"Communitarian"

Factors that affect power.

Recommendations from Cohen about choosing the effect size when doing a power analysis.

Obtaining the necessary numbers to do a power analysis

Power analysis definition

Capital equals self-valorizing value. The "self" relates to labor-power qua capital purchased by the capitalist realized in the process of production. Therefore, "capital is money capital is commodities," as it uses, realizes, and incorporates money and the commodity of labor.

I appreciate your acknowledgement of "students had the power".... You didn't "empower" them. You gave them a space to use the power they already have to do this kind of work.

Sean Morris Michael offers some questions to consider in critically examining the notion of the educational conference.

I’m a little lost by her but even more intrigued. I think with me not understanding the dialect it makes me imagine more and vision what she speaks about. Her is very free and geeked with passion. I might be wrong but I feel like she uses the word “bosums” a lot maybe it’s her favorite word. But in this poem she rights about a painter and their job of creating beautiful work. I think her mind and words a genius because she uses them in such a powerful but still free way.

Please respond to these two questions. Please use the assigned reading to build up and substantiate your views and analysis.

Ultimately Audrey Watters rescinded the Creative Commons license on her website, though I don’t think she ever mentioned specifically why she made that change (nor does she need to publicly state a reason) though it may have had something to do with annotations and/or harassment she experienced at the time.

I do remember thinking at the time she was looking at those decisions that in some sense by allowing annotations on her site, she was providing a platform and distribution for others to potentially harass her.

Some pieces of that extended conversation:

https://boffosocko.com/2017/05/10/un-annotated-by-audrey-watters/

https://blog.jonudell.net/2017/06/27/annotating-thoughts-on-annotation/

Not just purple ink, but most likely Tyrian purple which was a signifier of royalty and power owing to the incredible cost to manufacture the dye. The annotation itself may have shown it's own power, but the color it was done in added even more subtle social power to those who would have read it.

hard to believe

The practices and institutions that govern our daily lives

The decision did not favour his financial interests and has been misreported by the journalist. In fact, Mr Petch was pressuring an inexperienced General Manager to attend to an entitlement affecting multiple councillors. The entitlement - reimbursement of legal expenses incurred in legal action initiated by council - is not discretionary, but must be extended to councillors incurring costs in carrying out their civic duties in good faith. The entitlement is explicitly coded in the NSW Local Government Act and NSW Office of Local Government expenses guidelines for serving councillors and Mayor's. No evidence was submitted that the affected councillors had acted in a manner other than "good faith". Therefore the only logical conclusion that could be drawn for delaying the reimbursement

This is also an issue of power.

zzzzz

Japanese inventions

The best farah in the world

The nature of power is material as well as social.

The advice to separate self from role is good... but let's think about this as a reaction to the student above who says they feel like the instructor doesn't allow equal opportunities to contribute in the class. Sometimes, despite all best efforts, the faculty member may be wrong, and deep listening and learning has to allow for that possibility. Don't take it personally, but model the kind of leadership which recognizes the need for personal change.

True, but how does this interact with the power differential in the classroom? Can students really be expected to productively call out faculty members' biased behavior? It seems like an option not discussed in this paper is finding external facilitators to help navigate some of these issues.

This bothers our modern sensibilities, yet the hirearchy of needs dictates that we don't dismantle social structures that help us survive. Ironically, it's the people who can survive without regard for those structures (i.e., the wealthy and powerful) who often do the dismantling. Or, as my father would say, "don't sh*t where you eat." Unless, of course, you can eat somewhere else...

How would power be distributed? equally or a winner take all situation? Also, does the definition of power change in this instance?

"Language has been given too much power."

I'm finding it helpful to repeat that phrase when I don't understand what she means.

