216 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2017
    1. There are actually three problems to solve, reading, which is relatively easy,  posting, which is harder, and social graph management, which is quite complex

      I might submit that posting is possibly the easiest of the three and that the reader problem is the most difficult. This is based on the tremendous number of platforms and CMSs on which one can post, but the dearth of feed readers in existence.

    2. Managing your social graph

      Something akin to a following list could help this. Or a modified version of OPML subscription lists could work. They just need to be opened up a tad.

      Some are working on the idea of an open microsub spec which could be transformative as well: https://indieweb.org/Microsub-spec

    3. How do we decentralize the web without so decentralizing our own social presence that it becomes unmanageable?

      You've already got a huge headstart in doing this with your own website. Why bother to have thousands of accounts when you could have one? Then, as you suggest, password protected RSS feeds out to others could allow you to control which audiences get to see which content on your own site.

    4. It looks as if Withknown has made some progress in this area with syndication plugins.

      WordPress has lots of ways to syndicate content too.

    5. Subscribing to my personal timeline(s) with my favorite RSS reader would bring everything together,

      I've written some thoughts about how feed readers could continue to evolve for the open web here: http://boffosocko.com/2017/06/09/how-feed-readers-can-grow-market-share-and-take-over-social-media/

    6. listed items chronologically independent of source

      Having a variety of ways to chop and dice up content are really required. We need more means of filtering content, not less.

    1. Then, if the forum or community is really good, something called eternal September happens. Eternal September means a lot of new people who don’t know the context and rules of the community come flooding in and overwhelm the community norms. I’ve seen this with every single good message board I’ve been part of: my pregnancy message board, Facebook when it was just for people I knew in college, and Twitter. I learned so much from these communities, but as soon as people found out they were good, and were are opened up to an intimately large amount of people, the community feel left, immediately, and got swallowed up by the noise of the internet.

      I wonder if there's a multiplication factor to the Dunbar number for which, much beyond it, society begins to fall apart and become less "good". Perhaps 150x150? Iceland's 330,000 seems like a reasonable lower bound, but one could look at places like Twitter and Facebook or some of the other examples she mentions to find a better lower bound. I suspect a full network map of Twitter in early 2009 might be a good data set to study.

      Naturally, I suspect the upper bound will be highly dependent upon the structure of the network (and sub networks).

    2. we can’t really stop the national news from making us freaked out about remote things that have no impact on our daily life.

      Reminds me a tad of the thesis in The Information Diet: A Case for Conscious Comsumption by Clay A. Johnson

    3. homogenous

      Maybe homogeneousness of a different kind is the answer? Homogeneously civil perhaps?

  2. Oct 2017
    1. Commonality means that people will not have to pay to get access to the new public sphere: all will be free and public property. Commonality means also transversality: de-silo and cross-pollination.

    2. Openness is on the rise because it maximizes the improvement of goods and services, foster trust and support collaborative engagement.

    3. Transparency is the very basis of trust and the precondition of authentic dialogue. Data and people (including the administrators of a platform), should be traceable and audit-able. Transparency should be reciprocal, without distinction between rulers and ruled. Such transparency will ultimately be the basis of reflexive collective intelligence, allowing teams and communities of any size to observe and compare their cognitive activity

      The trouble with this is the post-truth political climate in which basic "facts" are under debate. What will the battle between these two groups look like and how can actual facts win out in the end. Will the future Eloi and Morlocks be the descendants between them?

    4. We need a new kind of public sphere: a platform in the cloud where data and metadata would be our common good, dedicated to the recording and collaborative exploitation of our memory in the service of collective intelligence. According to the current zeitgeist, the core values orienting the construction of this new public sphere should be: openness, transparency and commonality

    5. The practice of writing in ancient palace-temples gave birth to government as a separate entity. Alphabet and paper allowed the emergence of merchant city-states and the expansion of literate empires. The printing press, industrial economy, motorized transportation and electronic media sustained nation-states.

    6. The digital revolution will foster new forms of government. We discuss political problems in a global public space taking advantage of the web and social media. The majority of humans live in interconnected cities and metropoles. Each urban node wants to be an accelerator of collective intelligence, a smart city.

  3. Aug 2017
    1. he needed to be careful about setting big goals because he “worked for a guy who, if you don’t meet your goals, he’ll so skewer you.”

      the end of this statement being, "so why bother setting goals at all?"

    1. I would like to see contributions for which I am really interested, which stimulate me to think, in which I can learn something.

    1. I want a human curated web experience. I don’t want my experience curated by mysterious algorithms.

    1. Remember when the internet was going to usher in an age of peace and understanding because humans would be able to communicate with each other? It didn't happen.

      What didn't happen? The age of peace and understanding, or the ability for humans to communicate with each other freely?

    1. Vocativ's authors also found that the films that passed the test earned a total of $4.22 billion in the United States, while those that failed earned $2.66 billion in total, leading them to conclude that a way for Hollywood to make more money might be to "put more women onscreen."[35] A 2014 study by FiveThirtyEight based on data from about 1,615 films released from 1990 to 2013 concluded that the median budget of films that passed the test was 35% lower than that of the others. It found that the films that passed the test had about a 37% higher return on investment (ROI) in the United States, and the same ROI internationally, compared to films that did not pass the test.[37]

  4. Jul 2017
    1. the role of the blog is different than it was even just a couple of years ago. It’s not the sole outpost of an online life, although it can be an anchor, holding it in place.

