Brazil just took Internet freedom to new heights.
Yeah, that’s pretty interesting.
I honestly don’t do favorites and I don’t have a favorite book. I have a bunch of books I love but I don’t have a book I think everybody should read or a top 10 favorite books or a book I think contains the most wisdom. So my answer to this will vary from year to year. Right now when I realize how few people have read Merce Rodoreda I think, sweet Christmas, A Broken Mirror is one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever read, everyone should read it. So I dwell on that. But if I have any interesting reading advice I think it’s this: keep a list of what you read, and look over it from time to time, and ask: who’s underrepresented there? What do you know less about that you might know more about? What’s outside your usual scope? And then read that, and then read some more of that. But I’m not unsympathetic to people who wanna argue: nonsense, read what you like, life’s short, go with what speaks to you. For me, though, I get the most pleasure from trying to step beyond what I’m already tuned into.
One thing this means though is I have whole shelves of stuff I know I’d love but haven’t read precisely because I know I’d love it. But that’s cool. The shelves are there when I need ‘em.
John Darnielle pretty much dead-on explaining why I have so many books in my not-very-big apartment, and also why there are so many shows in my Netflix list I haven’t watched, and also why there are so many albums and artists that I know I will like but haven’t had a chance to listen to.
Public utilities companies are hiding giant pump stations inside of fake homes.
“Scientific Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming: A Pie Chart.” This is a really useful and important chart. If someone accepts the principles behind peer review and agrees to trust the results of that process, this chart basically proves that you can’t argue against global climate change anymore. Interesting stuff.
…the bulk of the service is decidedly smaller-scale–a low murmur with an occasional celebrity shouting on top of it. In comparative terms, almost nobody on Twitter is somebody: the median Twitter account has a single follower. Among the much smaller subset of accounts that have posted in the last 30 days, the median account has just 61 followers. If you’ve got a thousand followers, you’re at the 96th percentile of active Twitter users.
Via internal work email lists.
This is the best:
On the other end, just under one in every thousand Twitter accounts has a name that refers to Justin Bieber in some way; an additional one in every thousand refers to Bieber in its account description.
This is a better bit to chew on though:
For a few weeks this fall I had my computer probe the Twitterverse, gathering details on a random sampling of about 400,000 Twitter accounts. The profile that emerges suggests that Twitter is more a consumption medium than a conversational one–an only-somewhat-democratized successor to broadcast television, in which a handful of people wield enormous influence and everyone else chatters with a few friends on living-room couches. There are undoubtedly some influential Twitter users who would not be influential without Twitter, but I suspect that most people who have, say, 3,000 followers (the top one percent) were prominent commentators, industry experts, or gregarious accumulators of friends to begin with.
Active Twitter accounts follow a median 117 users, and the vast majority of them–76%–follow more people than follow them. Which brings to mind both discussions about the mathematics of pairing and studies that suggest reciprocated friendship is both rare and valuable.
Some things to keep in mind when thinking about social networks (not just the platforms themselves, but also the math of how people / nodes in the network relate to one another).