550 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2015
    1. The Institute for The Psychology of Eating’s online nutrition training focuses on groundbreaking work in the new and innovative approach called Mind Body Nutrition™.

      Curriculum™.

      GTFO.

    1. I agree with the conclusion that hierarchies and letting users put things in places is good, but I want to posit a more nuanced explanation than "we are set in our ways".

      I think sometimes we don't remember what exactly it is we're looking for. We may not have a word, or a name, or date. But if we put it some place in particular we can find it spatially rather than linguistically.

      This is why I think labels are superior to hierarchies. When we transcend the limitations of physical space would should not throw out space, but we should throw away the constraints of 3D space with its contiguous, volumetric forms. Labels let you put things in as many places as you like. Labels can, too, be hierarchical.

      The problem with the current crop of systems that eschew hierarchy is that they replace it with a text box.

      One could make the argument that smart indexing is just automatic labeling, but I think there's a memory function in having created the labels oneself.

      I'd like to see systems that experiment with more ways to fold space. Shortcuts are like wormholes. Maybe we should have common actions for creating bi-directional ones. On mobile devices I think we should take more advantage of zooming and z-planes.

    1. “Anybody that made it through the ’90s and [aughts] without having their libertarianism taking a pretty good hit wasn’t paying attention,” he says in a recent telephone interview. “We deregulated every g--d--- thing, and it came back at us in this way that we may never recover.”
    1. it dwindled in activity even as it swelled in population

      The treehouse fell apart.

    2. In extreme cases, an entire project would stall because I couldn't carve out enough contiguous time to get through the next part of it.

      This is the hardest problem of writing and the ways it gets undermined can be so subtle. A roommate asking, "Is this your sock?" can wreck an afternoon.

    1. It’s like, if you have a nightmare and you wake up and your heart’s pounding. You feel the same as if somebody was in the room when you woke up, but the consequence of you waking up and being alone, scared somebody’s in the room, versus somebody actually being in the room, are very different, and we shouldn’t pretend they’re the same, and say, ‘You have to protect me from that feeling.’ No, you don’t have to protect me from that feeling, you have to protect me from that guy, or that cop. That’s who you have to protect me from.

      Sing it!

    2. The result? Students’ sense of vulnerability is skyrocketing.

      I had similar thoughts around the immensely popular video about street harassment made by hollaback! after a former partner compared an unwelcome invitation I had extended to see a concert together to street harassment. It got me wondering what disciplines have good dialectic for separating useful from harmful exposure. So far I have only an inkling that trauma therapy offers some hope, and it connects the conversation to concepts like triggers.

    3. Both of these works, she says, specifically sought a lawsuit from the estate of Margaret Mitchell.
    4. Censorship has never contributed to the cause of social justice; throughout history it has invariably been on the side of totalitarianism and repression.
    5. I mean poets, when you sing the song of the pure self, you’re singing the song of Facebook, you’re singing the song of targeted advertising.
    6. But what we all know about social media is that it’s designed to keep you safe from the things you don’t want to see. In real life, if you see somebody and you don’t care for them, you still have to somehow engage with them. Online, there’s a whole series of algorithms that keep it from coming to you, even on the level of advertising you’re not interested in. In many ways we’re very happy about that. We love that. We also love the little antagonisms that come up, the pile-on that will happen, the call-outs that will happen. That gets into a really interesting thing in social media which I think is new. Now, you have to say something in order to be seen. You have to like or you have to affirmatively make a comment. And if you don’t, then that can be looked at.

      If the academy rejects Place I'd advise social media companies to hire her. Damn. Understanding: so high!

    7. In real life, if you see somebody and you don’t care for them, you still have to somehow engage with them.

      Yup!

    8. Besides that the poetry in question is purposefully plagiarized, and that its materialism is pointing out this very tradition of white irresponsibility that Williams brings up, that this petition asks for a voice to be silenced in the name of free speech and then urges discussion of the very topics Place’s piece has dragged up should have perhaps red-flagged the committee members for an event celebrating the anniversary of, of all things, free speech.

      This is representative of a line of thinking I often see that goes something like "allies stay on the sidelines, please." A delightful linguistic reversal of this that I experienced came during #BlackLivesMatter protests in Oakland. As we approached a police line someone shouted, "White people to the front!"

    9. Sexual Paranoia Strikes Academe
    10. “[GWTW] is in part about social media, and the way social media works,” says Place. “And social media is an aesthetic medium. What happens when you have overt antagonism or antagonistic content, on social media? On the surface, it’s so much based on affinity, and liking, and following, and a sense of community. But at the same token, the only way to consistently affirm your community is by having something to rally against. And then we can find out who our friends really are. It’s predicated on [the fact that] we all think the same thing. We don’t go to social media to be confronted by things we don’t understand or don’t agree with, which is maybe why we go to museums, or conferences, or universities. Do we really want museums and galleries, especially museums, to be curating based upon what people know they already like?”

      I would hire Place as a social media product designer. This paragraph reflects deeper thinking about social media than most people I know who create the platforms.

    11. It’s the nature of Twitter to not research further, we all know, but if that nature is influencing the way we run museums, school lectures, and conferences, the future might be more bleak than any of us dared to predict.

      It would be worth interrogating what it is about "the nature of Twitter" that makes this so.

      I think it has to do with the intersection of a number of things:

      • 140 character limit
      • Broadcast and re-broadcast that de-couples the Tweet from the authorial context
      • Sub-tweeting and shaming as attire and slacktivism

      I'm sure that's only the surface.

    12. “AWP has removed Vanessa Place from the AWP Los Angeles 2016 Subcommittee. We did so after taking into consideration the controversy her Twitter feed has generated. Place has been tweeting the text of Gone with the Wind and using a photograph of Hattie McDaniel as the profile picture. The context of this and similar work is explained by a few literary theorists and advocates of conceptual poetry, such as Jacob Edmond and Brian M. Reed. AWP believes in freedom of expression. We also understand that many readers find Vanessa Place’s unmediated quotes of Margaret Mitchell’s novel to be unacceptable provocations, along with the images on her Twitter page. AWP must protect the efficacy of the conference subcommittee’s work. The group’s work must focus on the adjudication of the 1,800 submitted proposals, not upon the management of a controversy that has stirred strong objections and much ill-will toward AWP and the subcommittee. Perpetuating the controversy would not be fair to the many writers who have submitted the proposals.”

      "Unmediated"?

      That depends on where you're looking. Here we have a poet, with their own history and an established dialogue with race, transcribing in a completely different medium than the original text, surrounded by controversy. How in hell can this be said to be "unmediated"?

    1. Consumer loans can be a fundamentally risky business even for a company with a reputation for deftly managing risk.

      Apparently it's considered deft to package up risky debt and then have the American and European taxpayers foot the bill when it goes south.

