But I've also become allergic to that language—the rhetoric around "solving problems" and "building things" that springs from the privileged mindset of the lone techno-savior. I suspect this mindset is one reason the old-school punks didn't quite make it. Sometimes, there are no clear-cut problems and nobody needs to build anything new. Sometimes we just need to talk about it. If we build anything, it should be not software, but consensus. I, too, want to help shape these emerging computational layers to be less coercive and extractive, more expressive and equitable, before it's too late. So I think the most effective thing I can do now is to join various publics, listen to how people understand and engage with technologies, and let that understanding shape my work as I work to shape that understanding. I don't know how to do it yet, but I'm trying.

There are more interesting views in the foothills.

listening to a podcast at a multiple of its intended speed goes against the grain of the medium, which is better suited to soothe, comfort, entertain, or saturate the environment than to impart knowledge. ​ In this sense, using computers makes us act more like computers.

and exercise and yoga and turning off devices and caffeine and pep talks—these can all help with our metaphorical recharge, but they’re not a perfect formula like a plug into a correctly-shaped hole. Sometimes are bodies and minds are stubborn mysteries. I have been thinking lately, as usual, our language about wellness is bending toward the language of machines. the one and only infallible, deep-in-the-bones, rejuvenating source of energy, has been the love of good people. the warmth of friends I haven’t seen in a year, and who have lit my face up with a grin so expansive that I find my cheeks sore at the end of the day.

Some of the ideas are a bit contradictory, which I suspect is the nature of all useful advice: you’ll have to work through the conflicts and details yourself. One of the reasons I write online is so that folks can discover me, and being discoverable has lead to many of the best things in my life. if you stay somewhere that you’re very comfortable for too long, then you’re missing out on so much future growth.

That two experienced developers could hold such conflicting views on commit access belies a quiet but growing tension between past and present norms in open source. ​ The salient issue for maintainers today is less about growing contributor numbers and more about navigating the flow of developers who are clamoring for their time. In a world where single maintainers like Dominic Tarr maintain hundreds of tiny modules, we need to reframe the question from “Why would he do that?” to “How do we design for trustless interactions?”

I recently stumbled upon this tweet from Aaron Lewis: “what if old tweets were displayed with the profile pic you had at the time of posting. a way to differentiate between past and present selves.” ​ I’m going to set aside for now an obviously and integrally related matter: to what degree should our present self be held responsible for the utterances of an older iteration of the self that resurface through the operations of our new memory machines? ​ What I’m reading into Lewis’s proposal then is an impulse, not at all unwarranted, to reassert a measure of agency over the operations of digitally mediated memory. ​ Yes, that was me as I was, but that is no longer me as I now am, and this critical difference was implicit in the evolution of my physical appearance, which signaled as much to all who saw me. No such signals are available to the self as it exists online.

In other words, the ‘success’ of technologies like self-checkout machines is in large part produced by the human effort necessary to maintain the technologies ​ Their broader point is that automation doesn’t eliminate human labor; it often leads to its disguising and devaluation ​ Customers have to bridge the gap between the norms of human customer service and the company’s imposition of inhuman staff shortfalls without completely losing their patience or simply taking what they couldn’t find a reasonable way to purchase. ​ That is, they rely on the kinds of consideration from users that the companies themselves don’t practice. ​ They have prioritized user growth, data collection, and advertising over providing a safe, reliable service to users. It’s no wonder that some users will adopt the same attitude and the same goals: try to spread unwanted messages as far as possible.

Now, we can admit, at sufficiently high resolution we’re all effectively homeless a lot of the time. ​ Last week, I attended Ribbonfarm’s annual meetup in Los Angeles (which was fantastic). In Venkatesh Rao’s closing remarks, he observed that the audience wasn’t so much a community as an airport: a bunch of people on individual trajectories sharing the same physical space momentarily before dispersing again. ​ If we can instead learn to design parts of the world for airport-like assemblages and the fractal nature of physical existence — the world we currently inhabit — we might actually find that we get more of what we’re seeking from communities.

Fascination in the Kaplan’s sense is a magical (that’s my word) quality of an environment where your attention is held but not drained.

The problem is that if you’re not reflecting, you’re not learning. And if you’re not learning, it’s quite easy to get stuck or to find you’re working on the wrong thing. Reflection is like sleep—you need it but you tend to only appreciate it after you’ve had it. You could poll everyone, but honestly it’s easier to just pick a date and see what happens.