Is a federal government, and a federal government alone, enough to do such a thing? I mean, look at what happened to the Library of Alexandria. I still get pissed off thinking about that. And is it even a good idea in the first place to let them have that responsibility? I can't help but think of all of the instances in which governments have been directly responsible for mass destructions of literature. There's an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to historical book burning events, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents, and a large majority of these noteworthy burnings were done at the will of the government. What would happen if we were to give them too much agency in this matter? Is it a good idea for governments to have the final say in the well-being of our literature? How can we trust them to decide what is and isn't worth protecting?

This reminds me of Albert Camus' thoughts on absurdity, and what James Cone says in his book Black Theology and Black Power: "All aspects of this society have participated in the act of enslaving blacks, extinguishing Indians, and annihilating all who question white society's right to decide who is human....Absurdity arises as the black man seeks to understand his place in the white world. The black man does not view himself as absurd; he views himself as human. But as he meets the white world and its values, he is confronted with an almighty No and is defined as a thing. This produces the absurdity."

This makes me think of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's TED Talk: "The danger of a single story." Rather than solely focusing on the single story aspect, Adichie delves into the topic of storytelling and the subsequent power associated with it. In this sense, the discussion of power alludes to Foucault's extensive work on power.

https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story/transcript?language=en

Politics, as in power dynamics, leadership, negotiation, and decision-making authority, play a role in determining how classifications and standards infrastructures are perceived as visible/invisible.

Games are the only entertainment medium right now that aren't showing any sign of an expiration date. Most people don't pay for music and movies anymore, and most social media sites go in and out of popularity. Games, however, have never lost popularity, there's always going to be another kid turning 10 that'll want a play-station for Christmas. Therefore, it is games that are the best method for education or to highlight political issues.

Heidegger notes that the disparity between two alike objects (simliar in function) from the technological time gap between them. For example, he states "A radar station is of course less simple than a weather vane," inferring to the huge technological gap between the two alike metrological instruments. More importantly, he states that that in order for the construction of a radar station, technological developments and production must mesh together. He maintains that a sawmill and hydroelectric plant are different technologically, but their purpose to generate hydropower via a large turbine influenced by water current is virtually unchanged throughout the centuries.

Curious how this may relate to the more recent "The End of Power" by Moisés Naím. It doesn't escape one that the title of the book somewhat echoes the title of this particular essay.

Important to recognize that there are power dynamics in LPP within all 3 dynamics -- belonging, involvement, and relationship.

As noted later in this passage:

"In this sense, it can itself be a source of power or powerlessness, in affording or preventing articulation and interchange among communities of practice. The ambiguous potentialities of legitimate peripherality reflect the concept's pivotal role in providing access to a nexus of relations otherwise not perceived as connected."

Buy Huntkey 600W Power Supply online at low price only on Huntkey & get latest offers and huge discounts.

Future research direction: Timescapes // Time compression // Post-Colonial and Feminist Time

See: Adam 1990 and 2004 See: Giddens' structuration theory

This critique addresses surveillance state concerns about glue-ing datasets together to form a broader understanding of aggregate social behavior without the necessary constraints/warnings about social contexts and discontinuity between data.

Skimmed the Ruppert paper, sadly doesn't engage with time and topologies.

Burns criticism of humanitarian response as not truly collaborative and an abdication of the state's responsibility for social welfare to the private sector.

Virilio's dromological law: "increase in speed, increases the potential for gridlock."

This evokes environmental concerns as well as critiques of political privilege/power wrt to elites with access to fast transport options and those with less clout relegated to public transportation, traffic jams, less reliable options, etc.

Adams argues here and through her other papers(*) that social science researchers need to focus less on the obvious temporal conflicts in everyday life and focus more on the "socio-environmental impacts, underlying assumptions and their material exppressions, institutional processes and recipients' experiences, hidden agendas and power relations, unquestioned time politics and 'othering practices."

• Adam, Timescapes of Modernity and 'The Gendered Time Politics of Globalisation'.

Are these power dynamics/tensions: actor or agent-based? individual or technical? situational or contextual? deliberate or autonomous?