    1. maybe there’s more that you can get for free

      Most of what's here in this article (and likely in the underlying papers) sounds to me to have been heavily influenced by the writings of W. Loewenstein and S. Kauffman. They've laid out some models/ideas that need more rigorous testing and work, and this seems like a reasonable start to the process.

      The "get for free" phrase itself is very S. Kauffman in my mind. I'm curious how many times it appears in his work?

    2. Any claims that it has to do with biology or the origins of life, he added, are “pure and shameless speculations.”

      Some truly harsh words from his former supervisor? Wow!

    3. The situation changed in the late 1990s, when the physicists Gavin Crooks and Chris Jarzynski derived “fluctuation theorems” that can be used to quantify how much more often certain physical processes happen than reverse processes. These theorems allow researchers to study how systems evolve — even far from equilibrium.

      look at these papers

    1. Comments sections often become shouting matches or spam-riddled.

      They can also become filled with "me too" type of commentary which doesn't add anything substantive to the conversation.

      See also the Why Did you Delete my comment at http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?page_id=4338

    2. The “conversation” ends up on Twitter, which is a horrible medium for it. Twitter’s critical flaw is, of course, it’s comically small post length limit. It’s really hard to have a thoughtful discussion 140 characters at a time. This is compounded by its terribly reply threading and its complete lack of formatting. It’s 2016 and this is the place for conversation on the web? Fuck that.


    3. But many of them don’t keep blogs of their own, or if they do, there’s never any cross-blog-conversation.

      The lack of good cross-blog-conversation has been one of the missing pieces of the web. I think this is why Webmentions can be so powerful.

    4. For a website the size and popularity of Daring Fireball, it’d probably be madness to foster any kind of coherent conversation.

      Certainly to do it without a staff would be difficult...

    5. If you want to respond, do so on your own website and tell me.

      Often it's the mechanism by which the tell me is the most difficult. Fortunately Webmentions make this a bit easier, particularly if they're moderated so the original author can control what's on their website.

  5. Jun 2017
    1. They are regarded as slightly pathetic.

      This may be one of Trump's few hot buttons... calling him pathetic or a looser.

    2. Trump is here said to be a wizard at media manipulation because he changes the subject. Deftly! As if a determined reporter could not change it back.

      And isn't it common political practice for interviewees to not accept the premise of the question and then to pivot?

    1. But the ability to work on indie projects is not available to all. The time and resources required to work indie are a sign of privilege, as is encouraging (and certainly expecting) all to work indie. As Anne Pasek writes, “all materials and practices … have a cost and thus a tollgate for participation.” (And there are many, often intersecting, forms of privilege that contribute to that “toll” ― race, gender, orientation, cultural background, economic background, able-bodiedness, etc.) So while indie work is great, and I’ve done a lot of it myself, we need to be careful about the ways in which we encourage and characterize indie work, noting in particular what it costs and who may be left behind or left out.

      This is all important and certainly true.

      However, as someone who knows he's certainly privileged, I view my definition of indie as something that is also open for others to come behind me and use for free or have the ability to reuse and remix in a way that corporate interests or non-indie work wouldn't. In a large sense, to me this means that while I may be privileged (whether that be socio-economically or even the time-encumbered), I'm helping to lower the cost and the burden for the less privileged who may come behind me to be able to do more, go further, or go faster.

      In some sense too, as described, indie has such a nebulous definition. Often when I see it in a technology related space I really read it as "Open Sourced".

    1. Content that isn’t indexable by search engines is not part of the open web.

    1. When Erdogan successfully carried out a constitutional referendum to greatly increase his powers, Trump called to congratulate him without reservations.

      another example of power/winning behaviour...

    2. He says he admires Vladimir Putin as a “strong” leader

      again, here, it's about appearing strong and being a winner.

    3. what a great job you are doing

      As pointed out in this sister article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/trump-isis-losers/527925/) Trump only seems to be able to put things into perspective by either winners or losers. He doesn't seem to be able to see any of the other subtleties.

  6. May 2017
    1. shifting it to another company which then gets to control (and even monetize) the conversation.

      As I've heard in the Indieweb chat: "Silos gonna silo."

    2. write your own blog post on your own damn site

      And isn't this what everyone should really be doing anyway so that they own their own work and words?

    3. My blog. My rules.

    4. I have added a script to my websites today that will block annotations

      I’ve spent some time thinking about this type of blocking in the past and written about a potential solution. Kevin Marks had created a script to help prevent this type of abuse as well; his solution and some additional variants are freely available. — {cja}

    5. merely stops you from writing in the margins here on this website.

      Does the script Audrey Watters is using really stop people from annotating her site directly?

      Based on my quick test, one can still (carefully) use Hypothes.is to highlight and annotate her site, but the script at least prevents Hypothes.is from showing that annotation. When visiting her site with Hypothes.is' Chrome browser extension on, it does show that there is one annotation on the page. It then requires some hunting to find this comment.

    1. my blog posts to be long-lived pieces of my consciousness: something I may want to refer back to, or remember in the future.

      a commonplace book!

    1. You’re giv­ing up far more than de­sign choice. Mr. Williams de­scribes Medium’s key ben­e­fit as res­cu­ing writ­ers from the “ter­ri­ble dis­trac­tion” of for­mat­ting chores. But con­sider the cost. Though he’s bait­ing the hook with de­sign, he’s also ask­ing you, the writer, to let him con­trol how you of­fer your work to read­ers. Mean­ing, to get the full ben­e­fit of Medium’s de­sign, you have to let your story live on Medium, send all your read­ers to Medium, have your work per­ma­nently en­tan­gled with other sto­ries on Medium, and so on—a sig­nif­i­cant concession.

