for - quote - everyone is sacred - HH Dalai Lama - via Richard J. Davidson - His Holiness says every human being is the same - We're all built in the same way and every human being has the capacity to flourish - We would even go a little further and we would say that - every human being has the right to flourish and also - has all of the necessary constituents - the necessary components - the underlying mechanisms that enable uh a person to flourish or to have well-being

for - key insight - as individuals, we promote neoliberalism - via entrenched and unconscious colonialism - Post Capitalist Philanthropy Webinar 1 - Alnoor Ladha - Lynn Murphy - 2023 - deep entrenchment and entrainment of neolieralism in our bodies - Post Capitalist Philanthropy Webinar 1 - Alnoor Ladha - Lynn Murphy - 2023

comment - The depth of entrainment of neoliberalism in our bodies is very pronounced - This is why it is so difficult to make adhoc change because it faces so much opposition emerging from the unconscious

for - regenerative company - principle 1 of 8 - agency-based instead of ownership-based - implementation - via leveraging full extent of legal personhood

Comment - Graham points out an interesting insight, that organisations are given legal personhood status -namely, we test a group of people as a person itself - This reminds me of Michael Levin's Multi Scale Competency Architecture

for - Indyweb dev - Presencing Institute - U-lab - natural application - weaving together these subnets with mindplexes via open source SRG complexity mapping tools in the Indyweb

for - definition inflating the commons - Geoffrey West - superlinear relationship - of cosmolocalization - via digital cooperation - Michel Bauwens - adjacency relationship - inflating the commons - indyweb

adjacency - between - inflating the commons - indyweb - adjacency relationship - Indyweb could be one way to inflate the commons by weaving together cosmolocal groups around the group into a mycelial network

for - tinnitus - mitigation via the Clarify - sensory substitution - vibrate at the same time as the sound - to decrease amplitude of tinnitus - Neosensory - David Eagleman

for - cross-scale translation - via transcription - allocation - adjustment

for - example - cascading tipping points via AMOC

example - cascading tipping points via AMOC - As Arctic system melts faster, it releases more freshwater into the North Atlantic - This is happening on the southern tip of Greenland, for example and the lower density of water slows down the AMOC current - Warm saline water flows from the Southern Ocean up into the North Atlantic - When it reaches the southern tip of Greenland, the heat is radiated into the atmosphere and heats up Europe - When the freshwater meltwater from Greenland mixes with this AMOC current, the AMOC water is less heavy and sinks slower - This pushes monsoons further south, which can explain why there are more droughts and fires in the Amazon rainforest - The slowdown of the AMOC leaves more saline water stuck in Antarctica, potentially contributing to the faster melting of Antarctica glaciers

for - AI and education - children will have custom tailored education program via AI

for - neuroscience - example - informal diversity - increases work efficacy - via sharing diverse and novel perspectives

for - progress trap - cultures that avoided progress trap of population explosion - Tahiti - via infanticide

progress trap - cultures that avoided progress trap of population explosion - Tahiti - via infanticide

• Tahitians practiced population control via
  • infanticide
    • It was ok to kill a newborn baby before it drew its first breath, as it was not considered a person until it drew the first breath
  • advanced Eroticism - separating sexual activity from reproduction

for - polycrisis - Russia's subversive geopolitics via proxies

details for assignments in LMS

https://chat.openai.com/g/g-z5XcnT7cQ-zettel-critique-assistant

Zettel Critique Assistant<br /> By Florian Lengyel<br /> Critique Zettels following three rules: Zettels should have a single focus, WikiLinks indicate a shift in focus, Zettels should be written for your future self. The GPT will suggest how to split multi-focused notes into separate notes. Create structure note from a list of note titles and abstracts.