How does the idea of "lead time" square with Mazmanian et al's paper on time as a commodity imbued with power?

hi There as we know that the Business intelligence is at the Height today as most of the Businesses are running on that so for that we have the Extensive Course on MSBI and Power Bi so please go through the link :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrv0e6Qa4_M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfznPyM4oFE

Celie talks to Sophia about their difference in handling their husbands. Celie is obedient and oppressed, while Sophia is rebellious and oppressed. The way it sounds to me, is that Sophia was also subjected to sexual abuse, but she stood up for herself and didn't allow the men to take her power from her. Sophia, it seems, not to be afraid of killing someone or of death itself. While Celie has been forced to live after all of her babies got killed or thought to be killed. I don't believe Sophia has every been pregnant, therefore she still feels powerful. Does power come with not having children? You don't need to nurture a child and you can focus on yourself when you don't have a child. Shug Avery never had kids (or nurtured them for that matter) and she rose to fame and fortune

Exactly!

When ever any lottery work to me. mentions the fording fruit, I always pay careful attention to the context and scene it pertains to. Forbidden fruit is a highly connotative term that draws in instant allusion to Adam and eve in the Bible. I found its use in this scene to be very interesting and narrative, the forbidden fruit in this case seems to be knowledge/information/stories. Sometimes knowing to much can be bad, knowledge can awaken one as much as it can lead one to damnation.

Classic example of investment made on the basis of hype of tech, without evaluating it critically

Las infraestructuras de bolsillo y comunitarias serían una forma de lidiar con los desbalances de poder de las plataformas digitales. Está sin embargo el tema de la sostenibilidad cuando no se comercializa la intimidad de los usuarios. Esto debería estar asociado a economías cooperativas y de bienes comunes. El bootstrapping de dicho modelo está aún por verse, pero podría ocurrir a partir de consultorías individuales que alienten y financien dichas plataformas.

Keep an eye on the questions that the girl asks of the American and vice a versa. The following banter of the two characters features two main elements of speech: questions and statements. These speech patterns allude to who is leading a conversation and who holds some sort of power over the other. The statements will show us who holds the power between the conversing characters, while the questions show us the opposite: the character lacking in power.

This relationship changes throughout the rest of the story, read on and notice who is asking the questions in the conversation!

I wonder if people with social anxiety fear weak ties more? What is the psychological relationship between strong and weak ties? I also wonder about social mobility--do those at the higher levels have more weak ties? Spend more time on their weak ties?

Except states regularly infringe upon these rights and/or limit/remove the means of exercising such rights

This space is fundamental to sociological theory. It the place where social forces exert power in the lives of individuals. SNA seeks to capture that influence and power.

Networks are what sociologists talk about all the time but our methods don't fully 'see' them. We find relationships between variables--i.e. race and class--and then discuss how this relationship is due to social forces. Networks are the way in which social forces exert power!

It also may be that certain ways in which networks function produce and reproduce inequality. See Power Law question.

We will discuss how networks can produce and reproduce inequality. It is called the power law.

This is also the power law; it takes links to get links. Power law is how inequality produced and reproduced in networks. Check it out!

Sociologically, this law of networks is how inequality is built in and reproduced, i.e. it takes money to make money. People gravitate to those who already have connections, power or influence which gives those people more power, connections and influence.

Do you know how to measure power law? I have some data that I am sure follows a power law because of the curve of the line. I don't know how to calculate it. I am just eyeballing it. Is there a better way?

Reduce the number of distractions you get better results.

This concise quote explains Mark Antony's opinion on Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. He believes that the patrician "is a slight unmeritable man, meet to be sent on errands". Antony does not consider Lepidus to be of much importance, to such an extent that he questions Octavius if "the three-fold world divided, he should stand one of the three to share it?"

First and foremost, the audience is again presented with the cruel, ruthless persona of Mark Antony. His confidence and arrogance supposedly puts himself above others, and Antony's actions are only motivated by his selfish interests.

Mark Antony disregards Lepidus' importance in the upcoming campaign. In fact, he views him as a lowly errand-boy rather than an acquaintance and an equal. Antonius is not afraid to speak his mind to Octavius, believing that Lepidus does not deserve an place in their coalition.