    1. depending on the degree of concavity of utility, which also can be interpreted in an aggregate model as the degree of aversion to income inequality in society.

      This is always the kicker in policy questions and where rational people can actually disagree. People have different valuations of the same moral ideals. This is why I periodically try to imagine the basis of my morality space and evaluate to what extent it is orthonormal.

    2. On average, each cash - using household pays $1 49 to card - using households and each card - using h ousehold receives $1, 133 from cash users every year. Because credit card spending and rewards are positively correlated with household income, the payment instrument transfer also induces a regressive transfer from low - income to high - income households in g eneral

      It is a persistent challenge to act in the interest of the group in lieu of one's own interest in absence of a guarantee against coordination failure. It should be widely recognized as an important virtue to do so.

    1. If you honestly believe you have no incentive to look up product information because you trust the government to take care of that, then you're about ten times more statist than I am, and I'm the guy writing the Non-Libertarian FAQ.

      Right. When libertarians argue that behavior would change in the absence of a state you must remember to check whether it's reasonable to assert that this is proof that the state works to some extent. You must realize that if the ends are the same you are then confronted with a question about the costs of the means or the universality of the value of those ends. Libertarians often insist that the universality assumption is over-applied in states to the point of oppressing the dissenters, burdening them with the socialized costs. In reality, there are things societies can largely agree on.

  2. Jun 2015
    1. Most people reading this will already be fairly tolerant. But there is a step beyond thinking of yourself as x but tolerating y: not even to consider yourself an x. The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you.

      The only counter-argument that comes to mind for me didn't form itself until I had read this last paragraph a few times.

      If your identity marker connotes tolerance then it hopefully has the opposite effect. Insofar as the experience of marginalization promotes empathy such identities might be good evidence for intelligence, and I do think individuals who feel oppressed or marginalized tend to empathize with others who suffer for different, marginalized identities.

      These identities will only breed stupidity if the individual feels a competition for scarce resources that overwhelms their empathy, whence the perniciousness of the belief in zero sum attention economics as a greater threat to activism than inaction, ignorance, and exhaustion.

    1. But these studies on the halo effect of attractiveness, should make us suspicious that there may be a similar halo effect for kindness, or intelligence.

      You can identify your halos and pitchforks. These are the attributes that cause you to be most easily and unconsciously drawn into the halo effect and they are known as implicit biases.

    1. Gilbert, Tafarodi and Malone's paper was entitled "You Can't Not Believe Everything You Read". This suggests —to say the very least—that we should be more careful when we expose ourselves to unreliable information, especially if we're doing something else at the time. Be careful when you glance at that newspaper in the supermarket.

      I wonder if this accounts for the bad design of pseudoscience publications.

    1. You should suspect motivated stopping when you close off search, after coming to a comfortable conclusion, and yet there's a lot of fast cheap evidence you haven't gathered yet—Web sites you could visit, counter-counter arguments you could consider, or you haven't closed your eyes for five minutes by the clock trying to think of a better option. You should suspect motivated continuation when some evidence is leaning in a way you don't like, but you decide that more evidence is needed—expensive evidence that you know you can't gather anytime soon, as opposed to something you're going to look up on Google in 30 minutes—before you'll have to do anything uncomfortable.

      Keeping these suspicions in mind, how should we improve agile decision making?

    1. I don't claim to understand the thought processes that would drive someone to do this, but given the rarity and extremity of suicide, we can assume for every worker who goes ahead with suicide for work-related reasons, there are a hundred or a thousand who feel miserable but not quite suicidal.
    2. The naive economist who truly believes in the equal bargaining position of labor and capital would find all of these things very puzzling.

      One of my most astute economist friends once opened my mind to the obvious fact that unions are the result of workers having power rather than the cause. I say this is "obvious" because an organization is created by its constituents and not the other way around. It's easy to forget, when one is entangled in rhetoric that treats unionization as an independent optimization goal, that the proper goal of the economic planner is a balance of power between capital and labor.

    1. But the marriage equality movement has been curiously hostile to polygamy, and for a particularly unsatisfying reason: short-term political need.

      I hope that the focus on prohibition by the drug policy reform movement helps sidestep a similar effect happening with cannabis.

    1. Laboratory analysis of those samples found compounds that are toxic to humans, including acetone and methylene chloride — powerful industrial solvents — along with oil.

      In what concentrations? "Toxic" is pretty meaningless.

    1. Enter the Daily Mail website, MailOnline, and CNN online. These sites display news stories with the main points of the story displayed as bullet points that are written independently of the text. “Of key importance is that these summary points are abstractive and do not simply copy sentences from the documents,” say Hermann and co.

      Someday, maybe projects like Hypothesis will help teach computers to read, too.

    1. Although it currently shows Google AdSense ads and Taboola’s content marketing, Ottman said those will soon go away. Point-selling will be the main revenue source.

      I find Taboola to be so awful that I question the judgment of these people for ever having used it.

    2. Users earn points by doing things on the network — uploading, voting, referring, posting, or commenting about content. Users vote on whether they like content or not by swiping, with the most-liked content driven to the top of charts. You can post content to your entire Channel, which is Minds’ term for your fans. To post outside your Channel, you need to use points, like offering 10 of your points to another user for 10 views of your post on their Channel. Points can be also be exchanged with Minds for site-wide sharing.

      The absolute worst incentives. Engagement generates reach? This network is going to amplify the people who already participate the most. This is absolutely upside down. This is rewarding the powerful with more power.

    1. Rather, it's to focus on a university system that treats students as customers and faculty as the interchangeable means of production. If you care about academic freedom, care about that.

      Brilliantly put. This addresses my previous annotation by pointing out that students are not to be coddled, they are not "always right" like the proverbial customer, and that instructors play a vital role in determining and promoting an accepting and broad discourse.

      These principles should encourage us to approach with caution when scandals erupt. Institutions need to be able to respond candidly and with reasoned thought to their students' concerns.

    2. If adjuncts and junior faculty members feel insecure enough to censor their teaching or work, then that's a problem in their relationship with their universities, not in their relationships with their students.

      I think this is basically true, but does ignore the fact that administrations are somewhat responsive to students and if students are driving the adoption of policies that result in dismissals then the student politics are a problem. It's not easy to unravel all this.

  3. May 2015
    1. The prevailing question after reading this is simply: what technical challenges are ahead for this? Do we need software that helps us convert between currencies issued by different people? Obviously the mining part has to be thrown out and replaced, so that leads me to ask: what are the building blocks that exist and what doesn't exist yet and needs to be built?

    2. I’m intrigued by the notion that social networks could eventually replace our currency. If economic growth lives up to the hype, we’ll all live like the rich someday, so why not print our own money, too?