      You're definitely not owning your own data.

    2. Min­i­mal­ism doesn’t fore­close ei­ther ex­pres­sive breadth or con­cep­tual depth. On the con­trary, the min­i­mal­ist pro­gram—as it ini­tially emerged in fine art of the 20th cen­tury—has been about di­vert­ing the viewer’s at­ten­tion from overt signs of au­thor­ship to the deeper pu­rity of the ingredients.

      This also sounds like a great way to cook!

  7. Apr 2017
    1. packaged the basic science of climate change into fake newspaper articles bearing two very different headlines

      Using fake news for the public good!

    2. It's just that "science" was whatever they wanted it to be.

      Donald Trump would be an extreme case of this in all things science or otherwise.

    1. The furore over Fake News is really about the seizures caused by overactivity in these synapses - confabulation and hallucination in the global brain of mutual media. With popularity always following a power law, runaway memetic outbreaks can become endemic, especially when the platform is doing what it can to accelerate them without any sense of their context or meaning.

      One might think that Facebook could easily analyze the things within their network that are getting above average reach and filter out or tamp down the network effects of the most damaging things which in the long run I suspect are going to damage their network overall.

    2. In indieweb we have been saying ‘build things that you want for yourself’, but building things that you want for your friends or organisation is a useful step between generations.

    1. Using an intercepting proxy, we observe nearly 800 different calls to several hundred distinct urls while visiting the homepage and a single article on TMZWorldStarNews.

      Holy cow this seems like an obscene number of calls!!

    1. Visit www.towcenter.org/pnp for the full report.

    2. However, this is a distraction from the larger issue that the structure and the economics of social platforms incentivize the spread of low-quality content over high-quality material. Journalism with high civic value—journalism that investigates power, or reaches underserved and local communities—is discriminated against by a system that favors scale and shareability.

    3. Some publishers are seeing a “Trump Bump” with subscriptions and donations rising post-election, and there is evidence of renewed efforts of both large and niche publishers to build audiences and revenue streams away from the intermediary platform businesses. However, it is too soon to tell if this represents a systemic change rather than a cyclical ripple.

      More likely a cyclical ripple, but one could hope...

    1. webmentions

      I'd recommend defining webmentions along with a link to the spec and W3C recommendation just after linkbacks/pingbacks as their more modern successor.

      As some of your potential audience isn't webmention aware, you could/should add some additional definition for those who are unlikely to click through to see the real value they represent.

    2. (see fragmentions)

      possibly put this link onto "URL fragments" earlier in the sentence rather than on this parenthetical for concision and clarity?

    3. promising piece

      especially given its use and popularity on platforms like Medium which are directly competing with WordPress.

    4. logs, receipts

      I wasn't generally aware of some of this history or ideas, you could add a paragraph or two more about these types of possibilities to summarize things for people who don't dig into the links (or likely won't/don't have time).

    5. Comments in WordPress

      <h2>Definitions & History</h2> It might be helpful, both here and in the future posts to have some headings to better delineate where we are in your argument and suggestions.

    6. what could be done

      don't forget to include something in the series about the potential future of salmentions and/or potentially vouch. Thinking forward about what potential problems may crop up and at least sketch solutions may help in creating a new forward looking implementation (particularly in a community focused on backwards compatibility) versus the indieweb way where one works on the basis of what actually exists rather than worrying about what could exist.

    7. popular responses

      popular MODERN responses

      It may help to underline how old the comment system is and that it doesn't really support many (any?) of the changes in the social web in the past decade.

      WordPress has it's own functionality for showing "likes" in a facepile (which is separate from comment functionality really), but since people can bookmark, read, or provide other social proof relating to a particular post supporting this is interesting. Emoji replies are certainly cool, but can be annoying/innocuous, particularly on posts with large numbers of comments. Some of the value of improving commenting is to aggregate some of these smaller intents into a more compact space to help make it easier to see the bigger/broader conversation without all the "me-too" sub commentary like "likes", "emoji", "thumbs up", etc. This may be even more important for the future of salmentions in which people can in some sense vote up or down comments with "likes". Having a comment set up that can pull in these types of salmentions to provide social weight to comments on a post would be a nice feature, particularly if a site can provide functionality to surface the most liked comments (in an indieweb fashion) on a post to highight the best comments amongst potential hundreds or thousands.

    8. unchanged

      a reference to how old and generally unmaintained/unsupported these are may be helpful in your argument, particularly for those who are going to care more about backwards compatibility.

    9. Indieweb

      This page could/should have a link to indieweb.org and could stand to have a quick delineation of what the basic principles are, and in particular as they overlap WordPress principles (like owning your own data on your own site). This will help the non-indieweb initiates on the WP side better understand what is possible.

    10. one of a series

      It would be nice to have an outline of what these multiple parts are. This seems to be the basic definitional post of what the current state is along with some history and some possibilities. Can you give one liners here of the other upcoming posts which might delineate where you'll be going in your arguments/discussion?

    11. pingbacks and trackbacks

      Though your audience is comprised of people who will know these well, perhaps adding a bit more definition with links to these and other examples will help to motivate your arguments.

