The relevant Wikileaks cable is here.

I think this probably creates a copyright issue.

Also, who would do the cloning, where would it be hosted. This would essentially fork content, and perhaps result in an even greater loss of control? What happens if the blogger wants to update the master, how do they update the copy?

I made this!

ho

Or... pretty much everything else. Human reaction time is nowhere near fast enough to dodge an incoming missile or other attack. I'm not a fan of killer robots, but this argument is incredibly disingenuous.

The counterpoint to this of course is that if annotation becomes as widespread, standardized and pervasive as we imagine it will-- and indeed hope it will-- then the notion that anyone can see the stall without the graffiti may become a moot point.

Can you believe it had maggots in it? Eewww!

test

test

We agree for essentially the same reason. That's why we formed Hypothes.is as a non-profit, according to a set of principles.

This is not completely accurate in two important ways. First, the Genius Web Annotator is a javascript client that can be injected either via a browser extension or via a proxy. Only the proxy version retrieves the page via their server. Their chrome extension does not. Our own open source annotation client at Hypothes.is works the same way.

Second, I think it's probably a stretch to say that a proxy redirect that is used solely for the purpose of injecting the javascript annotation layer is appropriation in exactly the same sense. Originally Rap Genius duplicated the lyrics on their website, depriving the original publisher of royalties or advertising revenue that they might have made. The proxy redirect doesn't permanently republish the work, but pulls it newly each time the proxy is clicked. Ads that are on the pages are redisplayed, paywalls are respected.

Certainly you could make the argument that because the proxy redirect strips the user information away and thus blinds the publisher to details about the user that might be helpful in targeting ads, that there is a possible commercial loss to publishers.

However, if you neither serve ads nor need meticulous analytics around exactly who is clicking on your site (probably most bloggers), then whether the reader comes via a proxied link or directly by browsing to your site may be more academic than substantive. The server load is the same and the end result is that your page is copied into their browser where they can read it.

Those of us in the annotation community (and particularly those of us that participate in the W3C Web Annotation working group) are working to deliver specifications and implementations of annotation that can eventually ship natively with browsers--eliminating the need for tricks like extensions or proxies. You'd sign into the annotation services (i.e. communities) that you want to listen to.

It's probably worth separating the technical implementation from the conceptual discussion of the speech that's happening (and in what ways it's both connected to and removed from what it references), since there are a variety of ways (some now and some in the future) that this layer can manifest. I'm not suggesting that there's no room for a discussion of proxies, or site owners' rights with respect to them, simply that perhaps there are two discussions worth having.

Is the corollary argument here that via a web extension I shouldn't be able to create an annotation on a remote server (even if that annotation isn't delivered and reanchored to the original content thru a proxy)?

Here's an extensive list we maintain (not exhaustively, nor accurately in many of the details, but as more of a scratch pad). We had extensive interviews and discussions with many on this list in developing Hypothes.is, including John Atcheson (mentioned below), who's a friend and colleague that I also worked with in assisting Getaround, as well as his co-founder Todd Herman.

The primary difference here is that the site is implementing, and integrating, the tech directly into the page. Medium is only "annotation" in the sense that it's in the margin-- in all other respects it's simply the same paradigm as the other flavors of web commenting systems, such as Disqus, Livefyre, fb comments, etc.

Web annotation in the sense of the W3C definition is a model where annotation services are provided by third parties and lie elsewhere. Users invite them to your page, and otherwise they're not visible to other readers who have not done the same.

Lets assume for the sake of argument that annotation providers did not offer proxy services, or that those proxy services could be prevented by publishers using something like an annotate.txt file (or even simply metadata in HTML headers that said effectively "please don't proxy").

But that even if you were explicit about not wanting your pages to be proxied, your pages could still be annotated by users with various browser extensions, or by the tech that is eventually likely to ship natively with browsers.

Would you have an objection to this kind of annotation?

Saying that the NYT lets you "select which articles are available for annotation" suggests that somehow they are exercising editorial control over annotation in the same way that they do for their native commenting platform-- which is disabled for selected and usually controversial articles, op-ed pieces, etc.

