Web Annotations are what we need right now. Let people write and scribble all over webpages and share with other people in an open, vendor-neutral format. Choose who you trust, from journalists to organizations to neighbors to experts to conspiracy theorists. Let commentaries and interpretations appear overlaid on government websites and documents, Wikipedia, opinion pieces, social media, Archive.org, anything and everything. Let it be out of the hands of the content hosts.
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
JellyBeanThief commented on Ann, the Small Annotation Server mccd.space/posts/design-p... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti
JellyBeanThief commented on Why 'Margin Call' remains Wall Street's favorite movie semafor.com/article/04/28... · Posted by u/jmsflknr
I‘m no expert in this area, but isn’t it by now an agreed-upon insight that a society of people working towards selfish interests end up unintentionally bettering circumstances for the society at large?
It very much is not.
We can put a man in the moon yet technology has been unable to create even a single baby. Something that even two of the dumbest high schoolers you can find can easily do.
"We can X yet technology has been unable to even Y" is one of the most famously repeatedly defeated positions in history. People have had to run marathons to keep those goal posts out of reach.
JellyBeanThief commented on Justin Trudeau promises to resign as PM cbc.ca/news/politics/trud... · Posted by u/sirteno
Perhaps bad phrasing, it is an emotional issue having lived through it.
I like to think that I don't live in a country ruled by a King but rather in a community of citizens who have collectively agreed on a way of doing things. This includes the right to express dissent against other citizens to whom we have delegated certain decision-making responsibilities. A permit isn't about seeking permission; it's about ensuring an orderly process so that things don't devolve into chaos and bouncy castles.
At the time, I think we were also in stage 2 lockdown(which should have been enough to stop it), so the people bearing the brunt of these actions, whatever you want to label it as, were not the ones making those decisions. Our elected officials don't live inside Parliament Hill.
> A permit isn't about seeking permission
Then they need to be renamed.
You mean uninterested?
It's worth noting that a lot of parents forced to go through with unplanned pregnancies are uninterested. They didn't want their children, and they will do the bare minimum necessary to keep them alive until 18.
Decline of the stay at home mom. Both parents tired from work means less quality attention, less consistent meals, etc..
Sounds like we need to shorten the work week
After trying out a bunch of digital zettelkasten tools, I just went back to paper.
This take may be a bit hot, but I actually think paper and pen is already the optimal maxima for thinking—not for retrieval, mind you, but for helping us produce new thoughts. Zettelkasten (at least the way Luhmann used it) is meant for this purpose—it is not a system for storing information and retrieving it but rather for supporting the creation of new connections.
The computer aided tools are suboptimal for this because they lack the good constrains of paper (severely limiting the search space) and the good features (seamless ability to incorporate a variety of representational modes, text, image, equation, with zero overhead, and the ability to organize things freely in space). As much as the digital knowledge base sounds good in theory, I don't think it will ever be as optimal for generation of thought. If all you want to do is summon existing information, digital tools are evidently superior. I personally think a hybrid system where one "thinks" on paper and "archives" digitally (after the thinking is done) might be best, but ultimately, we will be most productive with whatever system we actually enjoy using.
> the ability to organize things freely in space
This is the key. It's not enough for digital tools to just put things in folders or tag them. It's the links themselves that need elevation. People need to add metadata to links, they need to apply rules specifying what links to crawl and how to arrange them in space, they need to specify how content should be displayed in islands of connected content. Then they need to be able to arrange islands on a 2d, 2.5d, or 3d canvas.
We have information input and retrieval solved. For some reason it's taking a real long time for people to get to spread out.
I wonder if there is even a single player in the tournament who cares about the dress code. It is hard to imagine anyone who was serious about chess caring about the material a player’s pants are made of. No, I think this falls squarely in the realm of bureaucratic administrators who have nothing better to do than assert their power and maintain the illusion of a connection between talent (great chess players) and the trivial signaling games of the upper class (the style of pants one is wearing).
> I think this falls squarely in the realm of bureaucratic administrators who have nothing better to do than assert their power and maintain the illusion of a connection between talent (great chess players) and the trivial signaling games of the upper class (the style of pants one is wearing).
I concur except about the bureaucratic administrators. I think they do this because the upper class will replace them if they don't do the work of asserting the upper class's power.
Cool man, don't try and live forever.
Maybe people who haven't had their innate curiosity beaten out of them will get more resources to explore.
I just can't help seeing the same moral panic in this as I see in arguments against UBI.
It's like how many people with fuck you money have you met? I would say: "Trust me, humans do just fine without external deadlines or want." but it only takes like 30 seconds to find countless real people whose lives trivially destroy the whole line of argument.
How about this obvious counter point, making long term, 100 year research investments makes way more sense to any person who has the chance to see them pay off.
Right now this type of longterm thinking has only a few hive entities (RCC, governments, research labs) who can operate this way and we'd get a lot more exploring done if we can enable whatever percentage of the population was born with unbound curiosity to explore to their merriment.
Other commenters here are doing that too, more or less. But yeah, no one's proposing forced immortality. We have a cultural habit of assuming our right to choose for everyone else, we see people doing it even when they're actually advocating for universal rights to choose.
If you're sufficiently bored at age 450 or 45, go ahead and end your life. Your life belongs to you, not to other people. Just don't harsh the mellow of the person who's happy reading books until age 45,000.