    12. commentby


    13. 1

      How leet!

    14. but on specific areas of it.

      Mention examples of this like Medium and/or Kartik's example using webmention.

  8. Mar 2017
    1. The problem in Washington is not a Deep State; the problem is a shallow man

    2. “Deep State” comes from the Turkish derin devlet, a clandestine network, including military and intelligence officers, along with civilian allies, whose mission was to protect the secular order established, in 1923, by the father figure of post-Ottoman Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.

      Definition of Deep State

    1. Hypothesis Aggregator

      Be careful with this on newer versions of WP >4.7 as the shortcode was throwing a fatal error on pages on which it appeared. https://github.com/kshaffer/hypothesis_aggregator/issues/4

      p.s.: First!

    2. Kris Shaffer, the plugin’s author

      Here's his original post announcing the plugin: http://pushpullfork.com/2016/08/hypothesis-aggregator/

    3. Web annotation seems to promote more critical thinking and collaboration but it’s doubtful that it would ever fully replace commenting systems.

      But why not mix them together the way the IndieWeb has done?! A few people are using the new W3C recommendation spec for Webmention along with fragmentions to send a version of comments/marginalia/annotations to sites that accept them and have the ability to display them!

      A good example of this is Kartik Prabhu's website which does this somewhat like Medium does. One can write their response to a sub-section of his post on their own website, and using Webmention (yes, there's a WordPress plugin for that: https://wordpress.org/plugins/webmention/ ) send him the response. It then shows up on his site as a quote bubble next to the appropriate section which can then be opened and viewed by future readers. Example: https://kartikprabhu.com/articles/marginalia For those interested, he's opensourced the code to help accomplish this: https://github.com/kartikprabhu/marginalia

      While annotation systems have the ability to overlay one's site, there's certainly room for serious abuse as a result. (See an example at https://indieweb.org/annotation#Criticism) It would be nice if annotation systems were required to use something like webmentions (or older trackback/pingbacks) to indicate that a site had been mentioned elsewhere, this way, even if the publisher wasn't responsible for the resulting comments, they would be aware of possible attacks on their work/site/page.

    1. copying a manuscript of this kind proceeded at the rate of about one (two-sided) folio per day; pecia rentals typically lasted one week and involved about four folios.

  9. Feb 2017
    1. At any given moment, a field may be dominated by squabbles, but, in the end, the methodology prevails. Science moves forward, even as we remain stuck in place.

      This also sounds like the reason why the Indieweb movement is so interesting and potentially useful.

    1. pursue this abstraction

    2. Maldacena’s duality, called the “AdS/CFT correspondence,” tied the CFT to a corresponding “anti-de Sitter space,” which, with its extra dimension, pops out of the conformal system like a hologram.

    3. Arkani-Hamed speculates that the polyhedron is related to, or might even encompass, the “amplituhedron,” a geometric object that he and a collaborator discovered in 2013 that encodes the probabilities of different particle collision outcomes — specific examples of correlation functions.

    4. Polyakov initially didn’t believe it. His suspicion, shared by others, was that “maybe this happens because there is some hidden symmetry that we didn’t find yet.”

    5. Uncovering the polyhedral structure representing all possible quantum field theories would, in a sense, unify quark interactions, magnets and all observed and imagined phenomena in a single, inevitable structure

    6. But conformal systems, described by “conformal field theories” (CFTs), are uniform all the way up and down, and this, Polyakov discovered, makes them highly amenable to a bootstrap approach.

    7. Critical exponents corresponding to other well-known universality classes lie at kinks in other exclusion plots.

    8. Scale symmetry means there are no absolute notions of “near” and “far” in conformal systems;

    9. These critical exponents are clearly independent of either material’s microscopic details, arising instead from something that both systems, and others in their “universality class,” have in common.

    10. What materials at critical points have in common, Polyakov realized, is their symmetries: the set of geometric transformations that leave these systems unchanged. He conjectured that critical materials respect a group of symmetries called “conformal symmetries,” including, most importantly, scale symmetry.

    11. The bootstrap approach

      This also sounds a bit like complexity theory at play. What happens when we have some very simple laws and extrapolating them to higher and higher planes gives us the final answer. Naturally there are constraints, but this doesn't sound much different.

    12. Their findings indicate that the set of all quantum field theories forms a unique mathematical structure, one that does indeed pull itself up by its own bootstraps, which means it can be understood on its own terms.

      What kind of structure? Group? Ring? Other?

    13. This theory of quark interactions, called quantum chromodynamics, better matched experimental data and soon became one of the three pillars of the reigning Standard Model of particle physics.

    1. We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.

      This isn't the smartest thing to do with this kind of money...

    1. As was true of his earlier work on social choice, the magnitude of Professor Arrow’s theoretical insight was staggering. But, he made clear, his powerful conclusions about the workings of competitive markets held true only under ideal — that is to say, unrealistic — assumptions.His assumptions, for example, ruled out the existence of third-party effects: The sale of a product by Harry to Joe was assumed not to affect the well-being of Sally — an assumption routinely violated in the real world by, for example, the sale of products that harm the environment.

    2. Take “learning by doing,” a notion that Professor Arrow examined in the early 1960s. The basic idea is straightforward: The more that a company produces, the smarter it gets. Decades later, economists incorporated this idea into sophisticated theories of “endogenous growth,” which have a country’s rate of economic growth depending on internal policies that promote innovation and education — the very forces that Professor Arrow’s writings anticipated.

