71 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2019
    1. Retrospectives shouldn't be static and they should serve each team holding them. Ultimately, they should serve our customers by making our teams happier. If your team has been using any of these techniques or others not mentioned that you'd like to share please do!

      Might be worth adding a short concluding paragraph or, if this is it, setting it apart from the previous question's answer.

      Something to sum up the benefits of retros and maybe offering your time if anyone wants help getting started with them?

    2. It It can.

      “It It can.” → “A: It can.”

    3. transparency

      "transparency and accountability"?

    4. our Actionables

      This might be confusing to people because it's the first time it's been referenced. Considering saying instead something like "the Actionables column on our retro board".

    5. Q: What does the format look like?

      This section ended up being kind of long. Would it be possible to break it up into multiple "questions"?

    6. “fully present and totally invisible.”

      Love this definition!

    7. It’s not about any framework or methodology; it’s about people.

      This is interesting and left me wanting to hear more about this perspective. Consider adding a sentence to expand on how it's about people.

    8. thinks


  2. Mar 2019
    1. Potato Bottom

      On the river (bug spray recommended)

    2. Gooseberry

      According to some reports, not the prettiest of the campsites

    3. Murphy Hogback

      Described as a “popular” campsite, but that might be because it’s at about the mid-point on the road

    4. Labyrinth

      On the river

    5. Hardscrabble Bottom

      On the river

    6. White Crack

      Widely touted as the “best” campsite on the road

  3. Jun 2018
    1. 5-10 percent of newspaper revenue

      Holy cow, that's a lot!

    2. As recently as the late 1960s, the government was forgiving roughly three-fourths of print publications’ periodical mailing expenses, at a cost of about $400 million annually (or, adjusted for inflation, about $2 billion today). Much of that disappeared with the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 and in subsequent cutbacks. But the Post Office still discounts the postage cost of periodicals by about $270 million a year.

      This sounds like the postal subsidies have been scaled back, but some percentage of this decline can be explained by a decline in print circulation as well.

    3. And the amount used to be much higher.

      When? How much higher?

    1. the dawn of the republic

      For the purposes of this, we are taking this to mean post-ratification of The Constitution, roughly 1790 forward.

    2. advertising-supported model

      The Baltimore Clipper in 1844 charged $0.01 per copy of their daily paper. The paper consisted of roughly two-thirds advertisements.

      According to https://www.davemanuel.com/inflation-calculator.php, $0.01 from 1844 is roughly equivalent to $0.32 today, but today's newspapers cost $1 or more.

      This suggests that in the mid-1800s newspapers were more heavily supported by ad revenue than they are today.

    3. government subsidies

      According to Wikipedia:

      The U.S. Postal Service Act of 1792 provided substantial subsidies: Newspapers were delivered up to 100 miles for a penny and beyond for 1.5 cents, when first class postage ranged from six cents to a quarter.

  4. Mar 2018
    1. older versions of JavaScript

      Pre-ECMAScript 2015

  5. Feb 2018
    1. Purchase of Domain: ahedg.es

      I originally bought this domain from a registrar that deals with ".es" TLDs. That registrar failed to let me know it was expiring, so it was bought by this German company. I had to haggle with them to get it back. Total hassle.

  6. biopub.hypothes.is biopub.hypothes.is
    1. acetyltransferase

      I have no idea if this accurately depicts acetyltransferase, but it's cool.


  7. Sep 2017
  8. Aug 2017
  9. Jul 2017
    1. In an ideal world, social enterprises would receive funding and attract resources only when they produced their intended social impact

      Wait, they should receive funding only after they’ve achieved their mission?

    1. When that time comes, you will find yourself leading a team which must now make its own decisions, but which has precisely no experience of doing so.

      This reminds me of the sub captain who turned around his band of misfits into the top-performing crew in the Navy by empowering them to make (and be responsible for) decisions without him.


    1. Pushing people to go faster without mature efforts to identify and address what’s slowing them down will usually grind them to a halt (or burn them out) before too long.

      🔑 point

    2. doesn’t make decisions

      Or makes only safe decisions.

  10. Apr 2017
    1. this photo of a cat

      HTTP Status Cats is one of the most brilliant things the internet has done, IMHO.

  11. Mar 2017
    1. The Microbe is so very smallYou cannot make him out at all,But many sanguine people hopeTo see him through a microscopeFrom The Microbe by Hilaire Belloc, 1900

      How cute!

    2. 30 000 of London’s 70 000 population had died

      holy hell

    3. the scientific name, but often that is not the case. For example, it is not at all obvious that Xenopsylla cheopis is the rat flea that carries the plague microbe

      science schmience

    4. himalayana

      Marmot of the Himalayas

    5. out by the plague in the 14th centur

      That's a long time ago.

    6. Homo sapiens

      We are DEVO

    1. they might still be able and willing to look up the historical stock price for you.

      This is not at all hard to do, but I suppose if you can get someone else to do it, great!

    2. If you purchased the stock at different times, or haven't sold all the shares at once, you may have more than one trade confirmation statement.

      This can get complicated fast.

    3. If you know when the stock was purchased

      There's no section for if you don't know when it was purchased.

    4. USA Today

      How far back does USA Today go?

    5. If your current broker was the selling agent,

      If not, you may find yourself having to make complicated FIFO calculations yourself.

    1. #2

      Number 2 being the following:

      It’s too easy for misinformation to spread on the web

  12. Feb 2017
    1. family breakdown

      Humans are pretty resilient. There is no good reason why the nuclear family is the only model that can work in a modern society.