This quote also hints to what the world is like after the events of the play. Mark Antony, Octavius and Lepidus plan to divide the Roman Empire in three sections. This alludes to the Second Triumvirate of 43 B.C to 33 B.C.

It is interesting that Mark Antony, a self-absorbed character with a selfish lust for power, is willing to share his authority with two other men that would be considered his equals.

Mark Antony's speech at the Senate House in Act III Scene II appealed to the values and emotions of the Roman public to ignite a rebellion against the conspirators. A key element of his rhetoric centred on Julius Caesar's will; seventy-five drachmas were to be issued to each citizen. It was the generosity of Caesar that Mark Antony used to persuade a mutiny.

Ironically, in the privacy of his home, Antony commands Lepidus to "fetch the will" to "determine how to cut off some charge in legacies." He wants to realise the funds in Caesar's will to raise and army against Brutus and Cassius.

Here Antony is presented as manipulative and avaricious, which contrasts the loyal Tribune the audience was first introduced to. His ascension was made possible by offering to honor Caesar's will, a promise which he obviously has no intention in fulfilling.

From his speech in the Capitol to the end of the play, Mark Antony is confident, ambitious, successful and ruthless. He displays no concern for the Roman citizens as they suffer in the civil upheaval, he is willing to execute a nephew instead of argue for his life, and he only upholds the bare minimum of Caesar's legacy to maintain totalitarian control over the Roman Empire.

Although he is not tangibly introduced until the next scene, the audience is already presented with a fairly clear characterisation of Julius Caesar. However, Caesar's exact nature is determined through two juxtaposing attitudes towards the Empire.

The Roman common-folk praise the defeat of Pompey, in fact making a "holiday to see Caesar and to rejoice in his triumph." On the contrary, the noble classes express a more pessimistic attitude; Flavius cautions that the new leader will "soar above the view of men, and keep us all in servile fearfulness."

The tribunes believe that Caesar's power is too great for one man, and that his rise as Emperor will lead to the downfall of Rome. It is also a valid argument to say that they envy Caesar's might, especially since Flavius and Murellus are to lose an element of their own authority.

After commanding the people to weep for the coming events, Flavius and Murellus leave to "disrobe the images" of Caesar. This metaphor refers to removing the decorations off Caesar's statues, a crime which they are later punished for. The desperation of such an act is an indication of how strongly Caesar is feared and detested by the noblemen.

This scene leaves the audience with a preconceived image of Caesar as ambitious, influential and excessively powerful. The loathing of Flavius and Murellus towards the new Emperor foreshadow the upcoming conspiracy and the ultimate demise of Caesar.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

This may be a front group. Investigate, find additional sources, and leave research notes in the comments.

The Churchill Falls hydro-electric project was inaugurated by Pierre Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minister, on June 16, 1972. This hydro-electric plant was constructed between 1967 and 1975 and completed one year ahead of the predicted schedule. At the height of its construction, approximately 6,300 workers were present in the summer of 1970. The majority of construction occurred in the summer months, although construction continued year-round despite harsh conditions in Labrador where temperatures dipped to -21°C with a mean annual snowfall of 406 centimeters. The Churchill Falls power station is located in southern Labrador about 1,100 kilometers from an urban area. The Churchill Falls hydro-electric project was the largest hydro-electric project at the time, capable of generating 5,225 mW of electricity. It creates this energy by utilizing the water of the Churchill and Naskaupi Rivers which have a total catchment area of about 67,340 km2 combined. The underground power station is about 305 meters below ground. It uses eleven generators with a combined capacity of 5,225,000 kW. In order to utilize this harvested energy, large power lines capable of handling voltages up to 735 kV were put in place to transmit the energy from Churchill Falls to the Hydro-Quebec transmission system in the Manicouagan-Outardes hydro complex. The distance between these two stations is 606 kilometers. The energy from Churchill Falls was also transmitted via power lines to the Labrador City-Wabush area (Crabb, 1973). 

