100 diagrams that changed the world | brain pickings
i'm seriously thinking of changing my news orientation ... away from facebook to G+ ... away from memorandom and mashable to digg ... away from CNN to AJAM.
.Incidentally it's interesting how the net changes. Facebook, and Google are trying hard just like Yahoo did to own the exclusive territory of the web and keep people inside their domains. Yet it remains that other domains, other sources, other places, other blogs are still where it happens. Of late, i sense a bit of movement in the direction outside of those corrals. May that always be!
Incidentally this item is about how items get selected for my attention.
Tags
- digg
- news
- diagrams
- montography
- relativity
Comments
Seth says
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/great-divide-with-the-west/485728.html for the Russian point of view.
Seth says
seth 2013-09-25 11:38:03 16777
from where did that mis-aprehension come? Both liberal and conservative stances suck from my point of view ... pretty much same as it always was. were i had been conservative, even or liberal, my choices listed above would have been quite different.
Incidentally i like Digg primarily because it allows for user to select and escalate attention to stories ... unlike memorandom or drudge. Would that broadcast media contrive that we navagate our attention to what we want to be important ... rather that being selected by the powers that be.
from where did that mis-aprehension come? Both liberal and conservative stances suck from my point of view ... pretty much same as it always was. were i had been conservative, even or liberal, my choices listed above would have been quite different. Incidentally i like Digg primarily because it allows for user to select and escalate attention to stories ... unlike memorandom or drudge. Would that broadcast media contrive that we navagate our attention to what we want to be important ... rather that being selected by the powers that be.
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news (the not old stuff in the past). Of course if your interest goes off into some other direction unrelated to politics or food or social discourse then you've just changed your focus & may need new sources. Personally, if I want a cross section of people & worlds I am not likely to meet during a random walk in Paradise, I can go to YouTube which is fairly bizarre enough. Here is one of my favorites: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VKWLC87Uzw
Seth says
from where did that mis-aprehension come? Both liberal and conservative stances suck from my point of view ... pretty much same as it always was. were i had been conservative, even or liberal, my choices listed above would have been quite different.
Incidentally i like Digg primarily because it allows for user to select and escalate attention to stories ... unlike memorandom or drudge. Would that broadcast media contrive that we navagate our attention to what we want to be important ... rather that being selected by the powers that be.
from where did that mis-aprehension come? Both liberal and conservative stances suck from my point of view ... pretty much same as it always was. were i had been conservative, even or liberal, my choices listed above would have been quite different. Incidentally i like Digg primarily because it allows for user to select and escalate attention to stories ... unlike memorandom or drudge. Would that broadcast media contrive that we navagate our attention to what we want to be important ... rather that being selected by the powers that be.
Seth says
source: for some reason mark says
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
Really? For a month, turn on ALJAM whenever you would have turned on Fox, and then answer the question again.
Seth says
ME 2013-09-26 08:49:41 16777
seth 2013-09-26 07:21:36 16777
source: for some reason mark says
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
Really? For a month, turn on ALJAM whenever you would have turned on Fox, and then answer the question again.
I'm not likely to. For a month listen to maybe Rush Limbaugh or Eckert Tolle. You just change the viewpoint - not the news. Same shit is happening. Can't get away from the White House manipulating the M$M anyway.
no you actually do change which items come up and appear in your news when you switch channels. listen to a different channel and you will start thinking about different things. that is a fact. channels select the news. that should really not be a controversial thought here. it is nothing new. the only strange thing here is that you are not acknowledging it.
Seth says
well sure "the events stay the same" ... but the problem is your awareness of them. you really don't understand relativity, do you?
ME 2013-09-26 11:04:49 16777
seth 2013-09-26 09:50:37 16777
ME 2013-09-26 08:49:41 16777
seth 2013-09-26 07:21:36 16777
source: for some reason mark says
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
Really? For a month, turn on ALJAM whenever you would have turned on Fox, and then answer the question again.