    3. in the early 1960s, he teased apart the complexities that asymmetric information creates in the market for health insurance. He pointed to incentives for patients and their physicians to agree to medical procedures of questionable value when a third party, the insurer, pays the bills.

    4. Professor Arrow proved that their system of equations mathematically cohere: Prices exist that bring all markets into simultaneous equilibrium (whereby every item produced at the equilibrium price would be voluntarily purchased). And market competition puts society’s resources to good use: Competitive markets are efficient, in the language of economists.Professor Arrow’s theorems set out the precise conditions under which Adam Smith’s famous conjecture in “The Wealth of Nations” holds true: that the “invisible hand” of market competition among self-serving individuals serves society well.

    5. What Professor Arrow proved in his book “Social Choice and Individual Values” (1951) was far more sweeping. Not only would majority-voting rules prove unsatisfactory; so, too, would nonvoting systems of making social choices if, as was fundamental to his way of thinking, those choices were based on the preferences of the individuals making up the society.

    6. majority voting can produce arbitrary outcomes.

    1. We are sharded beings; the sum total of our various aspects as contained within our biological beings as well as the myriad of technologies that we use to extend our biological abilities.

      To some extent, this thesis could extend Cesar Hidalgo's concept of the personbyte as in putting part of one's self out onto the internet, one can, in some sense, contain more information than previously required.

      Richard Dawkin's concept of meme extends the idea a bit further in that an individual's thoughts can infect others and spread with a variable contagion rate dependent on various variables.

      I would suspect that though this does extend the idea of personbyte, there is still some limit to how large the size of a particular person's sphere could expand.

    2. While technological implants are certainly feasible, possible, and demonstrable, the main way in which we extend ourselves with technology today is not through implants but explants.

    3. in a tiny number of hands.

      or in a number of tiny hands, as the case can sometimes be.

    4. The reason we find ourselves in this mess with ubiquitous surveillance, filter bubbles, and fake news (propaganda) is precisely due to the utter and complete destruction of the public sphere by an oligopoly of private infrastructure that poses as public space.

      This is a whole new tragedy of the commons: people don't know where the commons actually are anymore.

    1. The HR rep began the meeting by asking me if I had noticed that *I* was the common theme in all of the reports I had been making, and that if I had ever considered that I might be the problem.

      Holy shit! If people haven't quite Uber already, this has got to be the end of the line...

    1. it encourages a “growth” mindset: the belief that your abilities can improve with your efforts.

      I'll be this also helps with their feeling of "flow" too.

    2. “Many thought, okay to get from A to B there are these three steps, but it turns out there are really five or six,”

      Sounds a lot like the mathematicians who came after Perelman to show that his proof of Poincare was correct--they needed help in getting from A to B too.

    1. a new paper by Hidalgo and his colleagues, appearing in the journal World Development, argues that everything else being equal, the complexity of a country’s exports also correlates with its degree of economic equality: The more complex a country’s products, the greater equality it enjoys relative to similar-sized countries with similar-sized economies.


    2. facility of itself


    1. I pursued her until she had a change of heart

      The headline over-promises on the story that was delivered.

    2. I figured the odds were in my favor.

      Why would the odds be in his favor if there will be more men than women? Sounds more like the deck stacked against him.

  10. Jan 2017
  11. Dec 2016
    1. Think of a standard map of the world, showing the borders and capitals of the world’s 190-odd countries. That is the chessboard view.Now think of a map of the world at night, with the lit-up bursts of cities and the dark swaths of wilderness. Those corridors of light mark roads, cars, houses, and offices; they mark the networks of human relationships, where families and workers and travelers come together. That is the web view. It is a map not of separation, marking off boundaries of sovereign power, but of connection.

    2. the Westphalian world order mandated the sovereign equality of states not as an end in itself but as a means to protect the subjects of those states—the people.

    3. The people must come first. Where they do not, sooner or later, they will overthrow their governments.

    4. Open societies, open governments, and an open international system are risky propositions. But they are humankind’s best hope for harnessing the power not only of states but also of businesses, universities, civic organizations, and citizens to address the planetary problems that now touch us all.

    5. when a state abrogated its responsibility to protect the basic rights of its people, other states had a responsibility to protect those citizens, if necessary through military intervention.

    6. But human rights themselves became politically polarized during the Cold War, with the West championing civil and political rights; the East championing economic, social, and cultural rights; and both sides tending to ignore violations in their client states.

    7. The institutions built after World War II remain important repositories of legitimacy and authority. But they need to become the hubs of a flatter, faster, more flexible system, one that operates at the level of citizens as well as states.

    8. U.S. policymakers should think in terms of translating chessboard alliances into hubs of connectedness and capability.

    9. According to systems theory, the level of organization in a closed system can only stay the same or decrease. In open systems, by contrast, the level of organization can increase in response to new inputs and disruptions. That means that such a system should be able to ride out the volatility caused by changing power relationships and incorporate new kinds of global networks.

    10. Writing about “connexity” 20 years ago, the British author and political adviser Geoff Mulgan argued that in adapting to permanent interdependence, governments and societies would have to rethink their policies, organizational structures, and conceptions of morality. Constant connectedness, he wrote, would place a premium on “reciprocity, the idea of give and take,” and a spirit of openness, trust, and transparency would underpin a “different way of governing.” Governments would “provide a framework of predictability, but leave space for people to organise themselves in flatter, more reciprocal structures.”