ᔥ[[ZettelDistraction]] in Share with us what is happening in your ZK this week. February 20, 2024

93% der Länder, die am verwundbarsten durch die Klimakrise sind, sind bereits überschuldet oder stehen kurz davor. Trotzdem sind bisher Kredite das Hauptinstrument der Klimafinanzierung. Damit verschärft sich die Schuldenkrise vor allem vieler afrikanischer Staaten. Sie ist eines der Hauptthemen des Pariser Klimafinanz-Gipfels. Hintergrund-Bericht der Libération mit vielen vertiefenden Informationen. https://www.liberation.fr/international/afrique/quinze-ans-apres-lafrique-rattrapee-par-la-dette-20230622_FC3LKPPATFCXDIGC4FS626ZE4E/

Oxfam: Climate Finance Shadow Report 2033 https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/climate-finance-shadow-report-2023

reply to u/stjeromeslibido at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/10qw4l5/are_there_symbols_for_supported_by_or/

In addition to the other excellent suggestions, I don't think you'll find anything specific that that was used historically for these, but there are certainly lots of old annotation symbols you might be able to co-opt for your personal use.

Evina Steinova has a great free cheat sheet list of annotation symbols: The Most Common Annotation Symbols in Early Medieval Western Manuscripts (a cheat sheet).

More of this rabbit hole:

• Steinová, Evina. Notam Superponere Studui: The Use of Annotation Symbols in the Early Middle Ages. Brepols, 2019.
• Cappelli, Adriano. The Elements of Abbreviation in Medieval Latin Paleography. University of Kansas Libr., 1984.
• Coulson, Frank, and Robert Babcock. The Oxford Handbook of Latin Palaeography. Oxford University Press, 2020.
• Lindsay, W. M. Notae Latinae. Cambridge University Press, 2013. https://archive.org/download/notaelatinaeacco00lindrich/notaelatinaeacco00lindrich.pdf.
• Bains, Doris. A Supplement to Notae Latinae (Abbreviations in Latin Mss. of 850 to 1050 A.D.). Cambridge [England] University Press, 1936. http://archive.org/details/supplementtonota0000bain.

(Nota bene: most of my brief research here only extends to Western traditions, primarily in Latin and Greek. Obviously other languages and eras will have potential ideas as well.)

Tironian shorthand may have something you could repurpose as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tironian_notes

Some may find the auxiliary signs of the Universal Decimal Classification useful for some of these sorts of notations for conjoining ideas.

Given the past history of these sorts of symbols and their uses, perhaps it might be useful for us all to aggregate a list of common ones we all use as a means of re-standardizing some of them in modern contexts? Which ones does everyone use?

Here are some I commonly use:

Often for quotations, citations, and provenance of ideas, I'll use Maria Popova and Tina Roth Eisenberg's Curator's Code:

• ᔥ for "via" to denote a direct quotation/source— something found elsewhere and written with little or no modification or elaboration (reformulation notes)
• ↬ for "hat tip" to stand for indirect discovery — something for which you got the idea at a source, but modified or elaborated on significantly (inspiration by a source, but which needn't be cited)

Occasionally I'll use a few nanoformats, from the microblogging space, particularly

• L: to indicate location

For mathematical proofs, in addition to their usual meanings, I'll use two symbols to separate biconditionals (necessary/sufficient conditions)

• (⇒) as a heading for the "if" portion of the proof
• (⇐) for the "only if" portion

Some historians may write 19c to indicate 19th Century, often I'll abbreviate using Roman numerals instead, so "XIX".

Occasionally, I'll also throw drolleries or other symbols into my margins to indicate idiosyncratic things that may only mean something specifically to me. This follows in the medieval traditions of the ars memoria, some of which are suggested in Cornwell, Hilarie, and James Cornwell. Saints, Signs, and Symbols: The Symbolic Language of Christian Art 3rd Edition. Church Publishing, Inc., 2009. The modern day equivalent of this might be the use of emoji with slang meanings or 1337 (leet) speak.

https://try.lingopie.com/

I noticed the same about the presentation. It seemed like Musk is becoming more adept at adept at selling his vision (e.g. addressing "why invest in space" criticism), but shied away from any concrete information about SpaceX's plans.

He even joked about "it's not done yet" so many times I suspect there isn't much to report at the moment. I wonder what's the reason for this update now.

A tour of their facility a few months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t705r8ICkRw

They're arresting them because they moved and sought to hide the movements of funds gained from an unlawful activity, not because they actually engaged in the original unlawful activity.

Newnewss for the sake of Newness. "Empty information calories".

Talking not doing.

Isn't that the actual (positive) purpose of TED? The whole self-delusion about how talks create progress felt tacked-on at least to me, like the mission statements of any large company. Did people really take it seriously?