I'm not likely to. For a month listen to maybe Rush Limbaugh or Eckert Tolle. You just change the viewpoint - not the news. Same shit is happening. Can't get away from the White House manipulating the M$M anyway.
no you actually do change which items come up and appear in your news when you switch channels. listen to a different channel and you will start thinking about different things. that is a fact. channels select the news. that should really not be a controversial thought here. it is nothing new. the only strange thing here is that you are not acknowledging it.
NOPE! The only thing that changes is the point of view of the story writers. The events stay the same. Of course if you are into donkey fucking maybe you will not notice the politics anymore.
well sure "the events stay the same" ... but the problem is your awareness of them. you really don't understand relativity, do you?
Seth says
seth 2013-09-27 12:29:28 16777
ME 2013-09-26 11:04:49 16777
seth 2013-09-26 09:50:37 16777
ME 2013-09-26 08:49:41 16777
seth 2013-09-26 07:21:36 16777
source: for some reason mark says
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
I don't see how changing your news aggregator & your social media hub will change that much in the way of news
Really? For a month, turn on ALJAM whenever you would have turned on Fox, and then answer the question again.
I'm not likely to. For a month listen to maybe Rush Limbaugh or Eckert Tolle. You just change the viewpoint - not the news. Same shit is happening. Can't get away from the White House manipulating the M$M anyway.
no you actually do change which items come up and appear in your news when you switch channels. listen to a different channel and you will start thinking about different things. that is a fact. channels select the news. that should really not be a controversial thought here. it is nothing new. the only strange thing here is that you are not acknowledging it.
NOPE! The only thing that changes is the point of view of the story writers. The events stay the same. Of course if you are into donkey fucking maybe you will not notice the politics anymore.
well sure "the events stay the same" ... but the problem is your awareness of them. you really don't understand relativity, do you?
well sure "the events stay the same" ... but the problem is your awareness of them. you really don't understand relativity, do you?
You may still be stuck in the dilemma of whether if there is no observer does a tree falling in the forest make a noise or it's equivalent grand idea - if there is no observer did anything happen?
I am reading some of the most bizarre horse shit in The Yoga of Time Travel
about relativity. I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity. But then your sources will contradict mine & mine will fuck yours in the ..... etc.
Relativity in the real world is mostly a personal, self or political ruse to avoid the idea that one or the other of you might be wrong in an argument or disagreement.
I am reading some of the most bizarre horse shit in The Yoga of Time Travel
about relativity. I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity. But then your sources will contradict mine & mine will fuck yours in the ..... etc.
Relativity in the real world is mostly a personal, self or political ruse to avoid the idea that one or the other of you might be wrong in an argument or disagreement.
Seth says
Seth says
source: mark above
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
Give me a break! One does not need to measure at the extremes of physics to understand or "prove relativity". One merely observes that objects move only relative to each other. There being no such thing measurable as a velocity of just one object. 20/miles an hour is meaningless ... unless it is assumed that it is relative to some other object. So there is no such thing as an absolute velocity. 
Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light.
Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light.
Seth says
seth 2013-09-27 22:42:36 16777
source: mark above
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
Give me a break! One does not need to measure at the extremes of physics to understand or "prove relativity". One merely observes that objects move only relative to each other. There being no such thing measurable as a velocity of just one object. 20/miles an hour is meaningless ... unless it is assumed that it is relative to some other object. So there is no such thing as an absolute velocity. Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light.
Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light. If you believe all the bullshit that goes on with relativity then you do need a break.
Seth says
Well i don't know what "bullshit" you refer to ... and anyway me thinks that would be a distraction from the topic ... but what i wrote above about relativity is certainly true and is what is pertinent to this discussion. Motion is relative. That is the one single part of relativity that is analogoous to relative truth ... or in the case of this item, relative awareness as given by your news aggregator.
But ok, changing the topic ... Einstein's conjecture about the the speed of light being an upper limit was astounding to me! Were you not astounded too?
ME 2013-09-27 23:48:33 16777
seth 2013-09-27 22:42:36 16777
source: mark above
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
I read most of Einstein's theory in one of the old man's books. Nobody can travel at the speed of light yet. But what is most interesting & incidentally gives job security to mathematicians & physicists, is not experimental. That which has been achieved assuming results related to relativity are engineering accomplishments. You can find out that an amount of U235 can be accumulated & will blow up & then assemble 2 sub-critical masses and explode them together & you get a bomb. None of that nor the particle physics extrapolations prove relativity.
