this talk by @mako last year on how the tools of free software have been co-opted in order to create freedom for companies instead of freedom for humans did a great job of bringing together a bunch of threads I've been following recently as well as pointing out new insights and ways forward.
highly recommended if you care about ways in which software can help people and are concerned about our work being subverted.
Thank you for sharing!
It's really important to remind us of the moral dimension of software freedom and to link this to human freedom: Free Software is primarily for people and not to create freedom for companies.
"How markets plundered Free Software's best stuff and used it to create freedom for companies, not people"
And one by @mako on his website:
This echoes @mako’s thoughts:
‘These decisions to embrace nonfree and private development tools undermine our credibility in advocating for software freedom and compromise our freedom, and that of our users, in ways that we should reject.’
— Free Software Needs Free Tools 👉🏻 https://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html
The analysis is built around a series of Bayesian regression models at different stages of user experience that we used to unpack the way that the relationships between gender/feedback and sharing/participation look very different among less/more experienced users.
One important takeaway hidden by looking only at overall averages is that although boys are more likely to share the the projects they create initially, the reverse is true among more experienced users!
Posted a write-up of my recent paper (led by Emilia Gan and Sayamindu Dasgupta) showing how the relationship between gender & feedback and users' decision to share their work on @Scratch shifts as users' gain experience. https://blog.communitydata.science/scratch-gender-feedback-dynamics/
Found a snake in my study at @CASBSStanford!🐍 I opened a sliding door nearby and it wandered outside onto a deck. The head of facilities then flung it off with a tool. I believe this constitutes "defeat" of the snake under the standard academic rules. https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/faq-the-snake-fight-portion-of-your-thesis-defense
One potential source of this difference is that while many online communities set norms about anonymous participation openly, the people who are blocked/deterred by privacy concerns that are incompatible w/ the status quo are simply never heard.
Check out my new paper documents how online collaboration platforms imagine anonymous users in ways that are strikingly differently than anonymous users see themselves. Paper was led by Nora McDonald w/ Rachel Greenstadt and Andrea Forte. #CHI2019 https://blog.communitydata.science/new-research-on-how-anonymity-is-perceived-in-open-collaboration/
To help you make your scientific study #exceedinglyreproducible, my student Jeremy Foote has published software to make PDF flipbooks of your lab meetings for deposition into your university's institutional archives. https://blog.communitydata.cc/exceedingly-reproducible-research/
Current approaches to #reproducibility in science is unambitious and fundamentally flawed. My research collective's new proposal for Exceedingly Reproducible Research outlines the error of your ways, and the ERR of ours. https://blog.communitydata.cc/exceedingly-reproducible-research/
My physical Research Symbiont award arrived! 🏆🐟https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/a-research-symbiont I knew it was a plush fish w/ an attached parasitic lamprey but didn't appreciate the detail that went into the magnetic "interface." [Current Mood: Weird mix of deeply honored and grossed out. 😊🤢]
This question from the @OED FAQ—"How do you know what the definition of a word is?"—strikes me as profound in terms of both lexicography and epistemology. How DOES one know? https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/news-and-press/oxford-dictionaries-faq