However, what the NYT did was demand that Genius disable their proxy service (what you get when you prepend a URL with genius.it/) for NYT articles. The reason that Genius complied is that the NYT could have blocked the proxy anyway (and may have done so).

However, NYT articles can still be annotated by using the Genius web extension. The NYT has no way of knowing whether the reader happens to deploy an annotation extension within the scope of their browser.

In this respect, Genius and Hypothesis function the same way. The architecture is dictated by the realities of the way the Web works.

Many of us feel that ultimately annotation tech may ship natively with browsers, eliminating most of the friction involved in their use, but also any recourse that publishers may have to block conversations. Thus the tension described elsewhere here between speaking truth to power and having control over conversations that are unwanted.

Your blog is still yours.

Because you're speaking publicly, people are going to talk about it, on twitter, on facebook, on reddit... and with annotation. There's nothing different about annotation except that it "magically" brings the things people say over top of your content. There's Genius, there's Hypothesis, and potentially someone may create a plugin that brings tweets over the top of the posts they're about. But the key difference here is that it's your readers that are consciously making the choice to bring those communities over your content. When I come to your blog post without those tools, your content is just the way you intended it, with only your clean unfettered page.

The problem of course is that if you provide a way to disable annotation, then it pretty much kills the "speak truth to power" angle.

This. So much of organizational conditioning and response-- and really modern life-- can be summed up in this one statement.

A fantastic insight that really gets to the root of different kinds of social psychology. Some people want to participate in and contribute to society. Some want to tear it down. Others want to poke it and see how it responds while sipping tequila.

It's the law!

The new Ben-Hur can't possibly beat the old one.

What's wrong with a little arsenic in your tea?

Actually the VA gets most sjdflajdf;kasdjf;ljasd.m

are developing

are

... into the foreground either as private, group or public comments.

s, N

... thus use cases in Europe will benefit from this.

Hypothes.is

"... implementing the emerging W3C standard open annotation data model ..."

Not sure what you mean by angles

Page

This looks interesting.

Sanders is never going to make it.

I wish more American companies-- well, actually just more companies period-- had the balls to do this. Apple has a lot of faults, but it needs to be said that very few companies would ever take this kind of public stand about anything.

Is there some particular reason this would take 5G speeds? Sounds like a 2G bandwidth event.

A screenshot of SideWiki.

Here's an example of their UI. Question: Can we improve upon the sidebar design approach? So many projects use it, ours included.

Here's a spreadsheet of such projects we've been maintaining. Edits welcome.

One of my all time favorites:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0t0EW6z8a0

here

Bpah

Here

This is the thing. https://help.passpack.com/knowledgebase/idx.php/46/107/article/How-to-Activate-Secure-Collaboration-Features.html

Perhaps I should set up such a home. Might help defray the monthly food bill.

Pardon me from asking the obvious-- but why don't people eat these "abandoned" chickens?

Apparently this might not be such a great idea

Dave Winer's thoughts on why Anywhere but Medium

Listen... here @ 17:29:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te8AIbQ7tDg&feature=youtu.be&t=17m29s

I think we take this kind of BS as fairly pedestrian unfortunately. "Oh yeah, they said we needed to file a FOIA request." But think about that. Here is a high profile court case that depended on a rare lab technique that was created de novo for this one request, based on a single 1997 study (the info that this test was done uniquely for this one request was in the Netflix documentary).

Folks have questions about the procedure, and instead of being transparent about what they did, our government essentially says "Fuck you, force us to give it you if you really want it."

At least we have the docs here, so I guess we should be grateful for that?

Citation please? I've heard no serious arguments towards this end. He'll keep trying and eventually he'll succeed. It may take another year of failures. They're being paid full price for these launches, so from a traditional space services perspective, any experiments he wants to do to recover rocket stages at the end of these launches is really up to him. Who are these theoretical detractors? Strawmen for the purposes of writing clickbait?

Ha.. was this a deliberate teacher joke? If so, I applaud! http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/chalkfull.html

I can see a perspective on this-- particularly in large organizations where individuals may primarily toil for the upward accumulation of wealth towards executives and shareholders.

