In his “On the gradual fabrication of thoughts while speaking,” Kleist was in turn musing on Immanuel Kant’s metaphor of the teacher as the midwife at the birth of the student’s thought. When stuck in developing a thought, Kleist recommends, find an acquaintance to talk at. No responses are required. The mere presence of the silent interlocutor, and even more so the imminent threat of losing their attention during lengthy stretches of boredom or incoherence will trigger, or so Kleist claims, the “fabrication of my idea in reason’s workshop.”

Media theorist Markus Krajewski has devoted a book specifically to the paper machinery of cards and catalogs. He traces the origins of this machinery back to sixteenth-century attempts at indexing books, and through the twists and turns of library technology in Europe and the U.S. over the following centuries.

Ideas have a history, but so do the tools that lend disembodied ideas their material shape −− most commonly, text on a page. The text is produced with the help of writing tools such as pencil, typewriter, or computer keyboard, and of note-taking tools such as ledger, notebook, or mobile phone app. These tools themselves embody the merging of often very different histories. Lichtenberg’s notebooks are a good example, drawing as they do on mercantile bookkeeping, the humanist tradition of the commonplace book, and Pietist autobiographical writing (see Petra McGillen’s detailed analysis).

As Friedrich Nietzsche famously conceded to his friend Heinrich Köselitz a century later, “You are right — our writing tools take part in the forming of our thoughts.”

Ruminant machines: a twentieth-century episode in the material history of ideas

There are rumors Pascal wrote the Pensées on notecards, and pinned these cards to a wall, connecting related thoughts with yarn. An early example of hypertext?

But “humane technology” is precisely the sort of pleasant sounding but ultimately meaningless idea that we must be watchful for at all times. To be clear, Harris is hardly the first critic to argue for some alternative type of technology, past critics have argued for: “democratic technics,” “appropriate technology,” “convivial tools,” “liberatory technology,” “holistic technology,” and the list could go on.

DM gives you simple but/and powerful tools to mark up, annotate and link your own networked collections of digital images and texts. Mark up your image and text documents with highlights that you can then annotate and link together. Identify discreet moments on images and texts with highlight tools including dots, lines, rectangles, circles, polygons, text tags, and multiple color options. Develop your projects and publications with an unlimited number of annotations on individual highlights and entire image and text documents. Highlights and entire documents can host an unlimited number of annotations, and annotations themselves can include additional layers of annotations. Once you've marked up your text and image documents with highlights and annotations, you can create links between individual highlights and entire documents, and your links are bi-directional, so you and other viewers can travel back and forth between highlights. Three kinds of tools, entire digital worlds of possible networks and connections.

He wrote that "[e]lite professional groups ... have come to exert a 'radical monopoly' on such basic human activities as health, agriculture, home-building, and learning, leading to a 'war on subsistence' that robs peasant societies of their vital skills and know-how. The result of much economic development is very often not human flourishing but 'modernized poverty', dependency, and an out-of-control system in which the humans become worn-down mechanical parts."[13] Illich proposed that we should "invert the present deep structure of tools" in order to "give people tools that guarantee their right to work with independent efficiency."[34]

the need to develop new instruments for the reconquest of practical knowledge by the average citizen.

The idea of a purely linear text is a myth; readers stitch together meanings in much more complex ways than we have traditionally imagined; the true text is more of a network than a single, fixed document.

We believe good tools lead to excellent creations.

Scenario

Scenario 1

What if the best tools for thought have already been discovered? In other words, perhaps the 1960s and 1970s were an unrepeatable golden age, and all we can expect in the future is gradual incremental improvement, and perhaps the occasional major breakthrough, at a decreasing frequency?

Put another way, many tools for thought are public goods. They often cost a lot to develop initially, but it’s easy for others to duplicate and improve on them, free riding on the initial investment. While such duplication and improvement is good for our society as a whole, it’s bad for the companies that make that initial investment. And so such tools for thought suffer the fate of many public goods: our society collectively underinvests in them, relative to the benefits they provide

Principle #1: Writing is not the outcome of thinking; it is the medium in which thinking takes place

One need arose quite commonly as trains of thought would develop on a growing series of note cards. There was no convenient way to link these cards together so that the train of thought could later be recalled by extracting the ordered series of notecards. An associative-trail scheme similar to that out lined by Bush for his Memex could conceivably be implemented with these cards to meet this need and add a valuable new symbol-structuring process to the system.

We refer to a way of life in an integrated domain where hunches, cut-and-try, intangibles, and the human "feel for a situation" usefully co-exist with powerful concepts, streamlined terminology and notation, sophisticated methods, and high-powered electronic aids.