      I've often thought that my ideal currency would actually be a multitude of currencies, each person minting their own (or even multiple), but I don't see at all what this has to do especially with art.

      I think the point being made is that art has valued tied to the reputation of the artist. Mostly true, perhaps, but probably not unique to art. Credit scores seem not dissimilar except that individuals aren't lenders. Familiar social dynamics like "friendship" and "trust" might capture what we're talking about, though.

    3. we can build a cryptocurrency where each digital coin is unique and singular, just like the art hoarded in Basel and Singapore.

      Is there a crypto-currency that doesn't do this? Each coin is unique. I would think that's a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for preventing double spending.

    1. However, it will take time to inform FBI field offices of the new guidance, and there are certain types of information that it won't be able to get.

      Yes, that's the whole freaking point. They shouldn't be able to get this information.

    2. a never-used program to monitor potential "lone wolf" suspects who haven't been tied to terrorist groups

      How are we supposed to believe this hasn't been used when the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is widely regarded by the public to have lied to Congress under oath about surveillance programs?

    1. Or more plainly: attention on social media both compensates for and is the logical endpoint of commoditized care work.

      I don't fully understand this but it was the most intriguing sentence in the piece for me. Are our social media services doing the care work of attending to our need for in-control socialization? Are they our new safe spaces that replace the therapist's office? I also wonder about whether people who work in a caring capacity have a unique relationship with social media.

    1. Broockman has ideas about how to reform things. He thinks so-called “post-publication peer review” — a system which, to oversimplify a bit, makes it easier to evaluate the strength of previously published findings — has promise.
    1. Dr. John Unsworth, Vice Provost, Chief Information Officer, University Librarian, and Professor of English at Brandeis University (!), opened the Summit by offering a scholarly definition of annotation in its traditional forms.

      I really like the way the slide pictured describes annotation. I've sometimes confused people by insisting that an annotation is the juxtaposition of commentary and referent. Yet I believe the placement is critical and what distinguishes annotation from general reference.

      The Web Annotations data model seems to agree with this perspective. The Annotation itself is neither the note nor its referent, but a resource linking the two.

    1. Just to focus on the differences between lambdas and Procs, a lambda acts more like a real method. What does that mean?

      Apparently it means a lambda is less ($@(#$ insane.

    2. When you create your own function to accept procs, the guts need to change a little bit because you'll need to use #call instead of yield inside (because which proc would yield run if you had more than one?).

      Too much special!! Why the special cases? Just so that one can type yield instead of invoking a function and naming the argument?

    3. Use that block of code (now called a Proc) as an input to a function by prepending it with an apersand &

      Oh, Ruby. This is entirely too confusing. Why is the ampersand required to signify that something is passed as a block, especially given that it has a type (Proc)? What does it mean if the ampersand isn't used?

    1. You should pay for that pleasure, you slut.

      This relates to the part, below, about prosperity and education. Pervasive attitudes in our culture are that labor is inherently good, fun is inherently sinful and done at a cost, and that the wealthy don't have to care about such things as good or evil because they aren't subject to the same scrutiny.

    2. There are no female CEOs pouring millions into reproductive rights or threatening to relocate their businesses when a state guts access to abortion.

      Is this true? I'm sure it's largely the case, especially as there are fewer female CEOs overall, but I thought I remembered one. I thought the CEO of the Body Shop, Anita Roddick, had poured money into Planned Parenthood or something like this, but now I can't find any citation to that effect.

    3. Improvements in birth control mean that prosperous, educated women with private doctors can control their fertility pretty well—certainly better than women who rely on public clinics—and if they need an abortion, they can get one.

      This is the most important part in this article, to me. That women of privilege actually can ignore abortion much of the time means that it's not only men who are passively oblivious.

    4. Reproductive rights, though, are inescapably connected to the larger project of feminism

      I think this is true of marriage equality, too.

    5. Marriage equality costs society nothing and takes no power away from anyone. No one has been able to argue persuasively that your gay marriage hurts my straight marriage. But reproductive rights come with a price tag: Government funding is inevitably involved.

      I find this point weak. We tax married couples differently. There's government subsidy in both.

    1. What we need is an ethos that comes to terms with contemporary, industrialized food, not one that dismisses it, an ethos that opens choices for everyone, not one that closes them for many so that a few may enjoy their labor, and an ethos that does not prejudge, but decides case by case when natural is preferable to processed, fresh to preserved, old to new, slow to fast, artisanal to industrial.

      That we may judge each thing on its own merits is the most important part of this to me and the source of all my frustration with efforts to paint with broad and dull brushes, such as GMO labeling.

    2. If we urge the Mexican to stay at her metate, the farmer to stay at his olive press, the housewife to stay at her stove instead of going to McDonald’s, all so that we may eat handmade tortillas, traditionally pressed olive oil, and home-cooked meals, we are assuming the mantle of the aristocrats of old.
    1. Brelo had told state investigators that he did not recall getting on the hood of the car. At trial, a state forensic scientist testified that he matched photos of footprints on the Malibu to impressions made of Brelo’s boots.

      Here we have an ex-Marine firing 49 rounds into a car after being told on the radio that the people inside don't seem to be armed and he cannot even recall doing it, yet a judge is going to let him walk?

      This person can't remember jumping up onto the hood of a car and firing 15 rounds through the windshield. Are we seriously going to let this person continue to walk around the streets with a gun?

    2. “The state did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant Michael Brelo knowingly caused the deaths of Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams,” said Judge John P. O’Donnell in his ruling, “because the essential element of causation was not proved for both counts.”

      Fuck this. If you fire 49 bullets into a car it doesn't matter if the people are dead already, the bullets are clearly intended to kill them if they aren't.

    1. I find it disturbing that the example "learning" tool is a classified ad.

    1. Not really what you'd expect from a mechanical bureaucratic institution.

      Unless, you know, you aren't a total fucking cynic.

    2. In other words, it's not wrong to say organic food is "healthier" than non-organics.

      Yes. Yes, it is.

    3. while switching to organic foods can be good for you insofar as doing so helps you avoid nasty things like chemicals and additives

      You're really just opting for a different class of chemicals and additives.

    1. At times he seems to address himself directly to the nouveaux philosophes, confronting a caricature of his own thought on “security”: he criticizes right- and left-wing “state phobia” as eliding, “thanks to some play on words,” the difference between social security and concentration camps; “the requisite specificity of analysis is diluted.”

      Oh, certainly the same thing ;).

    1. For a long time, we thought it was probably dopamine, which we knew played a role in neurotoxicity (dopamine is another neurotransmitter, like serotonin, that is released by MDMA.) However, more recent research has discovered that dopamine’s main role in promoting MDMA neurotoxicity is by increasing body temperature: significant overheating is a very important factor in whether or not MDMA neurotoxicity will occur.