Are you sure about that? Even if that were its mission, it doesn't have to be TED's primary function or effect. I suspect most people listen to be inspired (as entertainment), not to actually see the future.

Wikipedia mentions "The IGN website was the brainchild of media entrepreneur Chris Anderson", but I can't find any accurate source on how much he was actually involved with their operation (maybe only responsible for the website)?

I agree with the criticism on this. For actual change you need to do things instead of talking about them.

Many TED speakers may be credible on the topic they talk about (like Bill Gates, who does spend his time funding public health projects), but even then the value of talking about their achievements could be limited. Those talks may inspire listeners, but that cannot come at the expense of actually doing the work, or thinking that solely articulating ideas creates progress.

What's the alternative? Telling people that the future is not ok? Would people listen to talks like this?

If you're simply reading to inform yourself about a topic, it may be worth reading a couple of book reviews, and listening to an interview or two, rather than invest the significant amount of time necessary to really engage with the book.

A few hours of skimming and reviews/interviews may get you to 25% understanding and retention, which in many cases may be more than enough for your needs of being basically informed on the topic. Compared to the 50 - 100 hours necessary for a deep, analytical engagement with the text, that would only get you to 50% understanding and retention.

I like your summary of the article but disagree with the author. If one is measuring the "understanding percentage" of a book, I think he's actually looking for short-form information or answers (like gathered from a book review or blog post) rather than a book. For me, the value of the best books comes from the inspiration and impulse for original thought it gives. Not everything in a book is valuable for everyone, nor should it be.

For textbooks, of course cutting the detail gives you an overview more quickly, but it's just an overview. And this entire point doesn't apply to fiction books.

Maybe it's a question of what type of understanding we want from each book. Sometimes that's answers, sometimes that's understanding, sometimes diversion or inspiration -- they're not all the same. Consulting reviews but not the book is an awesome shortcut to get answers, but then you're not reading the book, but the reviews.

I think the gap between thoughtful, slow reading and quick reading is much larger. Assuming of course that slow reading means thinking about the sentences, probably highlighting passages and scribbling a few notes.

Doesn't apply to every book of course, and depends on the aspect of understanding you want (your own thoughts or what the author meant).

Effect of the 2021 US Capitol attack in China -- seeing it as emblematic of the west's societal problems.

What is he referring to here?

• In somewhat simplified terms, focusing on and exceedingly valuing new things over our cultural inheritance?

What a great introduction to the article.

• Ha, I didn't catch the foreshadowing until your reply here :)

• That's the awesome thing about open web annotations -- we can come here from all kinds of different places, yet help each other to learn more from reading.

That mobile games (and not immersive PC or console games) are mentioned here tells you a great deal about their direction, and they kind of audience they want to attract.

Update: this most likely refers to their cloud gaming service, to bring actual PC/console games to mobile devices. I still wonder if this new audience has an effect on the types of games they produce.

What's an example of a company that can't absorb large amounts of funding? I assume Google used it to improve their infrastructure to support an incredibly large userbase. Uber for example used most of its funding for marketing and kickstarting their marketplace. The general ethos of "hypergrowth" seems to be trying to get to scale as fast as possible.

So the argument here is not to chase scale by throwing money at it, but only invest when it's required? Does the second case actually exist outside of boostrapped startups?

Aren't IPOs by definition about diversification for existing investors?

This is what I often do, and I'm frequently frustrated there aren't any alternative words for many expressions that capture the same thing.

Like the author here, it never occurred to me that a good dictionary would be a solution, since I never saw one.

It depends on the goals of your writing, in general, using uncommon words makes you harder to understand.

I also suspect not all people find joy in expressive language, or don't even notice it as non-native speakers online.

The guiding reason behind Derek Sivers' writing.

Experiments with similar starting conditions. Visible results. Either way this turns out, we will learn from it.

via http://known.kevinmarks.com/2021/sketches-of-a-history-of-skepticism-part-i-classical-eudaimonia

Tipiciamente, o valor da constante de uma normalização no item (c) é escolhido como sendo $$c(n)= \frac{1}{2(n-1) \omega_{n-1}}$$

Argument that popular modern dictionaries are taking the wrong approach by defining words as plainly as possible. That makes it no fun to use them except for definitions.

