PMC3410434; In PubMed.
a.k.a. A Harvard Study. (That. Shows.); something about <quote>people who viewed stress as a way to fuel better performance did better on tests and managed their stress better physiologically than those taught to ignore stress.</quote>
A. Study. That. Shows; 2017.
tl;dr → American military veterans, higher levels of gratitude, altruism and a sense of purpose predicted resiliency.
tl;dr → DAO et al. broke the law by offering shares to the public without complying with applicable securities laws, but the SEC won’t prosecute them under their authority to defend the law that they are declared to have broken.
34-81207; a ruling; Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); 2017-07-25.
re-capitalized with $150 million funny munny.
<quote>In short, the DAO fit the conventional definition of an investment security.<quote>
<quote>If coin owners are promised voting rights in an organization or the right to a share of profits, that’s likely to be a security.
By contrast, if users mostly buy tokens for a utilitarian purpose—for example, to buy network storage—it’s less likely to be a security. </quote>
<quote>The SEC reasoned that if something looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, the law should treat it like a duck.</quote>
ICO → Initial Coin Offering
expert, Berkman Klein Center, Harvard University.
ex-general counsel and (ex-)executive director, Bitcoin Foundation, 2012→2015.
Mike Taylor; Every attempt to manage academia makes it worse; In Their Blog, entitled Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week (SV-POW); 2017-03-17.
Goodhart’s Law → When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
Campbell’s Law → The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.
Amy Helen Margaret Greyson; Making the Futures Present, report ocadu:1441, Master of Design in Strategic Foresight and Innovation; OCAD University; 2016 (2017-02-14) 193 pages; CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. About: OCAD U is an art, design and media university in Canada.
The architecture of the Internet is based on a number of principles, including the self-describing datagram packet, the end to end arguments, diversity in technology and global addressing. As the Internet has moved from a research curiosity to a recognized component of mainstream society, new requirements have emerged that suggest new design principles, and perhaps suggest that we revisit some old ones. This paper explores one important reality that surrounds the Internet today: different stakeholders that are part of the Internet milieu have interests that may be adverse to each other, and these parties each vie to favor their particular interests. We call this process “the tussle”. Our position is that accommodating this tussle is crucial to the evolution of the network’s technical architecture. We discuss some examples of tussle, and offer some technical design principles that take it into account.
Ran Wolff (Yahoo Labs); Emergent Privacy; 2014-07-30; 17 pages; ssrn:2193164
Defining privacy is a long sought goal for philosophers and legal scholars alike. Current definitions lack mathematical rigor. They are therefore impracticable for domains such as economics and computer science in which privacy needs to be quantified and computed.
This paper describes a game theoretic framework in which privacy requires no definition per se. Rather, it is an emergent property of specific games, the strategy by which players maximize their reward. In this context, key activities related to privacy, such as methods for its protection and ways in which it is traded, are given concrete meaning.
Based in game theory, emergent privacy demonstrates that the right to privacy can be derived, at least in part, on a utilitarian philosophical basis.
The great existential challenges facing the human species can be traced, in part, to the fact that we have underdeveloped discursive practices for thinking possible worlds ‘out loud’, performatively and materially, in the register of experience. That needs to change. In this dissertation, a methodology for ‘experiential scenarios’, covering a range of interventions and media from immersive performance to stand-alone ‘artifacts from the future’, is offered as a partial corrective. The beginnings of aesthetic, political and ethical frameworks for ‘experiential futures’ are proposed, drawing on alternative futures methodology, the emerging anti- mediumist practice of ‘experience design’, and the theoretical perspective of a Rancièrian ‘politics of aesthetics’. The relationships between these three domains — futures, design, and politics — are explored to show how and why they are coming together, and what each has to offer the others. The upshot is that our apparent binary choice between unthinkable dystopia and unimaginable utopia is a false dilemma, because in fact, we can and should imagine ‘possibility space’ hyperdimensionally, and seek to flesh out worlds hitherto supposed unimaginable or unthinkable on a daily basis. Developed from early deployments across a range of settings in everyday life, from urban guerrilla-style activism to corporate consulting, experiential scenarios do not offer definitive answers as to how the future will look, or even how it should look, but they can contribute to a mental ecology within which these questions may be posed and discussed more effectively than ever before.