      Last I looked at this research it was the differing rates of serotonin and dopamine creation that was hypothesized to lead to toxicity from dopamine in the absence of serotonin to balance it.

      Sounds like it's more complicated than that.

    1. Rap Genius, Climate Feedback and Fold all show great specific use cases for annotation. Annotation at scale is a noble goal, but showing real world applications will be critical to embedding the practice around the web.

      100% yes.

    1. I launched a Speechmatics transcription of my interview with Ward Cunningham when I began writing this column; we'll find out how it went when I'm done

      Do update with the results!

  4. Apr 2015
    1. and you must delete each annotation individually, by hand

      Excess detail. What does "by hand" mean?

    1. This post discusses the relative merits and dangers of different compositions of message authentication and encryption.

    1. The children who thought that having a black president, despite the fact that he was, on domestic policy, worse than EVERY other democratic nominee, are why the US is so fucked right now.

      Wow. Hadn't heard it put so bluntly before.

    1. A further notification was then sent to commanding officers stating that references to enemy had now been changed to “criminal elements” in guard communications.

      Still heavily problematic. We're talking about citizens exercising their first amendment rights.

    1. Mediocre article. Attempts to cover a topic that is fraught with pseudoscience and snake oil. Points for actually linking to studies and consulting MDs. Most of the problem with this article is the title, which is very disconnected from the actual content, since nothing in the content actually discusses removing glyphosate from your body.

    2. Here are 10 detoxifying techniques which have solid science behind them

      The end of this article is a mixed bag of good and not so good recommendations. Some of the things below have or are being studied for potentially beneficial uses, others (like colonic cleanses) have been abandoned by the medical community for decades.

    3. “How do we engage in this lifelong process of detoxification? As a foundation, this involves eating healthy food. This means organic, GMO-free food,” he said in an email interview. “Herbs such as cilantro help us to eliminate metals such as lead and mercury,” he said. “Herbs like turmeric and garlic help to lower the levels of inflammation that are often the underlying causes [of chronic diseases.]”

      It's hard for me to take seriously an MD who acknowledges "detoxification" is a thing. Here's a recent Guardian article that talks about the nonsense rhetoric of "toxins" and "detoxification": http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/05/detox-myth-health-diet-science-ignorance

    4. In addition to their deadly chemicals, studies note Monsanto’s GMOs increase human allergy susceptibility, suppress the immune system and possibly cause autism and cancer.

      Here's a criticism of the referenced study on skeptoid: https://skeptoid.com/blog/2013/05/04/roundup-and-gut-bacteria/

      One of the studies the references study cites was actually retracted: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

    5. Older chemicals, especially pesticides, also remain in the human body — like DDT, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxin, heptachlor, chlordane, Aldrin and Dieldrin. They impair the endocrine, reproductive, circulatory, immune, and central nervous systems.

      Which is why some of these are controlled or banned.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT#U.S._ban

    6. Last year senior Monsanto scientist Dan Goldstein attempted to quell fears over the mega company’s chemical pesticide RoundUp poisoning people’s bodies over time.

      Roundup is an herbicide, not a pesticide.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate

    1. “Honestly,” said Wiener, “it is perplexing to me why people are so insistent that local communities should not have control. The behavior we see on (our) street is a very localized issue. We should be able to address it.

      Our local communities passed sit-lie, Scott. Not only that, but on the very same ballot was a measure that would increase foot patrols.

      We can't, from one side of our mouths, say that we should have local control, and then from the other side that police don't get discretion in how they address use of public space but instead must enforce a law like sit-lie.

      Our local community got it wrong. If we can get it right at the state level, then fine.

      I don't care at which level it happens, I care that our laws encode compassion.

    2. And it gives police a tool to discourage bad behavior.

      Who decides that this behavior is "bad"?

    1. A better way to think about a food’s value might be to think about how a gallon of water could translate into calories that most efficiently feed us humans.

      Calories was exactly my first thought when I saw the chart where it was originally published.

    1. At the same time, the bombings also sparked investigations into whether authorities could have somehow prevented the attacks and whether authorities had made mistakes in responding to them.

      Shutting down the entire city was a mistake.

    2. His influences included Al Qaeda propagandist Anwar al-Awlaki, prosecutors said.

      Yet he is described above as "self-radicalized". Nonsensical!

    3. self-radicalized

      What is the "self-" qualifier doing here? Is this useful for some reason? No one exists in a bubble.

      Here's one article about the term: http://aclj.org/jihad/self-radicalized-islamic-terrorist

    4. a jury will decide whether to sentence him to death.

      I thought Massachusetts eliminated the death penalty.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Massachusetts

    1. Seemingly superficial differences in accent and word choice will mark her for life–not just as an English child, but as an English child with a certain background and education, from a particular city. Each time she speaks, she will be judged by other English people. They will instantly and subconsciously classify her in a way that they cannot class American-English speakers like her father and me. So, whether we like it or not, we have to learn and pay attention to these distinctions ourselves, in order to make sure that our children don’t adopt accents or words that might hold them back.

      "Distinctions" being the key word, of course.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Distinction

    1. San Francisco's population density is 1,400 people per square kilometer. There are many beautiful, beloved cities throughout the world that manage to accommodate far greater density numbers

      So neat to see Barcelona on this list having just returned from spending a few days there in January. As I was walking through the streets there I was thinking to myself, "Wow, wouldn't it be amazing if San Francisco could have multi-story apartment buildings block after block like this. This feels like a real city!"

    1. Which world currency is currently experiencing among the most dramatic deflationary spirals anyone has ever seen? Bitcoin itself, the ‘existential threat to the liberal nation state’. 32 Any sane person putting their life’s savings into Bitcoin among all world cur - rencies right now is as foolish as a Dutch person buying tulip bulbs. That is because the problems with currencies actually aren’t formal, or mechanical, or algorithmic, despite what Bitcoin propagandists desperately want us to believe. They are social and political problems that can only be solved by political mechanisms. T
    2. Despite their frequent use of the word ‘democra - tization’, such efforts are profoundly anti-democratic, insisting that the introduction of devices and software by a self-identified technocratic elite trumps duly-enacted laws and law enforcement mechanisms, and that a kind of market – a market in adoption of such services – is the exclusive method society should use to judge the provision of these services.
    1. Yes, there were an absurd number of mistakes in Rolling Stone’s journalistic method, but like most events ostensibly about ethics in journalism, the kernel of the controversy is about politics, not journalism.

      Hahaha, yup. Ethics in journalism, indeed.

    1. There were actual politics at stake, and it would’ve been an ridiculously dangerous move to substitute identity affinities for political analysis.