For writing at least, using something like the original Websters dictionary is a great help to improve your style.

Intruguing argument about how to allow more tinkering with software -- making it really easy to contribute, not just possible.

I think for example the note-taking community is on a path towards that -- a lot of the fun is about finding your own worflow and contributing to editor plugins you like.

This reminds me of physical tinkering, like building or fixing your own small furniture. That's also hard with the products we often buy today -- it's difficult to fix minature electronics which are meant to be replaced.

But with software (esp. open source) it could be easier, as everyone can have the same tools. I very much resonate with the idea of tinkering more and using less standards.

For many people, making changes to code at all is hard. The few times I remember actually forking a library to add functionality, it meant hours reading into the codebase and polishing my change to commit it upstream.

I like the author's argument, but it's not not just the friction to view source code -- many technical architectures are also needlessly complex or non-standard.

Paul Graham argued in 2005 (just before starting YCombinator) why venture capital is traditionally unfriendly to founders, and how it sets itself bad incentives.

Learnings: - Take a lesson from good hill climbing algorithms, and drop yourself in unfamiliar situations to find your career maximum. - Progress in artificial games (e.g. career ladders) is fun, but you're likely to miss the bigger picture.

How that looks in practice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc0b4aBOyBw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0qenuKmong

Definition: "Yak shaving refers to a task, that leads you to perform another related task and so on, and so on — all distracting you from your original goal. This is sometimes called “going down the rabbit hole.”"

Intuitively I assumed the term meant to stay lean and frequently reduce all complexity down to the bare minimum, but it's somewhat of the opposite :) This idea in general might also be called serendipity.

Learnings: - It's easy to assume people in the past didn't care or were stupid. But people do things for a reason. Not understanding the reason for how things are is a missed learning opportunity, and very likely leads to unintended consequences. - Similar to having a valid strong opinion, one must understand why things are as they are before changing them (except if the goal is only signaling).

You can't help but notice the shade thrown over CD Project Red with this statement. The development of The Witcher 3 was notorious for its crunch, I can only imagine it was worse for Cyberpunk 2077.

https://www.gamebyte.com/cd-projekt-red-admits-crunch-period-for-the-witcher-3-was-not-humane/

https://www.polygon.com/2020/12/4/21575914/cyberpunk-2077-release-crunch-labor-delays-cd-projekt-red

Has better latency != can have better latency. If there's demand for Stadia I assume they could use more of those data centers. But not sure the performance of Stadaia is the problem here, it's far far easier to use Stadia than Gefore NOW. Yet, people don't use it.

Smart strategy by Nvidia.

Notably, this goal has been stated before, I believe by Microsoft for the Xbox 360? Running demanding workloads in the cloud elastically makes a lot more sense than buying hardware you rarely use.

I suspect Google wanted faster, more measurable results than is possible with game development. There's a reason why tech companies are vastly more profitable than game companies.

I don't particularly see the shame in changing a strategy that isn't working. As an early user of Stadia I do see the lost potential though, maybe that's where this is coming from.

I think that makes a lot of sense. Google doesn't want to do the "platform building" Microsoft and Sony excel at, and it doesn't have to.

Imagine playing or trying out video games simply on the developers website.

I would love some sources on this.

Do the other countries have sufficiently fast internet infrastructure to make streaming work well for many people? Is there demand for Stadia there? What's the criticism regarding this exactly?

Notably Steven Hawking (and others) warned about this year ago already. Not to take away from Musk's achievements, but he's not the first to recognise and work on this problem.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/stephen-hawking-interstellar-travel-starmus-speech

Classic article about the topic: https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html

There is no accountability to people inside corporations, only to results. Which is working as intended, companies are meant to make money by serving customers, not employees.

The simple "truth" here is that these Stadia games likely wouldn't have been successful without a lot of additional investments.

That's corporate speak for "prepare for budget cuts". If nothing would change, they'd have said so directly.

Wow, are NFTs this old already? It feels like such a new phenomena around early 2022, late 2021.

Is that a bad thing, to have something to look forward to? It implies that new technological inventions are the only way to make progress, but it is undeniably progress. Not everyone will hold this view, and no one should force it upon you. So why are people constantly criticing "techno-utopia" views instead of creating and moving towards their own visions of the future?