    11. Instead of governing themselves through those who represent them, citizens can partner directly with the government to solve public problems.

    12. an open international order of the twenty-first century should be anchored in secure and self-reliant societies, in which citizens can participate actively in their own protection and prosperity. The first building block is open societies; the second is open governments.

    13. The self-reliance necessary for open security depends on the ability to self-organize and take action.

    14. The government’s role is to “invest in creating a more resilient nation,” which includes briefing and empowering the public, but more as a partner than a protector.

    15. much of the civil rights work of this century will entail championing digital rights.

    16. Hard gatekeeping is a strategy of connection, but it calls for division, replacing the physical barriers of the twentieth century with digital ones of the twenty-first.

    17. In this order, states must be waves and particles at the same time.

      Great and and appropriate physics analogy.

    18. The legal order of the twenty-first century must be a double order, acknowledging the existence of domestic and international spheres of action and law but seeing the boundary between them as permeable.

      Emphasis on "the boundary between them as permeable"!

    19. In many countries, legislatures and government agencies have begun publishing draft legislation on open-source platforms such as GitHub, enabling their publics to contribute to the revision process.

    20. The declaration’s three major principles are transparency, civic participation, and accountability.

      As I read this, it makes me think in some sense that groups like IndieWeb.org are the modern-day equivalent of the Lions Club or Kiwinis, just internet based and with civic goals that go beyond a city's borders.

    21. In practice, governments must have a legal framework that requires the disclosure of the income and assets of all high government officials and must put in place a set of deterrents against bribery.

      The United States has apparently failed itself in this regard with respect to President-elect Trump.

    22. Buildings and empires really do topple under their own weight.

      Particularly when they don't have resilience built into them.

    23. Ramo argues that the winner-take-all nature of network effects means that the current platform monopolies are here to stay.

      But we know from longer term analyses that this isn't the case or else why doesn't Egypt rule the world? Rome?

      Perhaps they may work in the near term, but certainly not in the longer term.

    24. a grand strategy of “hard gatekeeping,” based on the power to grant or deny access to closed networks he calls “gatelands.”

    25. In his book The Seventh Sense, Joshua Ramo recognizes that a “new age of constant connection” has arrived

    26. Dictatorships fare little better than democracies at stopping such attacks, and at a far higher cost to civil liberties.

      This sounds correct, but is there supporting data to corroborate it?

    27. Peace of Westphalia created a framework of sovereign and equal states.

    28. problems and threats arise because people are too connected, not connected enough, or connected in the wrong ways to the wrong people or things.

    29. The essential fault line of the digital age is not between capitalism and communism or democracy and autocracy but between open and closed.

    30. Alec Ross, a technology expert and former State Department official, lines up countries on an “open-closed axis.” As he argues, “the societies that embrace openness will be those that compete and succeed most effectively.”

      Is there a graph or image for this?

    1. Twitter did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

      It would be more interesting if they shut his account down for reported abuses to see what the reaction might be.

    2. "We told them it was BS and what they were doing with a public platform was incredibly reckless and dangerous," wrote Coby of the back-and-forth between the Trump operation and Twitter.

      Twitter may be a platform that mostly lives in the public, but it isn't a public platform. It's also one of the reasons I have my own site.

    1. Two different, often competing populist traditions have long thrived in the United States. Pundits often speak of “left-wing” and “right-wing” populists. But those labels don’t capture the most meaningful distinction. The first type of American populist directs his or her ire exclusively upward: at corporate elites and their enablers in government who have allegedly betrayed the interests of the men and women who do the nation’s essential work. These populists embrace a conception of “the people” based on class and avoid identifying themselves as supporters or opponents of any particular ethnic group or religion. They belong to a broadly liberal current in American political life; they advance a version of “civic nationalism,” which the historian Gary Gerstle defines as the “belief in the fundamental equality of all human beings, in every individual’s inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and in a democratic government that derives its legitimacy from the people’s consent.”

    2. Although Trump’s rise has demonstrated the enduring appeal of the racial-nationalist strain of American populism, his campaign is missing one crucial element. It lacks a relatively coherent, emotionally rousing description of “the people” whom Trump claims to represent.

    3. By invoking identities that voters embraced—“producers,” “white laborers,” “Christian Americans,” or President Richard Nixon’s “silent majority”—populists roused them to vote for their party and not merely against the alternatives on offer.

    4. For much of his campaign, his slogan might as well have been “Make America Hate Again.”

    5. According to a recent study by the political scientist Justin Gest, 65 percent of white Americans—about two-fifths of the population—would be open to voting for a party that stood for “stopping mass immigration, providing American jobs to American workers, preserving America’s Christian heritage, and stopping the threat of Islam.”

      This is the second article in the same issue of Foreign Affairs that's quoting this same statistic from the same paper.

    1. Today, an American’s economic status is a bad predictor of his or her voting preferences. His or her views on social issues—say, same-sex marriage—are a much more accurate guide to whether he or she will support Republicans or Democrats.

    2. That slower growth is coupled with challenges that relate to the new global economy. Globalization is now pervasive and entrenched, and the markets of the West are (broadly speaking) the most open in the world. Goods can easily be manufactured in lower-wage economies and shipped to advanced industrial ones. While the effect of increased global trade is positive for economies as a whole, specific sectors get battered, and large swaths of unskilled and semiskilled workers find themselves unemployed or underemployed.