      Yes!!! Reminds me of this quote from Graeber's "Democracy Project": https://instagram.com/p/tjcYY9Og32/?taken-by=tilgovi

    1. For targeted communities, there is little to no expectation of privacy from government or corporate surveillance. Instead, we are watched, either as criminals or as consumers. We do not expect policies to protect us. Instead, we’ve birthed a complex and coded culture—from jazz to spoken dialects—in order to navigate a world in which spying, from AT&T and Walmart to public benefits programs and beat cops on the block, is as much a part of our built environment as the streets covered in our blood.
    1. Set body copy as justified left, ragged right?

      I'm a huge fan of justified text. I don't know why a typography checklist would encourage "ragged right". I do understand that humans can sometimes make better decisions about stretching character spacing (or not) and breaking words with hyphens at line boundaries, but computers do pretty well and it's so nice.

    2. Limit line length to 350–550 pixels by splitting wide pages into two or more columns?

      Why would you measure line length in px rather than characters?

  5. Mar 2015
    1. The Hypothesis developer will be there coding on Annotator 2.0, the Open Annotation Data Model, and of course Hypothesis itself.

      This whole sentence might be unnecessary.

    2. The Hypothesis developer

      plural?

    3. --no matter what technology you're using!--

      Have an em-dash!!

    4. I Annotate is two days of annotation awesomeness! Did you know there are two more days available!

      Mind got tripped up on this, not detecting that "two more" meant two that are different from the first two. Maybe some conjunction or rewording could help.

    1. Goldmacher believes that building more market-rate housing will not improve affordability. He supports having rent control in Berkeley, 50 percent affordable housing requirements in all new projects, up from the city's current 10 percent affordable requirement, and stronger environmental reviews.

      I wonder where Goldmacher thinks the funding for the 50% affordable construction will come from if not the other 50% being market-rate. Perhaps he would like to volunteer his tax dollars at a higher rate? Maybe he has some secret way of increasing state or federal funding for affordable housing?

    2. "I think this is a front group" for developers, said Donald Goldmacher, an independent filmmaker and member of Save Shattuck Cinemas, which opposes the 2211 Harold Way project. "It's pro-development. It's not pro-tenant."

      Strange that people think pro-development is inherently not pro-tenant. Where does this message originate? What confusion of alignments happened to create this environment?

    1. The San Francisco Bay Area Renters Federation, a group of activists who believe more market-rate housing will alleviate high rents,

      Not "more market-rate"; more everything.

    1. One thing that I found annoying though, was that I had to keep changing the setting from private/only me to public for every annotation. Is it me, who hasn't found the key to unlock this default private setting?

      Hmmm. The setting is supposed to be sticky.

    1. Excellent guide for creating a fresh CoreOS image for AWS using Ext4 and OverlayFS.

      This is the future for CoreOS and should be more stable than btrfs.

  6. Feb 2015
    1. I am a PhD candidate in the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) group of Computer Science Department at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. I work in the CASCAD Lab, advised by Prof.Wai-Tat Fu. I also work closely with Prof. Bruce Schatz . My research interests broadly lie in the fields of human computer interaction (HCI), social computing, health informatics and cognitive science. Please see bio and projects for more details.
    1. "We provide half a billion dollars (annually) to the District. One would think they would be much more compliant with the wishes of Congress," Rep. Andy Harris, a Maryland Republican and one of the most vocal pot opponents, said in an interview Thursday.

      It's almost unbelievable to me that a representative can say something like this. It really speaks to how comfortable we've gotten with money politics.

    1. The disaggregation of news in the Internet age has inverted this relationship, and made news outlets hypersensitive to the interests of their readers. This is a positive development. It’s good that the media covers stories that its constituents are interested in and want to read about. It’s good when news outlets are connected to the communities they serve.

      I'm not so sure this is the case across the board. Our desires don't always serve us.

      I sometimes do want gatekeepers to prevent me from hurting myself.

      I don't know how to translate this into advice for the next generation of media, though.

    1. We welcome your submissions, and also any suggestions you have to make this experiment a success. We welcome your materials in any form--a link, attachment, whatever works for you. From there we’ll arrange things in an orderly fashion and invite submitters to review first before sending out to participants.

      I would actually just cut this whole paragraph and consolidate it with the one above. We have here two paragraphs saying essentially the same thing, repeating phrases like "we welcome".

    2. --a link, attachment, whatever works for you.

      em-dash And not sure the examples are helpful.

    3. also

      Strike "also". Maybe just strike the comma, too, and the "any".

      "We welcome your submissions and suggestions ..."

    4. turn around and provide an organized index back to participants

      "turn around" is a bit of a weird, casual phrase to me here. Maybe "collect it, we'll organize it and send it out to all the participants."

      ... or something.

    5. conference hashtag: #ianno15

      maybe "#ianno15 hashtag".

    6. — whatever

      maybe "or whatever else you think may be relevant."

    7. These

      This (material), rather than "these", methinks.

    8. --

      em-dash

    9. Our objective is to enhance the best part of what the event brings, focusing our time together on discussion, collaboration and networking, instead of in a heads-down receiving mode.

      I think that either "the best part of what the event brings" needs to come out, along with the comma after "networking" or the phrase "focusing ... networking" needs to be set off with em-dashes.

    10. Remove all the extra spaces after all the periods. That's an artifact of typewriters not kerning.

    1. Ironically, the same colleague who has criticized Calle 24's recommendations, recently introduced similar development controls on what he calls "monster houses" being built in his own neighborhood. Free marketeers often try and stop poor communities from having a voice in development, but are happy to exchange their 'supply and demand' hat for a nimby hat when it comes to protecting their own backyard.

      This is true and needs to be called out.

    2. Federal HUD housing and state-funded affordable projects make up the majority of our affordable housing stock, with a smaller portion built using city dollars and fees on market-rate housing. Housing advocates have said for decades that if we don't prioritize building affordable housing on San Francisco's limited land we'll face a serious housing crisis. After years of deregulation and general apathy for building affordable housing, here we are.

      I think a lot of that stock was built when federal funding was higher. Now it's not. So what do we do?

      Also, what deregulation?

    3. Free marketeers are claiming that if we build enough luxury housing it will eventually trickle down and turn into housing for the poor and middle class. This is the failed policy of Reaganomics at its worst.

      The value of a unit depreciates with time (normalized for any trend in overall prices). That's a very different scenario than taxes.

    4. If the invisible hand of simple supply-side economics worked, then the overwhelming demand for affordability would lead developers to build housing that actually meets the needs of the majority of our residents. Unfortunately, affordable housing is difficult to build and sometimes more expensive to finance than high profit pied-à-terres and luxury apartments. In the last 7 years we've built over 23,000 luxury units, and only 1,200 units for middle class families.

