vault backup: 2026-02-28 18:38:39
This commit is contained in:
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ tags:
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/draft
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
- topic/organization
|
||||
- topic/ergonomics/organizational
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-04]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-02-27T17:11:14-05:00
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
title: "2026-02-27 17:11:14"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- authorship/original
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/complete
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
date-created: 2026-02-27T17:11:14-05:00
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-27]]"
|
||||
weekly: "[[2026-W09]]"
|
||||
monthly: "[[2026-02]]"
|
||||
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
|
||||
yearly: "[[2026]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-02-27 17:11:14
|
||||
|
||||
I confidently identified a cormorant
|
||||
from a peripheral glance while I was driving.
|
||||
I wondered how I was able to distinguish it from the very similar anhinga
|
||||
(also a black diving bird with a yellow beak and of the same size)
|
||||
despite the distance and poor focus of the sighting,
|
||||
and I believe it was the silhouette.
|
||||
|
||||
While on the water's surface,
|
||||
Cormorants swim like geese or swans, with a S-shaped neck,
|
||||
where anhingas stretch their necks out forward
|
||||
with an upward angle to their beaks.
|
||||
It's because of this difference in posture
|
||||
that I associate cormorants with pride and dignity,
|
||||
where anhingas seem more to me
|
||||
like they're barely hanging on to their niche.
|
||||
|
||||
I'm reminded of a conversation I had recently with a peer.
|
||||
They stated (as I interpreted it)
|
||||
that despite how popular it is to pretend otherwise,
|
||||
animals do not experience emotion
|
||||
in any way meaningfully similar to our own perception.
|
||||
To which I agree.
|
||||
Certainly cormorants do not feel pride,
|
||||
nor do anhingas feel the insecurity I project onto them.
|
||||
but sometimes lies are more useful than truth.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-02-27T17:48:43-05:00
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
title: "2026-02-27 17:48:43"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- authorship/original
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/draft
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
date-created: 2026-02-27T17:48:43-05:00
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-27]]"
|
||||
weekly: "[[2026-W09]]"
|
||||
monthly: "[[2026-02]]"
|
||||
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
|
||||
yearly: "[[2026]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-02-27 17:48:43
|
||||
|
||||
I've meant to ask my peers who read these notes
|
||||
how they feel about my using "my peer"
|
||||
rather than their names,
|
||||
even when my paraphrasing is so specific
|
||||
as to leaves no doubt of authorship.
|
||||
|
||||
I'd figured I'd respect their wishes on the matter,
|
||||
but thinking about what my reasoning must have been
|
||||
(before it became consistency)
|
||||
I'll probably keep doing it anyway,
|
||||
however I feel I owe them an explanation.
|
||||
|
||||
These peers sound like you, but they are not.
|
||||
They are characters of my imagining,
|
||||
their actions and beliefs
|
||||
subject to the whims of the narrative.
|
||||
You'll find that they tend to reinforce my own beliefs
|
||||
more often than you would.
|
||||
Ambiguous attribution is how I hint that an interaction is embellished
|
||||
without harshing the whimsy.
|
||||
|
||||
And another thing:
|
||||
|
||||
The people that I do this for I think aloud with,
|
||||
speaking with the understanding that I will say things
|
||||
that are ill advised or poorly reasoned.
|
||||
I've said before I'd rather not be credited for my ideas,
|
||||
not least because ideas are free and I am nothing if not frugal.
|
||||
If y'all properly cited me
|
||||
on some of the dumb shit I say in implied confidence,
|
||||
I'd cry.
|
||||
|
||||
In conclusion:
|
||||
You could call it plagiarism, but I'd disagree.
|
||||
_Intellectual dishonesty_ I'll grant,
|
||||
so long as you agree it's tasteful, or at least fun.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-02-27T19:00:57-05:00
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
title: "2026-02-27 19:00:57"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- authorship/original
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/draft
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
date-created: 2026-02-27T19:00:57-05:00
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-27]]"
|
||||
weekly: "[[2026-W09]]"
|
||||
monthly: "[[2026-02]]"
|
||||
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
|
||||
yearly: "[[2026]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-02-27 19:00:57
|
||||
|
||||
## Attribution
|
||||
|
||||
> [!info]
|
||||
> This is a more objective explanation of my opinion on attribution
|
||||
> see the previous note [[2026-02-27_17-48-43]]
|
||||
> for a less formal discussion.