    3. The most widely held job for an American male today is driving a car, bus, or truck, as The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson has noted.

    4. This convergence in economic policy has contributed to a situation in which the crucial difference between the left and the right today is cultural.

    5. The shift began, as Inglehart and Norris note, in the 1970s, when young people embraced a postmaterialist politics centered on self-expression and issues related to gender, race, and the environment. They challenged authority and established institutions and norms, and they were largely successful in introducing new ideas and recasting politics and society. But they also produced a counterreaction. The older generation, particularly men, was traumatized by what it saw as an assault on the civilization and values it cherished and had grown up with. These people began to vote for parties and candidates that they believed would, above all, hold at bay these forces of cultural and social change.

    6. The most striking findings of the paper are about the decline of economics as the pivot of politics.

    7. Voting patterns traditionally reinforced this ideological divide, with the working class opting for the left and middle and upper classes for the right. Income was usually the best predictor of a person’s political choices.

    8. There is a reality behind the rhetoric, for we are indeed living in an age of mass migration. The world has been transformed by the globalization of goods, services, and information, all of which have produced their share of pain and rejection. But we are now witnessing the globalization of people, and public reaction to that is stronger, more visceral, and more emotional.

    9. For the vast majority of human history, people lived, traveled, worked, and died within a few miles of their birthplace. In recent decades, however, Western societies have seen large influxes of people from different lands and alien cultures.

    10. . The number of immigrants entering many European countries is historically high. In the United States, the proportion of Americans who were foreign-born increased from less than five percent in 1970 to almost 14 percent today. And the problem of illegal immigration to the United States remains real, even though it has slowed recently. In many countries, the systems designed to manage immigration and provide services for integrating immigrants have broken down. And yet all too often, governments have refused to fix them, whether because powerful economic interests benefit from cheap labor or because officials fear appearing uncaring or xenophobic.

    11. Trump’s political genius was to realize that many Republican voters were unmoved by the standard party gospel of free trade, low taxes, deregulation, and entitlement reform but would respond well to a different appeal based on cultural fears and nationalist sentiment.

    1. And even if you manage to get them, the poor cannot afford unpaid internships, pro bono work, or even the irregularity of jobs.

      This almost sounds to me like the disruption that happened to the television business in the late 90s early 00s. Elite movie stars began doing television which pushed out a lot of working class actors who had previously been doing television. Many agencies went out of business and the acting pool shrank as the result of actors who could personally afford to not work shrank as well.

    1. But over time the damage will accumulate: misallocated capital, lower competitiveness and reduced faith in America’s institutions. Those who will suffer most are the very workers Mr Trump is promising to help. That is why, if he really wants to make America great again, Mr Trump should lay off the protectionism and steer clear of the bullying right now.

    2. Mr Trump’s mercantilism is long-held and could prove fierce, particularly if the strong dollar pushes America’s trade deficit higher (see article). Congress would have only limited powers to restrain the president’s urge to impose tariffs. More important, even if rash protectionism is avoided, a strategy based on bribing and bullying individual companies will itself be a problem.

    3. Nonetheless, Mr Trump’s approach is worrying. Unlike the Depression, when Hoover and then Roosevelt got companies to act in what they (often wrongly) saw as the national interest; or 2009, when Mr Obama corralled the banks and bailed out Detroit, America today is not in crisis. Mr Trump’s meddling is thus likely to be the new normal. Worse, his penchant for unpredictable and often vindictive bullying is likely to be more corrosive than the handouts most politicians favour.

    4. The role of lobbyists will grow—an irony given that Mr Trump promised to drain the Washington swamp of special interests.

    5. Such tariffs would be hugely disruptive. They would make goods more expensive for American consumers. By preventing American firms from maximising their efficiency using complex supply chains, they would reduce their competitiveness, deter new investment and, eventually, hurt workers’ wages across the economy. They would also encourage a tit-for-tat response.

    6. American capitalism has flourished thanks to the predictable application of rules. If, at the margin, that rules-based system is superseded by an ad hoc approach in which businessmen must take heed and pay homage to the whim of King Donald, the long-term damage to America’s economy will be grave.

    1. a new set of ways to report and share news could arise: a social network where the sources of articles were highlighted rather than the users sharing them. A platform that makes it easier to read a full story than to share one unread. A news feed that provides alternative sources and analysis beneath every shared article.

      This sounds like the kind of platforms I'd like to have. Reminiscent of some of the discussion at the beginning of TWIG: 379 Ixnay on the Eet-tway.

  12. Nov 2016
    1. The New York Times

      I'm wondering if the NY Times used the summit to figure out how to prevent annotating at all? Somehow I'm not able to reasonably use either Hypothes.is or Genius with it in multiple browsers.

      In particular I just can't highlight anything on the page, and attempts usually end up moving me to a new article. Blech!

    1.  they actually use Medium for their core publication

      This is definitely not an IndieWeb way to go!

    2. But not every nail needs a fully-custom hammer.

      Ain't this the truth.

    1. “What’s unusual about Trump is he’s a leading candidate and he seems to have no interest in getting important things factually correct.”

    2. Its open distortion of reality is both its greatest strength and greatest weakness.

      The question is: how can we exploit the weaknesses to make the problem apparent to those who are too easily willing to believe?

    3. He compares what Trump did to totalitarian propaganda, which does not attempt to depict the world but rather substitutes for it a ruthlessly coherent counter-narrative that is untroubled by any contradiction between itself and people’s experience.