Give me a break! One does not need to measure at the extremes of physics to understand or "prove relativity". One merely observes that objects move only relative to each other. There being no such thing measurable as a velocity of just one object. 20/miles an hour is meaningless ... unless it is assumed that it is relative to some other object. So there is no such thing as an absolute velocity. Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light.
Err ... sans, of course, Einstein's conjecture about the speed of light. If you believe all the bullshit that goes on with relativity then you do need a break.
Well i don't know what "bullshit" you refer to ... and anyway me thinks that would be a distraction from the topic ... but what i wrote above about relativity is certainly true and is what is pertinent to this discussion. Motion is relative. That is the one single part of relativity that is analogoous to relative truth ... or in the case of this item, relative awareness as given by your news aggregator.
But ok, changing the topic ... Einstein's conjecture about the the speed of light being an upper limit was astounding
to me! Were you not astounded too?
Seth says
The things you mention in your first paragraph about motion are a distraction from what i meant by emphasizing that motion is relative in this context. Motion is relative not because of variations in the standard rulers against which we measure distance, but rather because it must be measured against some other moving frame of reference. If i run along a platform waving at you on the train, i measure your motion relative to my motion, not your motion relative to the platform ... or perhaps relative to the surface of Venus. The pertinent fact, in this context, is that the choice of frame of reference is completely up to us ... it is subjective ... there is no preferred frame of reference.
I don't think there is a "rational explanation of the speed of light being a limit". That was kind of my whole point. Einstein just made it an assumption in his formula. Which, of course would have been ignored by history, except for the pesky fact that the forumla more accurately predicted events ... like for example where and when one of the moons of Jupiter appeared. Yes he certainly did pull that one out of his ass ... that in and of itself is the surprising thing to me.
Yes certainly Einstein's formulas do not affect our daily lives ... we just are not in the professions on which they bear. But the part of relativity that I emphasized does! ... though it is such an integral part of our lives, that some of us just ignore it now ... and even ... err ... deny it.
ME 2013-09-29 09:39:08 16777
Motion is relative? Motion & time are abstractions of observable change. How you measure them is in comparison with standard things like atomic clocks & standard things. At one time the length measurement foot was the size of a king's foot. The results of measurement is indeed dependent upon your yardstick, scale & clocks. The numbers are relative to what you measure them with, for sure. Still, what you are measuring doesn't change just because you change your yardstick! Extrapolate that to Quantum stuff or truth & some people just get confused.
I have yet to hear a rational explanation of the speed of light being a limit. If you put it in your fundamental equation: e = mc^2 & then assume it from there on as a fact I can see why, though. Why light? If light makes sense as a limit then the square of light will never be observable & makes no intuitive sense. Did he just pull that one out of his ass? I pull his theory book out every decade or so just as an amusement. It really doesn't affect real life one way or another.
I have yet to hear a rational explanation of the speed of light being a limit. If you put it in your fundamental equation: e = mc^2 & then assume it from there on as a fact I can see why, though. Why light? If light makes sense as a limit then the square of light will never be observable & makes no intuitive sense. Did he just pull that one out of his ass? I pull his theory book out every decade or so just as an amusement. It really doesn't affect real life one way or another.
The things you mention in your first paragraph about motion are a distraction from what i meant by emphasizing that motion is relative in this context. Motion is relative not because of variations in the standard rulers against which we measure distance, but rather because it must be measured against some other moving frame of reference. If i run along a platform waving at you on the train, i measure your motion relative to my motion, not your motion relative to the platform ... or perhaps relative to the surface of Venus. The pertinent fact, in this context, is that the choice of frame of reference is completely up to us ... it is subjective ... there is no preferred frame of reference.
I don't think there is a "rational explanation of the speed of light being a limit". That was kind of my whole point. Einstein just made it an assumption in his formula. Which, of course would have been ignored by history, except for the pesky fact that the forumla more accurately predicted events ... like for example where and when one of the moons of Jupiter appeared. Yes he certainly did pull that one out of his ass ... that in and of itself is the surprising thing to me.