But there is another perspective-- that of the individual scientist, the small entrepreneur, the social worker. Dedicated, passionate individuals performing magic by accomplishing things that others cannot, often unreasonably constrained by time, money and resources.

What about negotiating our rights away in secret, and subordinating sovereign rights to corporate interests? http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/heres_why_the_trans-pacific_partnership_agreement_just_plain_wrong_20150107

I hope the irony in pairing these sentences was intended.

Disagree on the 2nd point. Terrorist networks have vastly less impact on our citizens than many many other things, including citizens shot by police.

Somewhere Trump is eating an Oreo

Not to rain on this parade, but how much of this is due to unprecedented amounts of quantitative easing? http://www.startribune.com/unease-with-quantitative-easing-is-going-global/363399171/

And let's not forget Prescott Bush, father of George H. W. Bush, our 41st president. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

As much as I dislike Trump, this "ritual" is essentially just common sense. If I were running for office, I'd do exactly the same thing. Why deprive yourself of this intel? And the video tapes of him succeeding? Could just be a homegrown form of positive reinforcement that he uses to review his interactions and refine his messaging.

Thanks for the coverage David, and I absolutely love the OA search engine you've created with JURN. If you read this, reach out to connect with us, I'd love to chat.

We've got our own list too.

Note that it reads "much of scholarship". Even without the majors (though they're already curious), I think we'll get there. What this really requires is momentum and buy-in from users and a majority of publishers, but not necessarily all of them. The browser extensions already give us a way to reach into content we don't control-- but support from major publishers helps us with content that's more challenging, and helps to signal to readers a default solution.

These are great questions, lets break them down:

Hand annotation-- I think this one is easy. People will annotate what they want to discuss, i.e. people's attention will be spent as they determine it should. Clearly not everything will get an annotation-- but then there are many papers that are never even read. However, the more pervasive, standards-based, powerful and user-centric an annotation capability is, the more it will be used. And by that I don't mean the Hypothes.is service, but rather a client through which you can connect with your annotation service of choice.

Linkrot checking and repair -- This could easily be assisted through automation. I can imagine us crawling annotations periodically (and/or checking them when they're served). Broken links could either be signaled as an issue to the original annotator, or potentially checked against a web archive (e.g. archive.org) and supplanted with a reference there-- or both.

Moderation-- Obviously this is the most important question. If annotation becomes spammy, then users and (particularly) publishers will stop using it. But there are wide variety of strategies we can explore to address this, including community flagging, leveraging groups, using algorithms to identify likely spam and focus resources on it, gating initial permissions by scoring registration email addresses and other such options.

We will shortly support annotation of PDFs against their Adobe ID fingerprint. This will remove the need for a stable URL for PDFs, and will enable use cases like annotating PDFs that you save to disk or receive via email from others.

Otherwise we can also relate two HTML pages to eachother (or to a PDF) if the same content is available elsewhere.

The video I think they're talking about is here, though at the key point the camera points away. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKWw

This: http://www.hoverboard360.com/

Not to be confused with this: https://hoverboard.com/

Is the money Taboola offers really worth the degree to which it debases the content it's embedded on? (Don't answer that!)

Or perhaps, "contribute annotations"?!

But a bunch of annotations ^

We also support embedding the javascript application on a page, so that it's there by default. https://hypothes.is/for-publishers/

Blah.

What? No one should ever try to redesign others' work because they might have less than complete information about the decisions that went into it? "cough" Bullshit!

Like this.

Here's LaTeX math support in the pull quote.

$$\(a^2+b^2 =(p^2-q^2)^2+(2pq)^2 =p^4-2p^2q^2+q^4+4p^2q^2 =p^4+2p^2q^2+q^4 =(p^2+q^2)^2 =c^2\)$$

$$1/(1-x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n$$

$$\begin{matrix} -2 & 1 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ 1 & -2 & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & -2 & 1 & \cdots & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & -2 & \ddots & \vdots \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 1 & -2 \end{matrix}$$

Saying relevant.

How exactly does one reflect ... strategically?

Add another note.

Write something here that I feel passionately about.