    2. That works out to one of every eight adult males in America today.

      Yep, this is an incredibly disturbing trend and a huge problem, especially considering the discrimination faced by people with prison records. And, yet, nowhere does the author mention the racial bias that underlies this statistic, the way that (especially, but not exclusively) drug laws are used as a new Jim Crow, a way to control and extract labor from primarily Black and Latino men. Why would he not tie this back to the social forces that created the situation?

    3. According to his work, nearly half of all prime working-age male labor-force dropouts—an army now totaling roughly 7 million men—currently take pain medication on a daily basis.

      Seems reasonable. If you're of "prime working-age" and a labor-force dropout, there's a good chance it's because you've suffered from a debilitating injury. Maybe you subsequently got addicted, but that would be some slice of the 7 million man "army" he cites.

    4. disadvantaged minority communities to Main Street White America.

      What about well-off minorities and poor white people? I call this out because the author is exposing his biases by reinforcing the narrative that minorities are by definition disadvantaged and white people make up Main Street. Another example of his intellectual laziness.

    5. from coast to coast

      Wait, I'm confused. I thought he said the coasts were an elite bubble and "real" America was in the neglected interior….

    6. but they rose sharply for those with high-school degrees or less, and for this less-educated grouping most of the rise in death rates was accounted for by suicides, chronic liver cirrhosis, and poisonings (including drug overdoses).

      This is shocking and sad and not terribly surprising, unfortunately, considering the weakening economic prospects for this group. That the author goes on later to essentially blame this on Medicaid is despicable, in my opinion.

    7. despite the trillions we devote to medical services each year.

      I would argue it is precisely because of the trillions we devote to medical services each year. For-profit health care is a terrible model for increasing health outcomes. It may drive a certain amount of innovation, but usually only at the high end. Basic preventative medical care is a bargain by comparison and it would be a net benefit to society for this to be paid for by the people's taxes.

    8. secularization and the decline of faith

      This is a problem because…?

    9. many things in our society are going wrong and yet seem beyond our powers to correct.

      The fact that problems in our society "seem beyond our powers to correct" is directly related to the major trend that the author has largely chosen to ignore: that an incredibly large percentage of our wealth is concentrated in the hands of a very few people. These people have chosen to use their means to influence the political process to the point where it is only responsive to them. Get money out of politics and you will make government responsive to the will of the "real" Americans the author so loves to deify.

    10. paid hours of work per adult civilian have plummeted by a shocking 12 percent thus far in our new American century.

      Shocking? Maybe. But some percentage of this may be due to the "gig" economy. I.e. increasing numbers of people deliberately (or sometimes not) choose project-based work over the standard 40+ hour work week. Freelancers have more control over their schedules, but also much more economic insecurity in many cases.

    11. 21st–century America has somehow managed to produce markedly more wealth for its wealthholders even as it provided markedly less work for its workers.

      Great, a nod to the real problem, but no investigation of the causes or implications. Why not?

    12. To put things another way: If our nation’s work rate today were back up to its start-of-the-century highs, well over 10 million more Americans would currently have paying jobs.

      How many of those potential jobs were lost to automation?

    13. The reasons for America’s newly fitful and halting macroeconomic performance are still a puzzlement to economists and a subject of considerable contention and debate.1Economists are generally in consensus, however, in one area: They have begun redefining the growth potential of the U.S. economy downwards.

      This reminds me of climate denial. "Though there is considerable debate about the causes, there is no denying that temperatures are rising." I doubt there is an honest economist who would dispute that hoarding of wealth by the few would harm the many. We are in a situation where this is happening on an unprecedented scale. I would love to hear from someone more versed in the numbers to know whether that accumulation could account for the decrease in U.S. economic growth potential.

    14. Although that wealth is not evenly distributed,

      An understatement of "fantastic" proportions!

    15. The warning lights have been flashing, and the klaxons sounding, for more than a decade and a half. But our pundits and prognosticators and professors and policymakers, ensconced as they generally are deep within the bubble, were for the most part too distant from the distress of the general population to see or hear it.

      I take perhaps a more cynical view that all of these bubble-dwellers (as the author would have us believe) have known all along these were the trends, but chose to ignore, downplay, or only take token action to address them to enrich or protect their personal wealth and privilege.

    16. So general economic conditions for many ordinary Americans—not least of these, Americans who did not fit within the academy’s designated victim classes—have been rather more insecure than those within the comfort of the bubble understood.

      Speaking of "designated victim classes" and "bubbles" is lazy writing and not particularly helpful at best and coded racism at worst. Later, the author talks about people who live in the bubble versus "real America". Seriously condescending, as if people who live in large, multi-cultural cities, who may also have a somewhat intellectual bent are not real Americans.

    17. bicoastal bastions

      Here we go again. In fact, Trump won among rural voters, even on the coasts, and Clinton won among urban voters, even in the center of the country. This should be an interesting read if the author is going to be so obviously lazy in his formulations in the opening paragraph.

    18. The abstraction of “inequality” doesn’t matter a lot to ordinary Americans. The reality of economic insecurity does.

      The problem with this is that economic insecurity stems largely from income inequality. In other words, the fact that a tiny percentage of people have accumulated almost all of the economic gains over the last 15 years means that millions more Americans live under increasingly precarious conditions.

    19. geographical mobility in America has been on the decline for three decades

      How much of this decline is due to an increase in the numbers of remote workers?