That's the problem -- making it easy to feel good about consuming content passively.

Is this the ultimate form of culturally accepted bragging? How many people discover they can be vaguely "inspiring" instead of delivering substance? Maybe that's what's wrong with the world.

I agree -- they're larely without substance but "interesting" and "inspiring". Which is not necessarily a bad thing.

It is becoming to be true.

He did see a bright potential before him, and that's precisely why he had a change at succeeding. I don't like the latent criticism about innovation in this article, it feels mostly like envy to me.

Was it not? I broadly see 2000-2010 as exploring the early potential of the internet, without major cultural problems (but ending with the financial crisis).

For reference, here are the "the most popular talks of 2015": https://www.ted.com/playlists/320/the_most_popular_talks_of_2015_1

That should be done for any type of communication. How does the "curse of knowledge" relate to this specifically?

You have a different political belief than the one who you're supposed to write the speech for. This isn't related to knowing or not knowing something?

Has something changed since 2018?

Ha, web annotations to the rescue!

Then why not summarize these important content fragments into a single post learners should read?

I disagree somewhat with only curating parts of content or endless remixing of content. The value of reading original sources is that you form opinions and see connections yourself -- learning instead of memorising.

Meaning this speaking style is mostly meant to overwhelm and persuade you, not permit to make your own conclusions from the presented facts?

English vocabularly standardized more gradually than other languages -- with larger differences between writings.

You can also find your "tribe" on the internet -- many people (including me) find that much easier than in real life. You have many more opportunities for connections and can drop things that don't work.

Maybe the author's point is more about the serendipity of being in an environment with people of your interests?

I'd be wary of making general statements like that. For me, moving not just cities but countries has been the best thing I ever did -- but to get away from a comfortable environment, not into one as the article describes here.

We should only do changes like this. Innovation instead of looting.

What exactly is "good allocated to the maximum level of efficiency" supposed to mean? We're always producing new wealth that can be applied somewhere.

This article is the story of one insanely dedicated Wikipedia editor. There are 733 at least more.

The most honest way to edit or write.

Obviously there's no mention of Google Scholar ;)

I assume the following is a direct comparison to https://scholar.google.com/

I wonder what the author is referring to here.

"levelised costs" -- Is this system more expensive initially than installing lithium batteries?

Related to this, I think being proud of "read books" (or worse, counting them) and bringing that up in conversations is pure signalling. Books are not just there to be consumed.

Great essay on making knowledge your own: https://sive.rs/dq

I find that I increasingly skip introductionary sentences written by other people, or what's on the book cover. The book should stand on it's own, if you want actual understanding and not copying of opinion.

This means copying the reviewers opinion of the book instead of forming your own. Of course that's faster, but IMHO you cannot call it "understanding of the book". You're reading a different "book" written by the reviewer.

Do they run their own hardware?

Why did they do that? Any good source here?

Or the modern self-employed producer, which we see more and more of (gig work, internet creators etc). You generally have more choice today in your form of employment. It is not just about consuming.

Indeed. Being forced to have children out of material necessity is no good basis for societal growth.

How do those concepts fit thogether? Individualism means valuing yourself -- so there you are valuing something. Does it mean not caring about larger institutions then?

Yes, because we rarely make progress in other aspects. For technological problems there's a clear solution that people will buy if it works. Deliberate sociological change you may have to force, which is never a good basis.

Are China's politics cutthroat? As an ignorant western person it appears their government is always acting in unison, much more so than in the US for example. Definetely worth reading more on.

Exactly. He effectively created his algorithm on the training data set, and can't independently verify the results.

Notably, the words used in the game are meant to be guessed by humans -- so using an optimal strategy that considers every english word should perform fairly well.

I think the explosive social growth comes from this simplicity. You are not told how well you did or get to try multiple examples. The only way to find that out is to share the product.

Probably an unintentional effect, but a powerful one.

Not just "why we are afraid of big numbers", also why we do not intuitely understand exponentials (as referenced earlier in the article). Exponentials appear in nature, but humans rarely had to deal with them until a few thousand years ago.

The core of this hypothesis: Approximating things (e.g. numbers) is an innately human instinct, while precise computation using abstract symbols evolved only recently. In nature there's rarely a large difference between 1.0 and 1.1.