References

Crabb, P. (1973). Churchill Falls- The Costs and Benefits of a Hydro-Electric Development Project. Geography, 330-335.

Did agriculture depend on industry?

Let us identify what we mean by "insiders"

Those who are close to power.

academia capitalism status quo

power

resistance

Reaching out.

Ironman.

Facts count for nothing.

Excitement. - Career? Power? Attachment? Identification? Meaning? Numbers?

power business

Academic power structure, values and education.

Academic hierarchy power games. cf Bourdieu.

I was only a maverick because of academic power structure.

Who has the right to speak? In whose name?

The language of those in power....

This was me who was doing that.

This was the best work that I could muster at that moment.

Frustration at not having the means to communicate.

Battle over picture of community.

Immigration and list of crimes.

Power to marginalise individuals.

Conflict.

Politics power and community.

Who is in, who is out.

In "The Letter Killeth" Frances Willard admonishes the acceptance of "truth" without acknowledging the social fictions at work in male-dominated exegesis:

We need women commentators to bring out the women's side of the book; we need the stereoscopic view of truth in general, which can only be had when woman's eye and man's together shall discern the perspective of the Bible's full-orbed revelation.

I do not at all impugn the good intention of the good men who have been our exegetes, and I bow humbly in the presence of their scholarship; but while they turn their linguistic telescopes on truth, I may be allowed to make a correction for the "personal equation" in the results which they espy.

As we move into the 19th century, some women speakers challenge the notions mentioned in a previous annotation about Mary Astell, particularly Sarah Grimké. In one of her Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Women, Grimké touches upon a more oppressive tradition of making women feel powerful in the private, domestic sphere in order to keep them from reaching beyond their "natural" boundaries. She attempts to break down the historical boundaries of the public and private, the domestic and the political, the masculine and the feminine that someone like Astell still seems to uphold.

Mary Astell, another Enlightenment thinker, is really interesting to link up here. From the intro to her section in The Rhetorical Tradition,:

For Astell, women's rhetoric should focus on the art of conversation... This is women's proper rhetorical sphere, different from but in no way inferior to the public sphere in which men use oratory. (845)

Astell makes some interesting moves around the concept of "natural" throughout A Serious Proposal to the Ladies, Part II. She claims that women's "natural sphere" is the private and domestic, which aligns with the social distinctions between public and private as masculine and feminine spheres. But she rejects the "natural" characteristic of the private as powerless.

So determinism makes the designer responsible/hold accountable assuming they "determine" what users "should" do,

while non-determinism absolves the designer leaving the burden of responsibility of the consequence of interactions, on the user. So non determinism assums that the embedded characteristics don't work on the user, or that he is able to resist their encouragement or discouragement. That he can shape the aspects of those certain characteristics than the other way around, thereby ultimately defining what to do with the technology.

Point on reward & punishment feedback is a really good point, darkpatterns comes to mind.

If IxD does not provide choices for action, there is no room for ethics: People act based on conditions, not on considerations of what should be done

This reactive behaviour is what UX practioners of gamification feel proud to do. It's disgusting to see them feel proud doing it, how come they feel no remorse doing it?. I too will have to do it in the near future, but I won't fucking have a glitter in my eye and a wide smile across my face doing it.

Those adaptations are also framed under the guise of fulfilling the prime objective of fulfilling the business needs, i.e to compete for market share, increase profit margins or simply, "Will this make "them" give "us" more money?. This objective is constrained to view humans in the identity of consumer. It is through this identity we derive the canvas of needs which our bosses and their bosses let us create adaptations.

Many designers are limited to designing a set of adaptations in their artifacts by what markets signals as profitable. Those who are fortunate enough to work in non-profits or worker coops may have more freedom to resist the unethical demands of the market forces.