With that said, the term “tools for thought” has been widely used since Iverson’s 1950s and 1960s work An account may be found in Iverson’s Turing Award lecture, Notation as a Tool of Thought (1979). Incidentally, even Iverson is really describing a medium for thought, the APL programming language, not a narrow tool. introducing the term. And so we shall use “tools for thought” as our catch all phrase, while giving ourselves license to explore a broader range, and also occasionally preferring the term “medium” when it is apt.

What I think we're lacking is proper tooling, or at least the knowledge of it. I don't know what most people use to write Git commits, but concepts like interactive staging, rebasing, squashing, and fixup commits are very daunting with Git on the CLI, unless you know really well what you're doing. We should do a better job at learning people how to use tools like Git Tower (to give just one example) to rewrite Git history, and to produce nice Git commits.

I mean it's just a pain to go in and I'm used to it now, but to go in on, you know, the different exchanges and each one has, has to be input different whether it's be typed in manually, whether you have to switch back and forth to look at the order book and Gemini or where you can copy and paste from below in Bittrex

The only one little personal issue and this could just be me not anyone else's did the damn alarm system on trading view, just not a fan of. But everything else is great.

e website. One thing I do love that you guys have the trading view doesn't have or doesn't have a good layout for in the charting, well it's still, it's still coming soon, but the order book and the trade history are really important to me.

Basically, I will definitely take a look at the total market cast, um, and the alt coin market cap. So I go to queen signals.trade, which is a neat little tool. And uh, they basically pull data from coin market cap. So I think it's the only site I know of where you can look at the total market cap.

well, I was thinking like you're talking about sentiment. Is there some type of sentiment tracker? I mean, I don't know. I'm sure that's super difficult technically to do, but that would intrigue people.

but I do you script on trading view. So treating you is great. Not only for the charts, but they also have an idea section and a script section.

I'm trading these who has these like how to videos, video tutorials and they really go in to the nitty gritty. I think they also have like a Wiki fac or like a wiki tutorial that is just like a whole encyclopedia of trading view and have every indicator you want, you click it and it expands and you can read about everything

Yeah, I mean, it really, it when I use the most trading view is 100% open all the time. So important

books. You know, I don't know if it's the Mac interface thing, but it's very buggy.

I just chose it and I paid and it was only like, I want to say like 30 bucks a month maybe. I Dunno. And that was also during the bull run when I had a lot more crypto money and I was just like, whatever. I'll buy it invested in my, uh, in my education and tools.

say try to focus on something that's really gonna drive you away from the competition, that people need. Because like I pay for multiple tools.

gether or going back into, three commas and seeing what hit. Cause they track all that information and will tell you when it's sold, how much money you made, the bitcoin value and in USD and you'll be able to kind of see what levels of hit.

I just don't like buying on there. So if I don't have to go into the application, i prefer not to. [inaudible] to Coinbase pro is also, it's poorly set up in my opinion. I don't know why i use it, but usually I'm just going in there to withdraw money.

Coinagy I actually still usually prefer to use to buy on Bittrex because I'm usually signed into Coinagy for the simpllicity. And if I have money in multiple areas, I can do it all from one platform. And because I just, I hate Bittrex. They redid their entire platform. I think they dropped the ball

Purchasing. And then once I've bought into an asset, I will establish all my sale targets and stops in three commas.

Um, and from a charting perspective it's better than coinagy because it allows you to put alerts on more things than just price action.

Tradingview, I pay for because I want to have alerts on specific coins and you don't have the functionality and the free version.

A lot of the tools I've been using the free versions because I haven't gotten to the point where, uh, I'm knowledgeable on how to maximize its value and therefore I don't pay for it because my knowledge is lacking.

um, so crypto compare as it is a good place to find the volumes

Whereas three commas is more structured that if you wanted to exit a position it would do so, but it be a market order and the would obviously bring with it a larger fees.

Um, three commas does that as well because it allows you to put in your targets, which is great cause it, you know, it auto sells it for you and then you can go back and look at it.

But then when I kept getting, you know, uh, burned on my stops not hitting because they just moved too fast and the limits didnt fill or the orders on the flip side didn't sell.

That's the one benefit of coinagy. You know, where I can actually plug in all the APIs for all the exchanges I work with and then basically operate from, from one application.

An example would be three commas, my main use case for it has been the market orders

hich is a reason why I would use, you know, a charting solution, which would be a tradingview or coinagy.

right. But if I have one trade that sells at the proper say private level or protects my ass, you know, and uh, and a stop loss scenario, the, the monthly subscription, you know, usually ends up paying for itself at them, the matter of one trade.

um, profit off of them or protect my do

market order functionality, which a lot of exchanges don't have

25 Important Apps And Digital Learning Tools For University Students

Top 10 Tools For The Digital Classroom

14 Oct 2016 18:57:49 UTC

14 Oct 2016 18:57:49 UTC