مل المسار الانتخابي مستقبلا، واستخلص بأن هيئة تختصر صلاحياتها في المراقبة الحصرية للانتخابات كما ورد في الرسالة الرئاسية الأخيرة، لا تعبر سوى عن إرادة الإطالة في عمر التزوير المتفشي في المنظومة السياسية الوطنية بأشكال ووسائل أخرى.

Hi!

Hello, I really don't think so.

Here.

This area here.

Here.

Make an annotation

If the battlefront on climate change turns to whether extraction industries have misled investors, that will be an extraordinary turn of events indeed.

Here.

Like this.

This is a test message from Dan

test

Like so

Say something appropriate here.

Test

It would have really been a service to readers here if you could have explored this a bit. What exactly are the limitations of flat discussions Jeff?

I'll take the liberty of offering my list:

Flat discussions:

1. Don't scale well to many participants. After a very short while the conversation maxes out, and people are talking over each other.
2. Don't work well on popular posts. This is a variation of the first point, with the emphasis on participants in a compressed period of time.
3. Force hacks like the use of @mentions at the beginning of lines to target remarks to a specific person.
4. Get noisy quickly.
5. Dumb down conversations to the few ideas and few voices that are sustainable before things get too congested.

Actually only in older usenet style systems. In forums like Reddit, you don't have to click through anywhere, and the 'collapsor' at the root of any branch lets you quickly "read-by-collapsing' as you quickly decide that each branch doesn't deal with a subject you're interested in.

In other words, having the conversation you want to have is "getting off topic". Says who? Who decides which conversation is "on topic"? The tyranny of the single loud room, in which only simple conversations can be had by a few folks?

Not to belabor the point, but the whole point of threading is to allow people to "start a new topic" if they want to "get off topic", but without disturbing those who prefer to continue discussing the thing they were.

Often so are normal discussions. Does that mean we shouldn't have them? Conversations are complex things.

test

Something that I'd like to say.

I think stickiness should be for top-level source annotations, not replies.  The reply should default to the parent, particularly for groups.

How did you do that?

Agree with this. Wider is better.

VERY soon.

I actually don't see it that way. When I ask if "that makes sense", I can just as often if not more likely be asking whether I make sense-- appealing to them as the sensible judge, and implying that perhaps I am the one that is "non-sense".

Someone who is perhaps overly self-critical might see it the other way around of course, but I don't think the question as stated carries a negative connotation.

Test

Wait, not a whisper in this entire article about what utter crap the F-35 apparently is, completely unsuited for many of the fundamental tasks it was designed? The cynic in me is amused that the Chinese may have replicated a turd, the counterpoint of course is that they may have been following the news and fixed the flaws themselves.

The first Beyond the PDF workshop was a grass roots affair, held at UCSD in 2011. An except from the page states:

The goal of the workshop was not to produce a white paper! Rather it was to identify a set of requirements, and a group of willing participants to develop a mandate, open source code and a set of deliverables to be used by scholars to accelerate data and knowledge sharing and discovery . Our starting point, and the only prerequisite to participating, was the belief that we need to move Beyond the PDF (meant to capture a common philosophy, not necessarily to be taken literally). In a heady moment we might also describe our efforts as the desire to contribute to the development of a free and open digital printing press for the 21st century.

Haven't you just contradicted the false dilemma you posed in the first paragraph? I was just about to leave a note there venting a little frustration, but here you've knocked that straw man down. Perhaps recraft the opener instead?

test

Richard Stallman is famous for the speaking rider he sends out when he is considering an engagement. The relevant portion:

If you can find a host for me that has a friendly parrot, I will be very very glad. If you can find someone who has a friendly parrot I can visit with, that will be nice too.

DON'T buy a parrot figuring that it will be a fun surprise for me. To acquire a parrot is a major decision: it is likely to outlive you. If you don't know how to treat the parrot, it could be emotionally scarred and spend many decades feeling frightened and unhappy. If you buy a captured wild parrot, you will promote a cruel and devastating practice, and the parrot will be emotionally scarred before you get it. Meeting that sad animal is not an agreeable surprise.

(Yes, I know that's a cockatiel)

I'll give a separate answer, which is that I think there are probably many different models, and hopefully what emerges over time is a spectrum that varies according to context, classroom, strategy, etc.