This reminds me of Iris Young's "Five Faces of Oppression." Young argues that we often neglect to see the many faces of oppression, and that we misrepresent reality by comparing dissimilar experiences of oppression as existing under the same general umbrella of subjectivity. Anyone who experiences even one face of oppression is oppressed, but many individuals and groups experience oppression differently because they may experience different combinations of the faces of oppression. One face of oppression which often goes overlooked is "powerlessness."

Powerlessness is a distinction between technical freedom and actual self-possession and choice. Examples Young gives are that although we are technically allowed to choose our employer, many employees are placed at the bottom of the totem pole, where they are dictated to, rather than consulted about their own work. Those who work menial jobs, for example, in which the minutia of their jobs (what to do and how to do it) are strictly controlled are powerless. In contrast, professionals such as doctors, teachers, managers, etc. are given a degree of freedom and choice about how to best go about their work, and they might even have employees working under them, whose work they get to control. This freedom gives one "respectability" in the eyes of society and one's own eyes. If someone does not have access to professionalization, they are denigrated for this lack of "respectability," by the implication that they are inferior to professionals. This, of course, becomes a vicious economic and psychological cycle.

This system of oppression through powerlessness is what Woolf is referencing here. Although she is employed, society has denied her the freedom allotted to most literary professionals, most of whom are men. She is employed, but she is not a professional because she is denied the freedom and respectability that being a professional connotes.

This is a fascinating concept; to think of rhetoric as being intentionally invented, or crafted in a certain way, to exclude others in an effort to create societal division and establish hierarchy. I suppose I've typically thought of rhetoric as something that occurs naturally in the world on multiple social levels of understanding and manifestation (and also as something that exists in a relationship of mutuality between the "author/speaker" and the "audience" see: rhetorical triangle), and not as something that was deliberately created as a tool to subjugate others. In fact, as we've discussed in class, the participation or reception of an audience is actually a sometimes necessary contribution to the "rhetoricity" of a speech/text/artwork/etc.

An example of how great rhetoric can shift human history. It's crazy to consider what the U. S. could've looked like had there been a mass exodus of African-American people as Lincoln originally advocated for...

"The superiority of Scientific Evidence Reexamined":

"Allow me now to ask, Will he be so perfectly satisfied on the first trial as not to think it of importance to make a second, perhaps u third, and a fourth? Whence arises this diffidence'! Purely from the consciousness of the fallibility of his own faculties. But to what purpose, it may be said, the reiterations of the at-tempt, since it is impossible for him, by any efforts, to shake off his dependence on the accuracy of his attention and fidelity of his memory? Or, what can he have more than reiterated testimonies of his memory, in support of the truth of its for-mer testimony? I acknowledge, that after a hundred attempts he can have no more. But even this is a great deal. We learn from experience, that the mistakes or oversights committed by the mind in one operation. arc sometime!-., on a review, corrected on the second, or perhaps on a third. Besides, the repetition, when no error is discovered, enlivens the remembrance, and so strengthens the conviction. But, for this conviction. it is plain that we are in a great measure indebted to memory. and in some measure even to experience." (Campbell 922)

I don't know what to make of this at this point, or if it is even worthwhile to think about, but it interests me that Campbell describes abstract truth as a "despotic sovereign" and an orator's power as "superior even to what despotism itself can can bestow" (904).

Well that's intense. And on the next page, with the thunder and lightening, it seems like oratory has even a godlike power. I guess I'm surprised to read this since he was so influenced by Enlightenment thinkers like Locke, and I tend to associate the Enlightenment with democracy and rhetoric in general with democracy, but at the same time, the idea of words and knowledge as power and the importance of rhetoric for leaders is also a huge thing. So I wonder to what extent Campbell's view of rhetoric was present, not just during the Enlightenment but throughout its history? Has there always been a tension between this "irresistible power" and democracy in terms of rhetoric?

what is the point of showing power by having many wives he should try gaining power w respect rather than women

This is another reason not based on power why some people practice polygamy

it was outlawed before but know he changed his thought process. I wonder why? Was it just soleful for the purpose to get more power?