Jesse Stommel and Sean Michael Morris. Seemingly I can only find .html, .azw3, and .pdf copies of the book, and I'd far prefer an .epub version. Fortunately the book has a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC 4.0), so I've spent some time this morning to convert an original and made myself an .epub version for my Android devices.

      I'm happy to share it if others are looking for the same and don't have the ability (or frankly the time) to make the conversion. I also have a .mobi version (for Kindle) of the text as well since it didn't require much additional work. These are exact replicas with no changes and come with the same CC BY-NC 4.0 license. If Jesse or Sean want copies to make available on their site, I'm happy to send them along. 

      If you have the means, please be sure to make a donation to help support the book and Sean and Jesse's work.

      Originally posted at https://boffosocko.com/2019/12/19/alternate-formats-of-an-urgency-of-teachers-by-jesse-stommel-and-sean-michael-morris/

    1. Kinney’s team worked with Southern Vermont reporter Howard Weiss-Tisman on his social media presence and community engagement strategies to better reach his audience — and, in turn, increase donations.

      This does seem like a solid avenue to pursue and I've yet to see something like it myself in the wild. Having hosts make "asks" through social media directly could be highly invaluable as it adds an additional personal touch.

    1. One of the questions that came up during the SPLOT workshop is if there’s a SPLOT for podcasting, which reminded me of this post Adam Croom wrote a while back about his podcasting workflow: “My Podcasting Workflow with Amazon S3.” . We’re always on the look-out for new SPLOTs to bring to the Reclaim masses, and it would be cool to have an example that moves beyond WordPress just to make the point a SPLOT is not limited to WordPress (as much as we love it) —so maybe Adam and I can get the band back together

      I just outlined a tiny and relatively minimal/free way to host and create a podcast feed last night: https://boffosocko.com/2019/12/17/55761877/

      I wonder if this could be used to create a SPLOT that isn't WordPress based potentially using APIs from the Internet Archive and Huffduffer? WordPress-based infrastructure could be used to create it certainly and aggregation could be done around tags. It looks like the Huffduffer username SPLOT is available.

    1. Lastly, I walked through Github Pages, and how using a separate branch, you can publish HTML, CSS, JavaScript and JSON for projects, turning Github into not just a code and content management platform, but also a publishing endpoint.

      More information on how to use GitHub pages to build your website: https://indieweb.org/GitHub_Pages

    2. Once again I am reminded of the importance of API 101 demos, and how I need to focus more in this area.

      I'd love to see a list of API 101 demos. This would be particularly cool if there were a DS106-esque site for content like this. Examples can be powerful things.

    3. Rolin Moe - Pepperdine (@RMoeJo)

      A bit curious that for a reclaim the web event around DoOO that he highlights their Twitter presence rather than their own websites. Potentially for lack of notifications/webmention functionality?

    4. Mikhail Gershovich - Vocat (@mgershovich)
    5. Chris Mattia - California State University Channel Islands (@cmmattia)
    6. Michael Berman - California State University Channel Islands (@amichaelberman)
    1. If that had been a Facebook post, I'd never have found it.

      how definitively true!

    2. I'm not sure if it's blogging's fault, or journalism's fault or even Google's fault — but I do think the focus on recency as the biggest defining value of content is an error, and if we continue too far down that path, we'll regret it.

      Some of the addiction to recency may be related to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's idea of "flow". It takes way more work to find good stuff that's older and if this breaks one's flow, then one may be more likely to be addicted to the faster speed of something like Twitter or Facebook that will algorithmicly serve up things you're more prone to like and say within tighter flow boundaries, right?

    3. There should be room for more static sites, sites organised by connections and links, not just by dates.

      And these are called wikis, n'cest pas?

  6. www.edwinwenink.xyz www.edwinwenink.xyz
    1. This weblog is a mnemonic device.