I do want to call attention as Jeremy did to the groups feature which is launching in just weeks. That will resolve the overall "public" question, allowing you to easily scope it to the classroom. Further breaking it down to 1:1 interaction, easily is something we've heard before. You of course could do that with 25 groups that you manage, one for each student-- but clearly that's cumbersome. Others have said they want a group mode where contributors can only annotate in a way that the administrator (teacher) can see-- possibly until a config has changed and the group is opened to classwide visibility.

Mostly we want to know exactly what students would like in order to make annotating more fun, more effective and more rewarding overall for them.

Thanks so much for taking the time to experiment with us. We look forward to more.

There's a copy of Rob's presentation here.

test

test

Perhaps the reason they have a high turnover rate is because only a very few members make anything approaching a sustainable living. Bill Ackman compares Herbalife to another similar company, Vemma, recently sued for fraudulent marketing practices.

Bill's presentation is here.

Test

This concept was proposed by Robert Heinlein in the 1940 science fiction short story The Roads Must Roll.

Good advice.

This is just crazy wrong to me. What, we aren't supposed to touch other people's work, think about other organization's problems (even though clearly we have limited information about their challenges)? Aren't we frequently asked to give an "outsider's perspective", aren't external consultants unburdened by internal politics sought for their fresh perspectives?

Why stifle this by calling it folly?

I'd add that if applicants send in their own designs without providing the context that helps show their thinking and informs the employer of why they approached a design in the way they did then most certainly I agree. It's the thinking after all that's most valuable. The last mile of "dribbble"-perfect pixels can be a wonderful but finishing veneer that must lie over a solid foundation. But an applicants failure to do that is decidedly unlike what happens when someone attempts to redesign someone else's work or problem space.

In fact, one of my all time favorite redesigns is Tyler Thompson's redesign of Delta Airline's boarding pass. What makes it so great, aside from the range of designs produced (and the alternatives sent in by a wide range of others ) is the thought process he leads us through. Clearly the "redesign of others work" in and of itself is not folly.

Which mothers? Expectant ones? Ones with Downs babies (wouldn't have a need for the test probably, unless it's for the next pregnancy). Or statistically are there fewer Downs babies born in Spain for other reasons?

Oh, and what exactly is "common among abortion-enabling biotechnology companies"?

Citation please.

What you're saying then is that "most humans" have an opinion outside the mainstream of either party. Should this be surprising to us?

I'd love to see data on this though. Otherwise it's kind of just conjecture.

Collection number should read 1269 according to Plantae Hartwegianae.

This notion is exactly what was behind the Sloan grant we and arXiv received. Also, we held a workshop on the potential for annotation as a model for peer review.

It's also available as javascript that can be embedded by site owners, wordpress users, etc. In addition, we have a proxy called "via" that can inject it onto any page on the fly. We have a page that describes the options for publishers.

We agree. This is near the top of our queue right now.

The phenomenon you allude to here is something that I've wondered about. People may want to evolve their thinking in a more restricted circle and, once it's refined-- or they're more confident it won't get ridiculed-- circulate it more widely. It will be interesting to see if this is how it's used.

This is literally the thing we are working on right now and will ship next!

As an english major myself, I often wondered just how many 10s of thousands of years into the future college freshman would be digging through Macbeth and To Kill a Mockingbird for the smallest new angle. But yeah, I'm sure by the time you're in graduate school the stakes are though the roof.

@timmmmyboy created the original Hypothes.is WordPress extension. Thanks Tim!

I think the most interesting part about the Daily Telegraph story is that they actually made a correction as a result.

UPDATE (07/08/15):

Here is the list of statements that have been removed (or modified) from the original version of The Telegraph article:

“River Thames could freeze over in 2030s when Northern Hemisphere faces bitterly cold winters, scientists say” [original subtitle of the article] “The earth is 15 years from a “mini ice-age” that will cause bitterly cold winters during which rivers such as the Thames freeze over, scientists have predicted.“ “[…] in such a way that temperatures will fall dramatically in the 2030s.“ “In a presentation to the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno, she said the result would be similar to freezing conditions of the late 17th century.“ “This had helped create a picture of what would happen in the 2030s.“

http://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/the-telegraph-dan-hyde-earth-heading-for-mini-ice-age-within-15-years/#update

God, this can't come soon enough. Thank you.