Yes certainly Einstein's formulas do not affect our daily lives ... we just are not in the professions on which they bear. But the part of relativity that I emphasized does! ... though it is such an integral part of our lives, that some of us just ignore it now ... and even ... err ... deny it.
Seth says
source: mark
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
... wiggy wobby woo ... there is no way to measure movement except in moving frames of reference. Somebody is introducing confusions here ... i doubt that not.
i think e=mc^2 it is a consequence of the basic kinematic formulas of relative motion like this one 
... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.
source: mark continues
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.source: mark continues
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Believing in relative truth allows me to talk more honestly because then i must take into consideration that what i say is relative to my mind and what you say is relative to your mind.
Seth says
seth 2013-09-29 11:24:28 16777
source: mark
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
... wiggy wobby woo ... there is no way to measure movement except in moving frames of reference. Somebody is introducing confusions here ... i doubt that not.
i think e=mc^2 it is a consequence of the basic kinematic formulas of relative motion like this one ... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.
source: mark continues
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.source: mark continues
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Believing in relative truth allows me to talk more honestly because then i must take into consideration that what i say is relative to my mind and what you say is relative to your mind.
Yeah we got personal truths going on here - nothing I believe in nor can argue to you about since your truths are personal to you.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Seth says
Well to both of your observations my reaction must be the same ... that is, quite literally, "ALL WE HAVE". Perhaps that is not the perdicament you wish to accept. But in personal communications all we have are, what you call, "personal truths". In science all we have are our changing models. There is no such thing as an "accurate formula" except how well it predicts events. Yet the importance of that fact seems to me to be the very thing you deny.
ME 2013-09-29 11:42:29 16777
seth 2013-09-29 11:24:28 16777
source: mark
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
... wiggy wobby woo ... there is no way to measure movement except in moving frames of reference. Somebody is introducing confusions here ... i doubt that not.
i think e=mc^2 it is a consequence of the basic kinematic formulas of relative motion like this one ... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.
source: mark continues
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.source: mark continues
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Believing in relative truth allows me to talk more honestly because then i must take into consideration that what i say is relative to my mind and what you say is relative to your mind.
Yeah we got personal truths going on here - nothing I believe in nor can argue to you about since your truths are personal to you.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Well to both of your observations my reaction must be the same ... that is, quite literally, "ALL WE HAVE". Perhaps that is not the perdicament you wish to accept. But in personal communications all we have are, what you call, "personal truths". In science all we have are our changing models. There is no such thing as an "accurate formula" except how well it predicts events. Yet the importance of that fact seems to me to be the very thing you deny.
Seth says
i don't think it has a location in any practical sense of the word. it seems to flame from our minds into our culture.
ME 2013-09-29 14:19:05 16777
seth 2013-09-29 14:17:33 16777
Mathematics is all in the meta-world ... its truths are true by their necessity ... but their *bindings* with the real world are purely by the coincidences of our subjective selection. Mathematics is hardly a contradiction to my assertion that "all we have are changing models" in science or "all we have are out personal truths" when it comes to our human communication.
Mathematics is all in the meta-world ... its truths are true by their necessity ... but their *bindings* with the real world are purely by the coincidences of our subjective selection. Mathematics is hardly a contradiction to my assertion that "all we have are changing models" in science or "all we have are out personal truths" when it comes to our human communication.
meta-world exists where?
i don't think it has a location in any practical sense of the word. it seems to flame from our minds into our culture.
Seth says
Well when you find the "more" by all means please articulate it for it would be starteling indeed!
ME 2013-09-29 12:40:23 16777
seth 2013-09-29 12:21:19 16777
Well to both of your observations my reaction must be the same ... that is, quite literally, "ALL WE HAVE". Perhaps that is not the perdicament you wish to accept. But in personal communications all we have are, what you call, "personal truths". In science all we have are our changing models. There is no such thing as an "accurate formula" except how well it predicts events. Yet the importance of that fact seems to me to be the very thing you deny.
ME 2013-09-29 11:42:29 16777
seth 2013-09-29 11:24:28 16777
source: mark
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
If you are measuring in moving references you are just confused.