      Blogs as digital commonplace books

    1. And other recent developments suggest that doing so could overcome many of the earlier pitfalls of protocol-based systems, potentially creating the best of all words: useful internet services, with competition driving innovation, not controlled solely by giant corporations, but financially sustainable, providing end users with more control over their own data and privacy—and providing mis- and disinformation far fewer opportunities to wreak havoc.

      Some of the issue with this then becomes: "Who exactly creates these standards?" We already have issues with mega-corporations like Google wielding out sized influence in the ability to create new standards like Schema.org or AMP.

      Who is to say they don't tacitly design their standards to directly (and only) benefit themselves?

    2. Moving back to a focus on protocols over platforms can solve many of these problems.

      This may also only be the case if large corporations are forced to open up and support those protocols. If my independent website can't interact freely and openly with something like Twitter on a level playing field, then it really does no good.

    3. It would allow end users to determine their own tolerances for different types of speech but make it much easier for most people to avoid the most problematic speech, without silencing anyone entirely or having the platforms themselves make the decisions about who is allowed to speak.

      But platforms are making huge decisions about who is allowed to speak. While they're generally allowing everyone to have a voice, they're also very subtly privileging many voices over others. While they're providing space for even the least among us to have a voice, they're making far too many of the worst and most powerful among us logarithmic-ally louder.

      It's not broadly obvious, but their algorithms are plainly handing massive megaphones to people who society broadly thinks shouldn't have a voice at all. These megaphones come in the algorithmic amplification of fringe ideas which accelerate them into the broader public discourse toward the aim of these platforms getting more engagement and therefore more eyeballs for their advertising and surveillance capitalism ends.

      The issue we ought to be looking at is the dynamic range between people and the messages they're able to send through social platforms.

      We could also analogize this to the voting situation in the United States. When we disadvantage the poor, disabled, differently abled, or marginalized people from voting while simultaneously giving the uber-rich outsized influence because of what they're able to buy, we're imposing the same sorts of problems. Social media is just able to do this at an even larger scale and magnify the effects to make their harms more obvious.

      If I follow 5,000 people on social media and one of them is a racist-policy-supporting, white nationalist president, those messages will get drowned out because I can only consume so much content. But when the algorithm consistently pushes that content to the top of my feed and attention, it is only going to accelerate it and create more harm. If I get a linear presentation of the content, then I'd have to actively search that content out for it to cause me that sort of harm.

    4. That approach: build protocols, not platforms.

      I can now see why @jack made his Twitter announcement this morning. If he opens up and can use that openness to suck up more data, then Twitter's game could potentially be doing big data and higher end algorithmic work on even much larger sets of data to drive eyeballs.

      I'll have to think on how one would "capture" a market this way, but Twitter could be reasonably poised to pivot in this direction if they're really game for going all-in on the idea.

      It's reasonably obvious that Twitter has dramatically slowed it's growth and isn't competing with some of it's erstwhile peers. Thus they need to figure out how to turn a relatively large ship without losing value.