|
||||
|
||||
>[!quote] [[README#Attribution]]
|
||||
> ## Attribution
|
||||
>
|
||||
> Please do not credit my work
|
||||
> unless you are obligated to by formal standards.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll concede that I hold this preference
|
||||
in large part _because_ it's unpopular,
|
||||
but let it not be said that I don't have reasons.
|
||||
|
||||
The academic value of written work is,
|
||||
with very few exceptions,[^1]
|
||||
independent of its author.
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Testimony of firsthand witnesses to events,
|
||||
though biases and the deterioration of memory
|
||||
make it not so much better than baseless speculation
|
||||
when compared to video evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
This point is not controversial,
|
||||
it is understood that Warren Buffet's analysis of the stock market can be flawed
|
||||
even though he is a very successful trader.
|
||||
|
||||
If despite this you
|
||||
I am lead to two conclusions:
|
||||
|
||||
1. you believe the author's person is relevant (you are foolish)
|
||||
2. you believe _I_ believe the author's person is relevant (you believe I am foolish)
|
||||
|
||||
But I rarely believe either of these in earnest
|
||||
because the fallibility of experts is almost universally understood.
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not educated, but I've known many subject matter experts;
|
||||
electricians that have been so
|
||||
for over half as long as the profession has existed in earnest.
|
||||
I have known them to be as fallible
|
||||
but I know you've been in my shoes
|
||||
and experienced the same in your own profession,
|
||||
so we can share this secret and recognize
|
||||
that no expert's word can be trusted
|
||||
on the merit of their "experience".
|
||||
|
||||
> [!quote] John Dewey, _Experience and Education_ (1938)
|
||||
> Experience is inevitable, learning is not.[^2]
|
||||
|
||||
Damn it.
|
||||
|
||||
[^2]: Dewey never says this in _Experience and Education_,
|
||||
or really anything so quotable.
|
||||
It's a popular paraphrasing of ideas expressed throughout the book,
|
||||
however from a cursory reading it doesn't seem to be one
|
||||
Dewey would agree was especially relevant.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
This being the case, I'm lead to a secret third option:
|
||||
|
||||
3. You believe the idea is relevant,
|
||||
but want to deny responsibility for its application.
|
||||
|
||||
Lorem ipsum set amet...
|
||||
|
||||
I consider it a glowing endorsement
|
||||
when my ideas are thought good enough by others to claim as their own,
|
||||
and I'm tempted to say that those frustrated by the same
|
||||
need an ego adjustment.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-02-28T07:59:45-05:00
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
title: "2026-02-28 07:59:45"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- authorship/original
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/draft
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
date-created: 2026-02-28T07:59:45-05:00
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-28]]"
|
||||
weekly: "[[2026-W09]]"
|
||||
monthly: "[[2026-02]]"
|
||||
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
|
||||
yearly: "[[2026]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-02-28 07:59:45
|
||||
|
||||
### Legitimate Genres
|
||||
|
||||
#### Pop
|
||||
|
||||
Pop music is defined by inoffensive themes and melodies.
|
||||
"Pop" alone is not a complete genre.
