It has been a popular idea, both recently and throughout history, that reducing the scope, variety, or number of choices faced by people is or can be good. But apparently they can't measure the effect any more!
From Tyler at Marginal Revolution.
Beautiful evidence of our world
It has been a popular idea, both recently and throughout history, that reducing the scope, variety, or number of choices faced by people is or can be good. But apparently they can't measure the effect any more!
From Tyler at Marginal Revolution.
Is it a violation of copyright to use a font by copying it by hand? If not, why should we treat computers (and, hence, files) differently?
Do economists only/often/.../ever give cash gifts for birthdays/Christmas/Hannukah/weddings?
And what does that say about the relative importance of signaling in human affairs?
Are economists a stronger or weaker proxy for the importance of signaling in this regard?
In general, are guild allegiances sufficiently strong to counter public hypocrisy?
I thought I was going to watch G.I. Joe.
Instead, I watched Funny People.
G.I. Joe would have been HEAVY – like a truck.
Funny People weighed at least four (4) Earth suns.
Oof.
Using Enso 'learn as open' command, I made the following 'open _' commands:
Now, I just hold the Caps Lock key and press 'o', then start typing any of the commands to launch the corresponding site.
This is almost as cool as the highlight (select) and 'Search google for _' Chrome command!
EconLog has had several posts about the recent productivity growth measured (of the US economy) and how it relates to 'organizational capital'. The idea is that productivity doesn't necessarily measure more labor on the part of the (remaining) workers; rather it can include substantial improvements in things like business processes, procedures – i.e. how a business operates. See this post for a recent example.
I have a perfect example from my own job: software as organizational capital. I work for a small software company and my job, as Support Director, has consisted in large part of developing improvements for our existing processes, like building the software from the latest 'source' version (e.g. making the new version of the program based on the accumulated changes made to fix bugs and add new features), or tracking the time we spend on specific projects or tasks. More and more, 'organizational capital' will be 'informational capital' in the form of software developed by internal programmers within a company!
Those spreadsheets that the Excel-guru in your company makes to track earnings, sales, etc. – encourage them to make them even better! Invest in your internal organizational-capital accumulators!
The most frightening thing about a byzantine legal system, beyond the uncertainty as to whether you are a criminal, is that you can get away with something for such a long time, that when the inefficient bureaucracies that make-up governments everywhere finally get around to your 'crime', you're screwed.
Wow &mdash gmail filters are ... amazing. And the 'create a filter' 'wizard' is brilliant. What do you want to do? This? That? Why certainly! Please &mdash you're too kind.
Though, I wonder: if you tell it to 'skip the inbox' and you only apply a label; where are the emails? In the label? [Does where even matter? It's really 'where'-ever it's accessed, so maybe the violation of strict folderism isn't really that bad, however inconsistent it seems to me now.]
The name of my filter I just created? "Paul Levin's Facebook firehose" &mdash I just made the almost-mistake of commenting on Paul's status update; it was "365 days till Bear Creek!!!!!!!". The Bear Creek Music Festival just ended yesterday evening. It was the fuckingshit. Only 365 days ...
[Oh ... I only get the first five comments to Paul's status that follow mine. Oh well &mdash the filters are still awesome. Even if I never use them again.]
[I need to check that this little rant isn't completely off-base (false).]
We (programmers [especially of free or open-source software]) should be using tools that make it easy (i.e. easier) to let others collaborate with us.
I use Inkscape and I love it. It's a great, kickass vector-graphics editor and creator. I've used Illustrator before, as a trial and ... as pirated software, and I'd love to use Illustrator. I'd switch in a heartbeat – but it's $~270-300 ["~$270-300"?], so ... no thanks. Inkscape is good-enough.
But the PDF output is bloated. And I keep thinking about it. And I keep almost-downloading the source code, and all the tools, and I get as far as thinking these thoughts before I write this instead.
And I'm too scattered, in terms of the tools I use (let alone those I'd like to use!). I've programmed in dozens of languages and many more libraries and hundreds of different tools – just give me everything in one click and suddenly your development team is marginally more capable. Even if I do nothing other than read your source code.
This argument is completely general too. We need to (eventually) make everything easier – in the limit, no barrier isn't worth eliminating (even as everything of worth is defined by it's intrinsic 'barricades'!).
I was living under the delusion that Levi's were (still) quality jeans. I have been educated.
I've only had the damn things for a couple of months? [Right?]
I'll buy a copy soon Cory!
I was sucked into it completely – I got home from a party last night around 5 (am) and finished the last ~50 pages by 6, and oh was it worth it.
It's an engaging, near-future tech-fi story following a handful of wonderfully motley characters. But the inspiration it's imparted has been the greatest pleasure &mdash my head is still spinning!
A great quote from Cory Doctorow's new book Makers:
Lots of people tried to play it safe. It didn’t make them assholes, even if it did make them ineffectual and useless.
Finally! I need more room for newer books anyways. My only quibble with the article is the first phrase:
It’s hard to believe ...
I had no trouble believing.