... wiggy wobby woo ... there is no way to measure movement except in moving frames of reference. Somebody is introducing confusions here ... i doubt that not.
i think e=mc^2 it is a consequence of the basic kinematic formulas of relative motion like this one ... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.
source: mark continues
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
I doubt that e=mc^2 predicts when one of the moons of jupiter appear.
... see the history of special relativity ... when one of Jupiter's moons appeared was in fact more accurately predicted by using those formulas.source: mark continues
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Relativity just allows you to be wishy-washy about what is being talked about - similar in quality to the hurry up required in confidence rackets like the Sting.
Believing in relative truth allows me to talk more honestly because then i must take into consideration that what i say is relative to my mind and what you say is relative to your mind.
Yeah we got personal truths going on here - nothing I believe in nor can argue to you about since your truths are personal to you.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Emperical resuls coinciding with a formula calculation are nice, particularly if the experiments are in many different contexts. Still does not prove the formula is accurate - it could be lucky. But note that current climate change calculations don't coincide & yet the assertions are the same that their formulas & conclusions are accurate.
Well to both of your observations my reaction must be the same ... that is, quite literally, "ALL WE HAVE". Perhaps that is not the perdicament you wish to accept. But in personal communications all we have are, what you call, "personal truths". In science all we have are our changing models. There is no such thing as an "accurate formula" except how well it predicts events. Yet the importance of that fact seems to me to be the very thing you deny.
I don't mind facts when there are some. Interpretations, conclusions, predictions that fail in the case of so-called climate science - those are the things that I relegate to the turd pile. I suggest that we do in fact have more. Some mathematics is quite objective. Some of modern quantum mathematics is fantasy, though.
Well when you find the "more" by all means please articulate it for it would be starteling indeed!See Also
- Thought So which is it? with 123 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Unhacking Wars with 92 viewings related by tag "relativity".
- Thought Consciousness as "transactional relative relivance" reares it's ugly head for the first time here with 91 viewings related by tag "relativity".
- Thought An Event is something that the news reports on with 42 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought The Barikaw Event with 12 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Today There is no Source for the Unvarnished NEWS ! with 9 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: a diagram of the interactions between thoughts, focus, emotions, and experience with 6 viewings related by tag "diagrams".
- Thought about: tech.memeorandum with 6 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Updated News Feed with 6 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought The Big Stories and views that don't make major network news ... with 5 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Change in news linking with 5 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought group quads project with 5 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought New & Newsworthy with 5 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Castro dead, caller tells Market News First with 5 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Individual meets collective - comment 58124 with 4 viewings related by tag "relativity".
- Thought Better picture displays with 3 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: tech.memeorandum with 2 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Top 10 Sources with 2 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought News in the Light of What's Published with 2 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Open Source Media - OSM with 2 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought news now refreshes every 2 seconds and shows ads with 1 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: sound step lightning 2 bluetooth speaker | digg store with 1 viewings related by tag "digg".
- Thought Google NEWS - HA! with 1 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Sourcing Journalism with 1 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: SemNews - Semantic News Framework with 1 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought To Zen or NOT to Zen - Is that the Question? with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Please FIx with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought involved bloger with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Diggdot.us - digg / slashdot / del.icio.us popular with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Another way to flag the news with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Watch digg in real time with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought The Anatomy of a Panic 9/11 with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought The Newseum with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought [title (1841)] with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Do you care if the Washington Post has no comments? with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought New Interface with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Value with 0 viewings related by tag "relativity".
- Thought No NEWS - Just the Narrative with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought Perhaps a map like this could track news fronts with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought make the news screen update automatically without a page reload with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: OMG with 0 viewings related by tag "relativity".
- Thought What is the News ? with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought 2006new with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought So what Critera makes a news item Important ? with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought The News Fronts experiment with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: Findory with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought need a news button for button bar with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought News select by Author or subject with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought about: I Hate the News (Aaron Swartz's Raw Thought) with 0 viewings related by tag "news".
- Thought item1213 shows up in my page but I can't see it with 0 viewings related by tag "news".