Obviously the prediction was a bit off, but the success of primarily video oriented education approaches, like Khan academy 100 years later, does suggest that he was on to something. (Biased though he obviously was!) There is something immediate, visceral and compelling about video as a medium for education.

We're just about to release private group annotation, specifically to address this commonly requested feature!

test

Since we all know that smashing your phone is an effective countermeasure when someone publicizes your personal (and portable) mobile number.

Test annotation

Here's what a sample annotation might look like.

I'll note that the photo is one of construction, not crumbling. :)

Skeptical lawmakers were further irked Monday after the United Nations Security Council unanimously endorsed the deal before Congress had vetted it, which some members viewed as a slight to the legislative branch.

No way no how. It's completely impossible for a video to appear (poorly) edited, complete with gaps and repeats, because it was "affected in the upload". To point out the obvious: 1) Modern error correction, and 2) even absent error correction, any upload error would result in a spectrum of possible outcomes none of which would in anyway remotely resemble the editing of a video in this way.

It quite likely could present a challenge to serendipity if we don't consciously create ways to encourage the sharing of the personal.

From Wikipedia:

Scholars of international relations have identified the modern, Western-originated, international system of states, multinational corporations, and organizations, as having begun at the Peace of Westphalia

Isn't the issue more how the ruthless business practices of Monsanto lead them to abuse the leverage that GMOs give them in controlling much of the world's food supply? If you want to have a conversion on the nutritional merits of GMOs, why go to Monsanto to do so?

This last tension of course is one that should be eliminated.

I assume there's a component of distance from the asteroid belt that factors into the age calculus. In other words, Pluto might look "young" as measured by impacts but one presumes that the opportunity for such impacts over time drops dramatically as one moves to the outer boundaries of the solar system.

How quickly we move from praising to criticizing innovation. How rapidly should we expect full accessibility for what's produced in all contexts?

This is an example.

So it's not just the tweeting of the photo-- it's the construction of the photo in the first place from sources. Another intern?

Surprise.

There's a doubt that this account isn't accurate? That Chapo and his environment wouldn't have been under intense scrutiny after these remarks-- potentially even resulting in his relocation-- seems extraordinary.

I'd say the evidence tilts in the direction these are probably authentic.

Now of course, all of these have foreign subsidiaries which could fully engage.

Again, all these make perfect sense viewed through the lens of business interests.

Easy to say for candidates now, much more difficult if the administration were actually to try to re-establish the sanctions / policy post-election.

The wild card here of course is Israel, and how they factor into all this.

Easy to say for candidates now, much more difficult if the administration were actually to try to re-establish the sanctions / policy post-election.

The wild card here of course is Israel, and how they factor into all this.

Well, because they can still maintain their principled stand while the major corps don't care anymore. Politically perfect compromise?

No, only for "US companies that are not multinationals". I'd be curious to see a list of the companies that might want to engage here that fit this filter.

Pardon me for my cynicism, but to (state the obvious) what this means is that the big players just sidestep around this stuff while the smaller players are blocked by it. Just another data point on how the system continually tips towards the largest multinationals.

Suddenly things all become so much clearer, don't they?

Subtle. Maybe just sneak in and steal the artichokes back later?

Let's be a little more clear here. I think the implication is that the PIN codes and their associated mappings to containers, once stolen via USB-drives can also be intercepted wirelessly (i.e. in real time when containers arrive)? And this of course implies that the codes are transmitted in the clear.

And the port wasn't unaware of this problem, even the potential of abuse, from the very get go?

That this is even possible is astonishing. The only security is whether you can type a pin into a keypad?

Voici une annotation de test. Faites votre propre ou de répondre à la mienne.

What's great is that the actual numbers are so much better than this. I'm clocking this at 5 seconds, not 26.

Hmm.. first question: Why is he traveling to Brussels? He should invite them to Greece to negotiate there.

You're always weaker traveling to the venue of your counterparty. He's probably done that enough by now. Time to switch turf.