|
||||
|
||||
##### Avant-Pop
|
||||
|
||||
##### Hypnagogic Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* Jack Stauber
|
||||
|
||||
##### Chamber Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* The High Llamas
|
||||
|
||||
##### Dream Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* The Marías
|
||||
* Hibou
|
||||
|
||||
##### Indie Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* Sub Urban
|
||||
|
||||
##### Bedroom Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* ivri
|
||||
|
||||
##### Synth-Pop
|
||||
|
||||
* Crystal Castles
|
||||
|
||||
#### Rap
|
||||
|
||||
##### Cloud Rap
|
||||
|
||||
* Een Glish
|
||||
|
||||
##### Emo Rap
|
||||
|
||||
* Grim Salvo
|
||||
|
||||
##### Scream Rap
|
||||
|
||||
* femtanyl
|
||||
|
||||
#### Rock
|
||||
|
||||
##### Alternative Rock
|
||||
|
||||
* Nirvana
|
||||
* Softcult
|
||||
|
||||
##### Indie Rock
|
||||
|
||||
* Hockey Dad
|
||||
|
||||
##### Pop Rock
|
||||
|
||||
##### Soft Rock
|
||||
|
||||
#### Heavy Metal
|
||||
|
||||
##### Trap Metal
|
||||
|
||||
Grim Salvo
|
||||
|
||||
#### Punk
|
||||
|
||||
##### Post-Punk
|
||||
|
||||
* Alone in My Room
|
||||
* Jfarrari
|
||||
* Молчат Дома (Molchat Doma)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Folk
|
||||
|
||||
##### Indie Folk
|
||||
|
||||
* Annabelle Dinda
|
||||
* Emerson Woolf & the Wishbones
|
||||
* The Crane Wives
|
||||
|
||||
#### Jazz
|
||||
|
||||
##### Acid Jazz
|
||||
|
||||
#### Blues
|
||||
|
||||
##### Country Blues
|
||||
|
||||
* Bonnie Raitt
|
||||
|
||||
### False Genres
|
||||
|
||||
#### Grunge
|
||||
|
||||
Grunge is typical of time, place, and aesthetic
|
||||
(1990's Seattle dirty punk), not musical elements.
|
||||
Nirvana is Alternative Rock,
|
||||
Alice in Chains is Heavy Metal.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-02-28T12:02:03-05:00
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
title: "2026-02-28 12:02:03"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- authorship/original
|
||||
- destiny/permanent
|
||||
- status/draft
|
||||
- type/timestamped
|
||||
dg-publish: true
|
||||
date-created: 2026-02-28T12:02:03-05:00
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-02-28]]"
|
||||
weekly: "[[2026-W09]]"
|
||||
monthly: "[[2026-02]]"
|
||||
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
|
||||
yearly: "[[2026]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-02-28 12:02:03
|
||||
|
||||
It is difficult to express how _little_ Accubid does for the user.
|
||||
Except for LiveCount and SupplierLink
|
||||
(which are separate programs anyhow)
|
||||
100% of its functionality could be replicated with database queries.
|
||||
|
||||
This trait is not unique to Accubid,[^1]
|
||||
what is unique (and uniquely frustrating)
|
||||
is how little the workflow would change if it was.
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Programs like this are called CRUD (Create Read Update Delete) apps.
|
||||
|
||||
If you were to replace the Takeoff tab with a command prompt,
|
||||
this is what it would look like to take off (2) receptacles:
|
||||
|
||||
```sql
|
||||
INSERT INTO Takeoff (drawing,area,phase,system,bid_item,labor_factor,assembly,length,count)
|
||||
VALUES ('E1.01','Level 01','BOH','Electrical','Building','Standard','DUPLEX REC',0,2);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Given the option, I'd already pick the console;
|
||||
but I'm aware I'm an outlier.
|
||||
Consider though, that ...
|
||||
Not to mention that such a schema would allow mouse-less takeoff,
|
||||
a considerable boon for [[ergonomics]].
|
||||
|
||||
***
|
||||
|
||||
I get strange looks when I suggest that construction estimating could be fun.
|
||||
Truly I believe it _would_ be fun,
|
||||
except for the total absence of [skeuomorphism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeuomorph),
|
||||
interfaces designed to resemble their physical counterparts.
|
||||
|
||||
> ![[level-selector.jpg|400]]
|
||||
> Mock-up of a level selection interface,
|
||||
> perhaps for quickly creating typicals.
|
||||
|
||||
%%
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
| Roof |
|
||||
| Level 15 |
|
||||
⭍ Levels 04-14 ⭍
|
||||
| Level 03 |
|
||||
| Level 02 |
|
||||
___| Level 01 |___
|
||||
| Level G1 |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
%%
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user