      The issue with this paragraph is that it assumes regulation is not to blame for the high cost of affordable housing. It may well be the case that it is.

    1. The study also found that conspiracy theory posts are much more likely to be shared and liked by Facebook users.

      Much more likely than what?

    2. The researchers examined social media patterns for 1.2 million Facebook users and found that nearly 92 percent of those who engage with Italian conspiracy theory pages interact almost exclusively with conspiracy theory pages.

      Oh, no. No. Noooooo.

    1. ???

    2. var result = rf.search().search().search(); // result is 3rd instance of string

      This seems inconsistent with the spec above. Doesn't search return a RangeFinderResult rather than the RangeFinder for chaining?

    3. The promise resolves when the system has re-acquired necessary system resources.

      Should "re-acquired" be "released"? What's the intention here? Why would I suspend a search if it doesn't release some resources?

    4. in the upcoming section on magical ways to determine a confidence value on the results, probably something to do with the edit distance and how many criteria failed or something

      :-D

    5. The promise resolves when the system has re-acquired necessary system resources, or if a matching result is found.

      Should this be "and" instead of "or"? Why would the promise resolve just because resources are available, if the search hasn't actually moved forward?

    6. Returns the current search index position as a range.

      What is meant by "search index"? Is this like an implicit characterStart for a resume?

    7. I'm not sure it makes sense to have so many different ways to specify the beginning of the search: xpathSelector, querySelector, startRange, characterStart.

    8. The edit distance tolerance (in number of operations) between the supplied target text or markup attribute string and the candidate text content of the document.

      Does it make more sense to maybe have a threshold as a float from [0, 1]. It's less specific, but it might mean that whatever results we get are limited to those whose confidence would be >= this value. It becomes selector-dependent what this means but it's consistently ambiguous ;).

    9. DOMString

      Is DOMString the right type here? Is there a function type?

    10. A float in the range of 0 to 1, indicating of the closeness of the match with the given criteria, where 1 is a perfect match.

      Grammar here is a little wonky.

    11. Should the return object also contain the CSS and/or XPath selector that is the closest match for the selection? Can you get that easily from another Web Platform feature?

      I think not. The Range has start and end Elements. There's not only one way to address an Element in XPath or CSS and deciding which way to write that selector is maybe not obvious.

    1. information on if there are any annotations on the webpage

      I'm of the opinion that this information is superfluous and would like to see a UI treatment that is overall more passive. The only environment in which any indicator at all in the browser chrome seems important to me is one where Hypothesis is insufficiently quiet in the "on" state. If it's quiet enough, users will leave it on all the time.

      I simply don't see an important use case for knowing whether there are annotations ahead of reading. Annotations should generally become noticeable as one reads rather than before.

      If annotations are important to notice before having read the primary document it's worth asking why. If it's because the use case revolves explicitly around determining whether to read, it might make more sense to ask if we can't show this information before navigation! Why load the page just to be notified of annotations that tell me whether or not I want to read it. I should know before I navigate!

    1. For mobile we can’t use the desktop adder since Android and iOS present their own popup menus.

      Sites like Medium do as well. We may wish to consider that.

    2. This would be good for accessibility as screen readers won’t have to navigate the dom looking for the button.

      Nice point.

  7. Jan 2015
    1. And claims about the magical powers of tax cuts are often little more than a mask for the real agenda of crippling government by starving it of revenue.

      This part I absolutely agree with. However, most of these people would, I suspect, vociferously deny being anarchists, but also claim to be patriots. Perhaps it's worth asking why, if governance itself is not an issue, why these people seem to believe that government cannot scale. It's hard to govern large areas effectively, and in the public interest, but it's not clear that it's impossible.

    2. So will we see conservatives scaling back their claims about the magical efficacy of tax cuts as a form of economic stimulus? Of course not. If evidence mattered, supply-side economics would have faded into obscurity decades ago. Instead, it has only strengthened its grip on the Republican Party.

      While I think the idea was pretty awful, I do feel an urge to point out that this paragraph is pretty guilty of the same fallacy that opens this article, that of cherry-picking data. Kansas is not everywhere and it's not clear, without some more information not presented here, that we can generalize from it.

    1. There’s a certain anxiety in the VR community that surfaces in many conference panels and interviews with industry leaders: plenty of veterans are worried that this latest flowering of the technology will end with the same commercial disappointment that we saw in previous decades.

      Why do we care about whether it's a commercial success?

    1. problems that are real
    2. Yet policymakers all too often fail to fit remedies to the circumstances. Rust Belt cities require set-asides just like San Francisco, while Bay Area institutions such as Stanford hand out generous housing subsidies to new faculty, a measure that only serves to drive housing prices up, instead of searching for ways to increase supply.

      Yet the Bay Area rhetoric most often heard is that supply-side solutions will not succeed.

    3. Expressing concern about “gentrification” in those cities may simply be another way of expressing concern about rising housing prices.

      Those worried about gentrification may not actually be concerned about the lowest-income residents. They are concerned about themselves.

    4. I need a word for this: "the endless hand-wringing about bullshit problems which hinders discussion of real problems".

    5. One of the first people to explore this question in a sophisticated way was University of Washington economist Jacob Vigdor. In 2002, Vigdor examined what had happened in Boston between 1974 and 1997, a period of supposedly intense gentrification. But Vigdor found no evidence that poor people moved out of gentrifying neighborhoods at a higher than normal rate. In fact, rates of departure from gentrifying neighborhoods were actually lower.

      Lower!

  8. Dec 2014
    1. This is an article about the problems with unregulated markets, or markets regulated for the benefit of the wealthy. The headline is frustratingly negative and one has to read all the way to the bottom for proposed solutions, nearly all of which actually do involve building more housing (while regulating the market so that a large chunk of that is affordable).

    2. Creating a Workforce Housing Equity Fund: Tech companies taking advantage of tax breaks should pay into a Workforce Housing Equity Fund for building affordable housing as part of their Community Benefits Agreements.

      Now we're talking. Welcome the new wealth, tax the hell out of it, and re-invest that in equitable developments.

    3. Take the units by eminent domain for the public good and tie this to Section 8 tenants.

      Yes!

    4. Aggressively buying land: The City should buy as many developable sites as possible to reserve them for affordable housing. Land around transit hubs and other strategic locations should be rezoned for affordable housing.

      We should also be vigilantly opposing any development near transit hubs that has a significant amount of parking. There is no excuse for having parking in a luxury building near transit when there could be affordable units.

    5. Preserving existing affordable housing: The City needs to continue to work with State legislators to restrict the use of the Ellis Act for landlords who have owned the property for less than 5 years to discourage “flipping.”