      Here I wonder if it's possibly the case that in an ever sub-specializing world that people have somehow lost the time, effort, or even inclination to attempt to put all of the facts together themselves to create a cohesive whole. Instead they rely on others to manufacture these stories on their behalf and thereby make it easier for such totalitarian propaganda to insert itself.

      Perhaps the working man isn't spending time reading the paper anymore, and/or it's certainly easier to read third and fourth party stories on Twitter, Facebook, or listen to infotainment on Fox News, MSNBC, or CNN. Why try to follow more direct sources when we can read Facebook and worry about who's going to win this season of The Voice or The Bachelor?

    4. Yesterday I read something by a philosopher, Jason Stanley, that illuminated what I mean by “a miss bigger than a missed story.” Beyond Lying: Donald Trump’s Authoritarian Reality. Stanley made the point that fact checking Trump in a way missed the point. Trump was not trying to make reference to reality in what he said to win votes. He was trying to substitute “his” reality for the one depicted in news reports.

      Similar to the emperor with no clothes. Reality may be what you can manage to get others to believe.

      The other thing at work is his clever (?) use of doubletalk. See also: http://boffosocko.com/2016/09/30/complexity-isnt-a-vice-10-word-answers-and-doubletalk-in-election-2016/

  13. Oct 2016
    1. why encourage posting before you’ve even read the thing? Because, at least my hope is, it’ll prevent posting a link from becoming an endorsement for the content at the other end of that link. There’s a natural tendency to curate what we associate with our online profiles and I think that’s, in large part, because we’ve spent a lot of time equating a user’s profile page with a user’s identity and, consequently, their beliefs. But I consume a wealth of content that I don’t necessarily agree with, and that helps to inform me, to shape my opinions, as much as the content that I agree with wholeheartedly.

  14. Aug 2016
    1. I try to follow the tenets of the Indie Web movement in owning all of my own data and in publishing on my own site and syndicating elsewhere (POSSE

      Compare this with the fragmention: http://boffosocko.com/about/website-philosophy-structure/#I+try+to+follow

    1. www.dougengelbart.org/site/colloquium/forum/ohs-lc/msg00001.html

      This is the portion in green, but the difference is almost too subtle. The CSS could make this more obvious...

    1. I want no part of such elec-trickery.

    2. It is not about the numbers. It is never about the numbers. Don’t let them tell you otherwise.

    3. But first, what would motivate any young person today to pull the plug? Well maybe they should consider this for a moment. Who most wants you to stay on the grid? The advertisers. Your boss. Human Resources. The advertisers. Your parents (irony of ironies – once they distrusted it, now they need to tag you electronically, share your Facebook photos and message you to death). The advertisers. The government. Your local authority. Your school. Advertisers.

      Going of the grid hurts "The man" in 70's parlance.

  15. Jun 2016
    1. Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1606.03433 : Calculating the Middle Ages? The Project “Complexities and Networks in the Medieval Mediterranean and the Near East”

    2. While the complexity that arises from network theory in many areas of science has been studied for decades, there has been almost no such research in the field of history.

    3. “On average across all five polities, a change of ruler in one year increased the probability for another change in the following year threefold,” says Preiser-Kapeller. So the closer you are to an upheaval, the more likely there is to be another one soon. Or in other words, upheavals tend to cluster together.

    1. Structures naturally re-arrange themselves to increase their metabolic rate.

      Does this agree with optimization of metabolic rates in other areas? Consider D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson...

    1. From the standpoint of physics, there is one essential difference between living things and inanimate clumps of carbon atoms: The former tend to be much better at capturing energy from their environment and dissipating that energy as heat.

    2. Chris Jarzynski, now at the University of Maryland, and Gavin Crooks, now at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Jarzynski and Crooks showed that the entropy produced by a thermodynamic process, such as the cooling of a cup of coffee, corresponds to a simple ratio: the probability that the atoms will undergo that process divided by their probability of undergoing the reverse process (that is, spontaneously interacting in such a way that the coffee warms up). As entropy production increases, so does this ratio: A system’s behavior becomes more and more “irreversible.”

    3. in a paper appearing online this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Michael Brenner, a professor of applied mathematics and physics at Harvard, and his collaborators present theoretical models and simulations of microstructures that self-replicate.

    4. the underlying principle driving the whole process is dissipation-driven adaptation of matter.

    5. In a September paper in the Journal of Chemical Physics, he reported the theoretical minimum amount of dissipation that can occur during the self-replication of RNA molecules and bacterial cells, and showed that it is very close to the actual amounts these systems dissipate when replicating.

    6. Ilya Prigogine, “Introduction to Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes”, John Wiley Sons Inc., 1968

    7. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0895717794901880

    8. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1412.1875v1.pdf

    9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e91D5UAz-f4

    10. “Thermodynamic Dissipation Theory for the Origin of Life” (arXiv:0907.0042[physics.gen-ph]2009; Earth Syst. Dynam., 2, 37-51, 2011)

    11. Brooks and Wiley, Evolution as Entropy, U Chicago Press (1986, 2nd edition 1988)

      Get a copy to read through.

    12. 2009, K. Michaelian, arXiv:0907.0042 [physics.gen-ph] http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.0042 and again in 2011, K. Michaelian Earth Syst. Dynam., 2, 37-51, 2011 www.earth-syst-dynam.net/2/37/2011/doi:10.5194/esd-2-37-2011