    5. Meanwhile, politicians from the two major political parties have been hammering these companies, albeit for completely different reasons. Some have been complaining about how these platforms have potentially allowed for foreign interference in our elections.3 3. A Conversation with Mark Warner: Russia, Facebook and the Trump Campaign, Radio IQ|WVTF Music (Apr. 6, 2018), https://www.wvtf.org/post/conversation-mark-warner-russia-facebook-and-trump-campaign#stream/0 (statement of Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.): “I first called out Facebook and some of the social media platforms in December of 2016. For the first six months, the companies just kind of blew off these allegations, but these proved to be true; that Russia used their social media platforms with fake accounts to spread false information, they paid for political advertising on their platforms. Facebook says those tactics are no longer allowed—that they've kicked this firm off their site, but I think they've got a lot of explaining to do.”). Others have complained about how they’ve been used to spread disinformation and propaganda.4 4. Nicholas Confessore & Matthew Rosenberg, Facebook Fallout Ruptures Democrats’ Longtime Alliance with Silicon Valley, N.Y. Times (Nov. 17, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/17/technology/facebook-democrats-congress.html (referencing statement by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.): “Mr. Tester, the departing chief of the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, looked at social media companies like Facebook and saw propaganda platforms that could cost his party the 2018 elections, according to two congressional aides. If Russian agents mounted a disinformation campaign like the one that had just helped elect Mr. Trump, he told Mr. Schumer, ‘we will lose every seat.’”). Some have charged that the platforms are just too powerful.5 5. Julia Carrie Wong, #Breaking Up Big Tech: Elizabeth Warren Says Facebook Just Proved Her Point, The Guardian (Mar. 11, 2019), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/11/elizabeth-warren-facebook-ads-break-up-big-tech (statement of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)) (“Curious why I think FB has too much power? Let's start with their ability to shut down a debate over whether FB has too much power. Thanks for restoring my posts. But I want a social media marketplace that isn't dominated by a single censor. #BreakUpBigTech.”). Others have called attention to inappropriate account and content takedowns,6 6. Jessica Guynn, Ted Cruz Threatens to Regulate Facebook, Google and Twitter Over Charges of Anti-Conservative Bias, USA Today (Apr. 10, 2019), https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/04/10/ted-cruz-threatens-regulate-facebook-twitter-over-alleged-bias/3423095002/ (statement of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.)) (“What makes the threat of political censorship so problematic is the lack of transparency, the invisibility, the ability for a handful of giant tech companies to decide if a particular speaker is disfavored.”). while some have argued that the attempts to moderate discriminate against certain political viewpoints.

      Most of these problems can all fall under the subheading of the problems that result when social media platforms algorithmically push or accelerate content on their platforms. An individual with an extreme view can publish a piece of vile or disruptive content and because it's inflammatory the silos promote it which provides even more eyeballs and the acceleration becomes a positive feedback loop. As a result the social silo benefits from engagement for advertising purposes, but the community and the commons are irreparably harmed.

      If this one piece were removed, then the commons would be much healthier, fringe ideas and abuse that are abhorrent to most would be removed, and the broader democratic views of the "masses" (good or bad) would prevail. Without the algorithmic push of fringe ideas, that sort of content would be marginalized in the same way we want our inane content like this morning's coffee or today's lunch marginalized.

      To analogize it, we've provided social media machine guns to the most vile and fringe members of our society and the social platforms are helping them drag the rest of us down.

      If all ideas and content were provided the same linear, non-promotion we would all be much better off, and we wouldn't have the need for as much human curation.

    1. h0p3 (at philosopher.life) who I just like to converse with and keep up with throughout my week

      I'm curious what modality you use to converse? Am I missing some fun bit of something about that wiki?

    1. The people who I envisioned myself writing for—they got what I was saying and where I was focused.  The very early responses to the post were about what I expected.  But then it took off, and a lot of people came into it without the context I assumed the audience would have.
    1. There must be an ‘industrial revolution’ in education

      This first phrase is the most telling of all the issues we deal with on the edtech front. Because the industrial revolution touched almost every aspect of life since its inception, everyone presumes that it must also affect education.

      Sadly other than helping to make searching for and obtaining material much quicker, it still needs to be consumed, thought about, and digested by a student. The industrial revolution simply hasn't increased the bandwith of the common student's brain. It's unlikely that anything in the near future will expand it.

    1. Capitalists and market-thinkers inevitably seek to enclose the commons, privatizing benefits and externalizing costs onto society.
    1. In concrete terms, what does it take for a website to become part of the IndieWeb? What does the IndieWeb even look like?

      These are all good and important questions. Even internal group discussions don't always settle on a minimum, though the two base requirements are to own your own domain name and to use it as a form of identity on the web. Technically having a "business card" site on the web at a domain you own is IndieWeb.

    2. A personal website belonging to the IndieWeb doesn't need to run any particular suite of software, and doesn't need to be hosted on any particular service.

      Even here the word "belong" is pushing things too far. I might suggest "that is a part of" as a more apt replacement.