      Yes. And San Francisco did just pass a tax on houses sold within 5 years of purchase. Good, work!

    6. So 30,000 units aren’t going to bring prices down to the level working class people can afford.

      Right. So build 100,000.

    7. Add that with many others with the same good fortune, so goes that the higher the average salary in a city, the higher the average cost of a house.

      Throughout this article a basic statistical reasoning error is made. The reasoning goes: the average cost is higher, so there is less affordable housing. Seriously affordable housing often comes with subsidies and income restrictions. It doesn't matter how much more expensive the high end is, that housing is still going to be affordable, and the people with high salaries cannot live there. The average price goes up, but the price of income-controlled housing does not, necessarily, go with it, because that price is controlled by regulation.

      Of course, the rates for affordable housing are pegged to a percentage of the media income, but if enough of the new building is affordable housing the median doesn't change.

      Affordable housing advocates should be fighting for lots of building because there are people who are not wealthy that want to move here, too, and there are not enough units for them, either. Not building accomplishes nothing for lower-income residents.

    8. Building doesn't happen if developers are forecasting they're going to lose money.

      This is why in a boom time we should be milking the developers for every last unit they're willing to build. When the inevitable bust happens, this will be our middle class housing stock. In fact, the more we build now, the cheaper each unit will be if demand does fall sharply. If things end up really bad, maybe the city can even pick up foreclosed buildings for cheap and turn around and make them into affordable housing.

    9. "If, let's just say, the tech economy slows down and people's incomes aren't going up and they're not getting big stock options," Engmann says, "they may be thinking well, 'For this unit I'm not going to pay $4,000. For this unit, I'll pay $3500.' But it's not going to go down to $1500. It's not going to happen."

      This person has never heard of Detroit.

    10. Myth 4: As long as you can upzone and deregulate, you can build and build to the point where prices will go down.

      Straw person arguments!!!

      Upzone and regulate!!

    11. If you increased the zoning on land that already has buildings on it, the property's owner needs a financial incentive to tear down what's there. Because of this barrier, past efforts have proven to be futile.

      Like building something bigger with rentable units? Upzoning creates the financial possibility that zoning is otherwise prohibiting the owner from realizing.

    12. The second reason upzoning won't make prices fall is that building costs go up the more storeys are added. Physics and building codes make it so that as buildings get taller, they go from wood construction (the cheapest), to concrete (more expensive), to steel (most expensive), says contractor Robert Carpenter in an email. So units in high-rise buildings aren't really cheaper to build.

      This cost curve just has several phases. Building up does mean that prices can be lower, up until the phase change where materials shift and architecture changes.

    13. If building costs were lower and incomes stayed high, developers would just make more profit.

      Only in an unregulated market is this true. So regulate it, stupid!

    14. Will the developer be able to make enough money at the end of the day after suffering all these costs? The reason so much development is happening in San Francisco is that the answer is "Yes!"

      Right. That means there is a margin. That margin could be reduced, such as by requiring more affordable units. As long as it doesn't go to zero, building will still happen.

    15. People argue that the cost of building in San Francisco, with all of its activists, environmental regulations, union labor and permitting hurdles, is making it so developers can only build luxury housing. If building costs were lower and the approval process was streamlined, developers would provide housing working class people could afford. But this reasoning assumes developers are going to pass on the savings. With so much demand at the high end of the market, they're just not going to.

      This reasoning does not have to assume developers will pass on the savings. San Francisco could instead use policy to regulate the number of affordable units. Streamlining the development process would lower the cost so that new building can still generate a return with a larger percentage of available units.

    16. "The fact that more market rate housing is built is not going to impact the demand at the lower income levels," Engmann says. "The trickle down effect doesn't work because all that housing will be taken up by people who can afford it higher."

      The "trickle down effect" doesn't have to "work" here. The purpose of building more housing is not to have the price of affordable housing be lower. It's to have the price of market-rate housing be lower. That will happen if you build more housing.

    17. The average techie can easily pay for an apartment that current tenants who are teachers, government workers, nurses or baristas can't afford.

      And without new buildings to rent, they will pay for the ones where the teachers, government workers, nurses and baristas are currently living.

      Or, new buildings could be built, leaving existing tenants to stay where they are.

    18. Landlords of existing properties and developers of new housing will charge as much as they can.

      However, there are limits on what you can charge for a piece of property. Being in a desirable location is not the only factor. If you have an old, small, wood building next to a large, new build luxury loft, guess which one is going to be cheaper?

    1. Some protesters also sat on a train track in Berkeley, blocking a train from moving, the San Francisco Bay Guardian reported.

      The Bay Guardian had already been shut down at the time of writing. The author was confused by out-of-date information in the bio of former Bay Guardian news editor Rebecca Bowe.

    1. However the Internet changes how governments work, I’m optimistic that it’s a good thing for governance.

      However, we have to be extremely wary of importing too many things from the technology world into governments. "Move fast and break things" is great when you can just roll out a patch, but not so good when it costs a generation their education or health care.

    2. Governance has to adapt to global catastrophes and individual suffering at the same time. It’s hard.
    1. Britain’s Coalition government is rushing through an anti-terrorism bill that would require universities to take action to stop students and staff from being drawn into terrorist activity. According to Home Secretary Theresa May, this would require higher education institutions to ban extremists from speaking on campus.

      That seems all kinds of problematic, to me. The government really should not be telling universities what speech to allow on their campuses. That's antithetical to liberal education, as far as I can tell.

  9. Nov 2014
    1. Paste: You guys are in San Francisco, right? I bet it’s good to be back. John Dieterich: Yeah, it’s great. We had a fun show last night at Great American Music Hall, and we hadn’t played there in a while. It was good.

      "Good" is a massive understatement. That show was outstanding. Opener Go Dark was also fabulous.

    1. I think the demand is so insatiable, and the out-of-town investment money so big, that we’ll end up building 50,000 pied a terres and second homes that will do very little to bring prices down to the level where a middle-class worker in one of the city’s biggest industries (government, health care, or hospitality) will be able to afford the rent.
      1. Requiring more affordable housing would make many of these units affordable. Of course.
      2. The result would be more density, which is better for small businesses because they get more customers.

      Of course, if the developers don't want to build housing at all, or not with those restrictions, then we can return to the other points of this article and play with zoning. Then go back to the steps above.

      Probably, we should do all the things. Because whether or not we can "solve" the housing "crisis" without a whole lot more density, I want density anyway. That's why I live in a city and not the suburbs.

    1. Funny how Corporate America loves the term “free market” except when they are under threat.

      Author misses the point here. Corporate America loves the term "free market" only when it is under threat. A "free market", as we know it, is anything but free. It is regulated into existence by "free trade" agreements and the like.

