What do you think is the opposite of stoicism?

unfortunately i see it used all the time

but cf. many papers in practice, e.g. those by Clegg et al.

Literally the word means "compare" but according to Wikipedia that type of use would be non-standard. Traditionally if you want to refer to something similar, you would say "see also".

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

PSA -----
(1) "extant" means "surviving" so when you say "extant literature" you're implying some literature has been lost.
(2) "cf." or "confer" means "see in contrast" not "see as example" so you're implying that the citation gives different argument than the present text.

Collaborative Policymaking This report explores how public administrations can foster more effective collaboration by intentionally shaping the behaviours, routines, and mindsets of public servants. Drawing on cutting-edge insi...

🚨 New European Commission's JRC Report Out
Collaborative Policymaking

Science-backed insights for better collaboration in public administration/policymaking & 12 actionable principles to make it happen

🔗 Report + principles: publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/h...

@davidmair4.bsky.social

ChatGPT nailed it: "your concern is not anti-psychology. It’s pro-science."

yes i HAVE wondered this!!!

(1/4) Ever wondered what tech policy might look like if it were informed by research on collective intelligence and complex systems? 🧠🧑‍💻

Join @jbakcoleman.bsky.social, @lukethorburn.com, and myself in San Diego on Aug 4th for the Collective Intelligence x Tech Policy workshop at @acmci.bsky.social!

IF ONLY

i'm afraid there's nothing i can do 😢 one of only two comments (from 80 students) on my negotiation class evaluation: “The only bad thing of the course was the low attendance”

I've discovered an unexpected benefit of the MESO (multiple equivalent simultaneous offers) in landlord negotiations, when they tried to give us a contract that didn't reflect our agreement: "...which was your choice, not ours."

I have a credit dispute with my coauthor. Each of us denies coming up with Equation 1, and thinks the other person did it.

wow that is a seriously nostalgic website. i remember when CSS didn't exist.

hmm are you predicting my future? we haven't done the proceedings yet....

EasyChair is ....... not so easy.

using the AI to add the progress bar to the script using the AI to do the literature review.

Social Physics and Collective Intelligence "Social Physics" and Collective Intelligence Additional Resources Coursera Course on Network Dynamics of Social Behavior: https://gb.coursera.org/learn/networkdynamics Methodology At their most...

idk, i think its cool. tiny.cc/socialphysics

on the importance of theory

On the usefulness of AI+CI research results in a fast-changing landscape: "If we root ourselves more to first principles of collective intelligence rather than focusing on current capabilities of LLMs, we’re future proofing our perspective"
- Jason Burton, just a moment ago

and yes, the two laggards are indeed harming my career prospects.

i suspect these numbers vary by field norms and ambition: with those values, all my papers would be published in PNAS, Nature Human Behaviour, Management Science, or Academy of Management Journal.

so even 5 max would assume that all my papers are published in top-tier journals. that's true, but only because the struggling papers haven't been published yet as they are still working through the system =P

sure yeah you can normalize, change the numbers, whatever but---i suspect we require a large number of reviews for each paper published, on average.

i'm going to go through all the top-tier journals before i give up and go to a 2nd tier journal.

If I submit my paper to 5 journals before it gets published, and each journal requires 3 reviewers, thats 15 reviewers per paper. Is everybody completing as many reviews as they require from others? Or are some people carrying the lions share of the burden?

Negotiating with my landlord for lease renewal. Offered them a MESO. Targeted their interests. Gestured at rights. Keeping power in my pocket. Thanks, negotiation theory!!

Coming soon: the response.

I guess in this case, I honestly find it hard to tell the difference between cruelty, stupidity, and an extremely radical anti-globalist agenda.

If intention is at all relevant to cruelty it's kind of irrelevant whether it's a good strategy, vs whether the perpetrator thinks its a good strategy. Unless cruelty is in the eye of the beholder and not the perp, I suppose. In which case I suppose it's entirely up to you, and I have no opinion.