      Your web presence "belongs" to Facebook. Your website "belongs" to you.

    3. an enthusiastic band of hobbyists with a taste for the retro and a fondness for old-school fan pages.

      While this may describe a few people within the group and it could be a stereotypical perception for those old enough to remember the "old" web, I'd have to push back on this perception. While many of us do come from the old web, we realize how much we've given away (including our agency) and we're attempting to create a web renaissance or even a neo-web. There is honestly very little that is very retro about this and in fact it is quite forward thinking.

      I suspect that Desmond is simply using this description here to set up his story.

    1. Lately though, its been making a bit of a comeback. Idea being that self-selecting your daily information diet (see: No Trump-loving-creepy-brothers-in-laws) probably means less unwilling toxicity and restless nights of non-sleep.
    1. So when I wanted to find a Last.fm user’s profile picture—having figured out through Google’s Social Graph API when someone on Huffduffer has a Last.fm account—it made far more sense for me to use hKit to parse the microformatted public URL than to use the API method.

      So the secret to having one's image appear in their Huffduffer account is to add a rel="me" to one's home page?

    1. In 2010, the Chronicle of Higher Education asked two dozen scholars “What will be the defining idea of the coming decade, and why?” I wrote that Facebook would end up having more users than the population of China, and that giant social networks, with their madding crowds, would provoke a reaction: Just as the global expansion of fast food begat the slow-food movement, the next decade will see a “slow information” counterrevolution focused on restoring individual thought and creativity. And here we are a decade later, and we’re still hoping for the same thing. Maybe next decade?
    2. Green has built up a stable, useful relationship with the software, mostly opening it to scribble down interesting lines that occur to him, or that are spoken to him, to use later on in his writing.
    1. Blogging is what I know best, where I feel most comfortable, where I have spent the most time. It is where I am not necessarily punished for having small ideas.

      One might even say that some of your small ideas in blogging have, in aggregate, transformed into larger ideas. Perhaps in being so close to them, you haven't noticed the transition?

    2. I always seem to know what I don't want to do, even if I persist with it for some time, but have never been able to work out what I do want.

      You may be better off for this. I feel like I'm in much the same situation Colin, but I've had the misfortune of knowing what I wanted to do in my 20's, having a reasonable start at it and then later changed paths. I think it feels worse knowing how the other part felt and not being able to regain that with a new path/career.

    3. Many people luck out like me, accidentally. We recognize what particular path to mastery we’re on, long after we actually get on it.

      Far too many people luck out this way and we all perceive them as magically talented when in reality, they're no better than we, they just had better circumstances or were in the right place at the right time.

    4. For some time I have wrestled with the notion that I am not where I should be, indeed that I am not where society expects I should be. I try not to let age define me but frequently find it hard to escape the nagging feeling that I should have done more, been more successful, achieved promotions and had a career rather than a series of jobs.

      You're not the only one. It's compounded further having had our parent's generation before us where one could have had a 50+ year career at the same company. Now, no one stays at the same company for more than 3 years and typically has 3 or more careers in a lifetime instead of one.

      I wonder if it will be better for the generations after us who grow up with that as the norm?

    1. You might connect with someone who regularly used the same tags that you did, but that was because they shared your interests, not because they had X thousand followers.

      An important and sadly underutilized means of discovery.

    2. I literally couldn’t remember when I’d last looked at my RSS subscriptions. On the surface, that might seem like a win: Instead of painstakingly curating my own incoming news, I can effortlessly find an endless supply of interesting, worthwhile content that the algorithm finds for me. The problem, of course, is that the algorithm isn’t neutral: It’s the embodiment of Facebook and Twitter’s technology, data analysis, and most crucial, business model. By relying on the algorithm, instead of on tags and RSS, I’m letting an army of web developers, business strategists, data scientists, and advertisers determine what gets my attention. I’m leaving myself vulnerable to misinformation, and manipulation, and giving up my power of self-determination.