It's applied to the big number problem in the next paragraph.

Or very small numbers, like understanding how atoms work in order to synthesize stronger materials. Or in general, attempting to understand things that are outside our direct field of view and intuitive understanding.

I like the author's argument. Reasoning about big numbers is reasoning about what we don't know -- the first step of getting to know it.

Meaning, you can come up with a solution to an NP problem in polynomic time (something represented by an exponential), if you take the optimal choice every time there is a choice (non-deterministic). Which is the same as verifying that a given solution is correct, by just following it's steps.

It's about finding the best representation of big numbers, not thinking of them.

Interestingly, I enjoy reading the articles more when I stumble upon them browsing their home page, rather than through a newsletter subscription. There's something to exploring vs. consuming.

But it makes sense that they want to optimise for newsletter subscribers.

That's the best feedback you can get if you want to be truly independent.

A similar read on the topic: https://www.oliverburkeman.com/time

That's not neccesarily the ideal for all people. But it should at least be a choice what to do with our time.

What a well-written intro!

But production per day must have slowed down since you always had less people working at once. It's an interesting way to increase utilization of industrial equipment -- you don't have to increase capacity, but can use the same things longer. Assuming you rotated 2 rest days within 7 day weeks that would mean you need 2/7 = 28% less workplaces for people (maybe ore smelters for example), which could be significant.

Here's a great example of one such study into life science research, which seems to be directly inspired by Progress Studies: https://guzey.com/how-life-sciences-actually-work/

It's recommended to configure this library by setting environment variables.

The thing I don't like about configuration via environment variables is that everything is limited/reduced to the string type. You can't even use simple numeric types, let alone nice rich value objects like you could if configuration were done in the native language (Ruby).

If you try to, you get:

ENV['STATSD_SAMPLE_RATE'] = 1
config/initializers/statsd.rb:8:in `[]=': no implicit conversion of Integer into String (TypeError)

Princípio da tangência no interior, para as curvaturas médias de ordem superior.

O conceito de uma hipersuperfície está (localmente) acima ou abaixo de uma outra.

Essa fórmula de monoticidade de fato vale em um cenário mais amplo, vide essa anotação, por exemplo.

Esse é um ingrediente fundamental na nossa abordagem para a desigualdade de Alexandrov-Frenchel via desigualdade de Penrose.

Vide teorema 2.1, no final da sessão.

Note que de agora em diante o autor se detém a estudar esse caso particular, onde estão inteiramente determinadas as geometrias intrínseca e extrínseca das folhas do semi cilindro, obtido folheando-se pelas paralelas o exterior da hipersuperfície estritamente convexa dada a priori.

Observe que essa equação fica inteiramente determinada pela especificação da geometria intrínseca e extrínseca das folhas.

Para uma ideia do que é essencial se saber sobre a geometria das folhas do semi cilindro, vide essa anotação.

O papel da aplicação \( u: N \longrightarrow \mathbb{R} \) é distorcer as fibras do semi cilindro \( N \), por dilatações e torções, deixando a geometria intrínseca das folhas invariante, de tal forma que o resultado seja um semi cilindro com a curvatura escalar prescrita \( \mathcal{R} \).

Isso significa que a construção a seguir é feita a partir de um semi cilindro em que a geometria das folhas é dada a priori.

Esse artigo não trata da construção desse semi cilindro inicial.

A prova dessa proposição deixa mais claro o que é essencial saber sobre a geometria das folhas do semi cilindro reto, para que seja possível deformar suas fibras prescrevendo a curvatura escalar, conforme foi descrito (com mais generalidade) por Shi-Tam.

More via/direct linking on social media will allow this type of behavior.

When this was written, overriding getters for native DOM properties was not possible.

annotate through via

Error 1000 Ray ID: 1e70d2a751550d7f • 2015-05-15 18:14:30 UTC

DNS points to prohibited IP

What happened?

You've requested a page on a website (www.autostraddle.com) that is on the CloudFlare network. Unfortunately, it is resolving to an IP address that is creating a conflict within CloudFlare's system.

Hey look!!1! "group annotation services"!

Here's one: http://via.hypothes.is/