Indeed, what Spotify calls “streaming intelligence” should be understood as surveillance of its users to fuel its own growth and ability to sell mood-and-moment data to brands. ​ When a platform like Spotify sells advertisers on its mood-boosting, background experience, and then bakes these aims into what it recommends to listeners, a twisted form of behavior manipulation is at play. It’s connected to what Shoshana Zuboff, in The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for A Human Future at the New Frontier of Power, calls the “behavioral futures market”—where “many companies are eager to lay their bets on our future behavior.”

many people now rely on their employer to pay the premium for insurance against the erosion of their social life. ​ Hardly a cause for either company’s success, but certainly a tailwind. ​ Ironically this would mean that WeWork didn’t stand on the shoulders of Facebook as a user acquisition machine so much as it cleaned up what Facebook left in its wake as an alienation machine.

but because she’d gladly fill me in on all the new things she’s loving and not let me leave her apartment until I’ve tried them all. ​ and then promptly forget to drink it for an hour

Given the following definition of `Prism`: ```swift struct Prism { let preview: (A) - B? let review: (B) - A } ```

Within hours of yesterday's post, I had some new information to consider.

one that emphasises the study of a whole through not only its parts, but the precise way it is built up from its parts. ​ We will welcome papers on implementation.

The full panel Q&A and discussion with Josh Abernathy, Justin Spahr-Summers, Uri Baghin, Dave Lee, and Jon Sterling from the 2014 Reactive Cocoa Developer Conference hosted by GitHub. As always, feel free to leave us a comment below and don't forget to subscribe: http://bit.ly/subgithub Thanks! Connect with us. Facebook: http://fb.com/github Twitter: http://twitter.com/github Google+: http://google.com/+github LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/company/github About GitHub GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Millions of people use GitHub to build amazing things together. For more info, go to http://github.com

Let's start discussing Apple's Combine framework by discussing what's missing

the major skill that all of you have acquired is how to be a more thoughtful, invested, engaged person in today’s world. That’s hard to put on a resume, and even if you could, I don’t know if employers would value it: somehow “understanding how ideologies of race, sexuality, and gender are encoded in the media that surrounds us and influence our interactions with each other” isn’t as marketable as “Proficient in Excel.” ​ There’s an old union slogan I’ve been thinking about a lot: 8 hours for rest, 8 hours for work, 8 hours to do what you will. What you do with that time “to do what you will” — go outside, read deeply and widely, go to the Bijou every night for popcorn with brewer’s yeast, run for office, go to church, advocate for things that actually matter to you — that is just as much who you are, if not more so, than the time you spend at work. Unions understood and still understand: work is part of life. But only part. ​ We don’t have to monetize our hobbies.We don’t have to value education for its ability to provide readily marketable skills.

But as a result, I am remembering much of my life through the algorithmic frameworks of these third-party companies. ​ Consequently, we view photographs not merely as relatively rare artifacts capturing particularly significant moments but as prosthetic extensions of ourselves and our interior lives. ​ When algorithms intervene in how and when we interact with our photographs, they secure a deeply emotional inroad to our identity-forming practices. ​ These images and the way they are algorithmically organized don’t merely remind us of the past; they help shape how we think of ourselves in the present and how we might think to document our lives and articulate ourselves in the future. ​ — making us audiences of ourselves as the algorithms piece together our “best” stories for us. ​ But “Memories” features rewire relationships in such a way that makes commercial platforms indispensable mediators. ​ memories become susceptible to being evaluated according to performance metrics. ​ we must ask what memories are left on the outskirts. What experiences are illegible to or unvalued by a commercial system? What does it mean for our subjectivities at large that we are all building our memories around same scaffolding? Over four decades ago, Susan Sontag posited that photography enables “an aesthetic consumerism to which everyone is now addicted.” As a multiplier of photography’s influence, algorithmically fueled “Memories” features bring us deeper into a supercharged aesthetic consumerism that shapes our personal narratives along the lines of influencer culture.

When we’re unable to answer a question, it tells us we need to return to the material to review or relearn it. In a sense, this is a sort of reality reconciliation akin to checkins, therapy, OmniFocus Reviews, and the like. The “Study Deck” item in the Tools menu allows you to quickly switch to a deck with the keyboard. You can trigger it with the `/` key. When opened, it will display all of your decks and show a filter area at the top. As you type characters, Anki will display only decks matching the characters you type. You can add a space to separate multiple search terms, and Anki will show only decks that match all the terms.

This maintains proposals for changes and user-visible enhancements to the Swift Programming Language. - swift-evolution/XXXX-function-builders.md at 9992cf3c11c2d5e0ea20bee98657d93902d5b174 · apple...