    1. Marijuana kills cancer cells in proportion to its dose and duration of treatment, researchers found, and whole plant cannabis rich in THC was more efficacious than pure, lab-grade THC alone.

      We clearly have a lot to learn about cannabinoids and terpenes. There are maybe medical breakthroughs to be made here, breakthroughs that have been delayed for decades by reactionary, draconian drug laws.

    1. The biggest trolls, assholes, and bullies set the trajectory of many controversies and start to distort our notion of what most people in the other tribes are like. It doesn't help that it's perversely satisfying to gaze at those other tribes, the ones with whom you did not associate yourself, and to imagine that they're inferior.
    1. If we believe in equality, if we believe in participatory democracy and participatory culture, if we believe in people and progressive social change, if we believe in sustainability in all its environmental and economic and psychological manifestations, then we need to do better than slap that adjective “open” onto our projects and act as though that’s sufficient or — and this is hard, I know — even sound.
    2. that the moments when students generate “education data” is, historically, moments when they come into contact with the school and more broadly the school and the state as a disciplinary system
    1. This is an ongoing attempt at an algorithmically-generated, readability-adjusted scatter-plot of the musical genre-space, based on data tracked and analyzed for 1306 genres by The Echo Nest. The calibration is fuzzy, but in general down is more organic, up is more mechanical and electric; left is denser and more atmospheric, right is spikier and bouncier.
    1. When we get to the point where someone sees the mere existence of a political conflict that requires us to criticize allies as a no-win scenario, something has gone very wrong. For the actual work of politics– convincing people to come over to our side in order to make the world a more just and equitable place– those politics have utterly failed. We have been talking about privilege theory for 30 years. We’ve been talking about intersectionality for 25 years. We’ve been getting into cyclical, vicious Twitter frenzies for a half decade. This is not working. And I doubt hardly anyone actually believes that this is working. They’re just having too much fun to stop.

      I've recently decided, for myself, that Twitter is not a viable platform for political discussions. I simply can't do it anymore. I spend more time getting derailed by confusion stemming from trying to be terse when discussing subtleties than I do actually discussing the issues I wanted to discuss.

    1. And he has in fact recently resigned form his job to spend more time coordinating GamerGate. Oh, and he declines to either stop violating his restraining order or stop seeking to have it removed.

      I can't find where he's supposedly violated his restraining order. I do see him refuse to stop fighting it. But that seems like it would be his legal right, which makes me a little bothered by its representation here.

    1. This criterion requires an independent security review has been performed within the 12 months prior to evaluation. This review must cover both the design and the implementation of the app and must be performed by a named auditing party that is independent of the tool's main development team. Audits by an independent security team within a large organization are sufficient. Recognizing that unpublished audits can be valuable, we do not require that the results of the audit have been made public, only that a named party is willing to verify that the audit took place.
    1. But to make the case for sex workers rights as functioning primarily to facilitate better care of children — rather than on rights and protections as intrinsic goods — is to accept the same gender confines prescribed by the activists so intent on reframing the majority of sex work as trafficking.
    2. But these features also make it ripe for conflict between sex worker activists and anti-trafficking activists who oppose sex work. One of the most frequent attacks on Twitter is that these activists are pimps pretending to be sex workers. This argument defeminizes sex workers into the masculine identity of a pimp and paints them as co-conspirators in trafficking. It’s a form of gendered shaming against female-identified sex workers that pits them over and against victimized women and girls
    1. Still, there are hints that, while the discussion of the group is still being framed, the bitcoin industry could assert itself in the process through greater involvement.

      "Hints"? That's the whole point. Participation is all there is. Do it.

  10. Oct 2014
    1. IT'S ABOUT THE THINGS YOU SAY AND DO AND HOW THAT PROPAGATES A POSITIVE SOCIAL EFFECT OR A NEGATIVE SOCIAL EFFECT. BUT JUST AS HULK HAS ARGUED MANY TIMES, WE HAVE SUCH A DIFFICULT TIME SEEING OURSELVES AS ANYTHING BUT A PERSON IN A MOMENTARY INTERACTION. AND SO WE ONLY LIKE TO DEBATE THE FAIRNESS OF THAT MYOPIC INTERACTION ITSELF. WE ARE SO DAMN BAD AT SEEING OURSELVES AS PART OF A LARGER TREND / SYSTEM. WE ARE SO BAD AT SEEING WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY ADVOCATING ON THE WHOLE.
    2. YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND HOW PROBLEMATIC THIS IS. IT'S ALMOST THOUGHT TO BE IMPOSSIBLE. WHAT HAS ESSENTIALLY HAPPENED IS THAT WE HAVE TAKEN A CULT BEHAVIORAL APPROACH TO DISCUSSION AND PHILOSOPHY - NORMALLY A REALLY DIFFICULT THING TO INSTILL INTO PEOPLE AND REQUIRES ISOLATION, DIRECT PROGRAMMING AND FULL-ON CULTURAL SEPARATION - AND TURNED IT INTO SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN CASUALLY LEARNED ON THE INTERNET'S PROVERBIAL STREETS THROUGH THE ORGANIC PROCESS OF BEING A PART OF VIDEO GAME'S MOST TOXIC SUBCULTURE. THIS IS ONE OF THE SCARIEST THINGS HULK HAS EVER SEEN.
    1. GitHub integration WordPress integration

      What is meant by "integration" in each of these?

    2. metrics on annotations/comments

      We should compare these asks with our own needs for monitoring our public service at Hypothes.is.

    1. Google Play's app review systems already check all apps for abuse of these access permissions.

      What if Google and I have a different definition of "abuse"?

    2. These days, apps typically access the Internet, so network communication permissions including the “full Internet access” permission have been moved out of the primary permissions screen.

      This used to be the easiest way to tell whether a free app that had no need for network included advertising. :(

    3. Simplified permissions on Google Play

      So simple it needs a whole site to explain it!

    1. “We should be building platforms to amplify the voices of women in tech, not to cater to the egos of men,” she said. “Men who want to help need to get the hell out of our way, basically. Because we're coming. And we don't need their support.”

      I think this is an immature stance that I cannot support. When you want to be treated with respect by most of the people around you it helps to demand mutual aid and cooperation from 50% of that population rather than telling them to fuck off.

    1. The US doesn’t contribute to this general correlation, with relatively low corruption levels.

      Oh, really?

    2. A few different people said that when a tip is low, they assume the customer is cheap or hurting for money, but when it’s high, they assume it’s because they did a great job serving the customer or because they’re likable (not that the customer is generous).
    1. However my opinion is that each designer is free to design a system as she or he wishes, there is just one rule: say the truth, so Redis Cluster documents its limits and failure modes clearly in the official documentation.

      Respect!