Down the Drain: The 19 Best Shower Beers

Glorious. Foolhearty. IPA’s for the a.m. crowd. In the shower.

Sierra-Nevada-Torpedo-shower-beer-e15018

Drinking in the morning is no longer a sign that you have a problem with alcohol; it’s mandatory for getting through the day without committing a series of grisly homicides, then going on the run. The single problem with getting a little liquor in your system to face the daily grind is finding the time […]

The post Down the Drain: The 19 Best Shower Beers appeared first on TheCoolist.

Breadcrumbs for August

Sometimes it is fun to just tell a small story about the breadcrumbs you follow in the wild, wild Net. Here is one such.

I gather stories every morning for my newsletter. It’s fun. I get to keep my curating hand in good practice. In the end I added three links to today’s Nuzzel newsletter. One was about a journalism conference, one was about the reverse lookup image search engine TinEye, and the last was about a blog about booze in movies. Here’s how that happened. I think we need to share practice. I often have students do a similar breadcrumb exercise for class.

  1. Nuzzel feed for Newsletter (my facebook + twitter feed)
  2. Mediashift article about journalism conference ()  I love these because of the sheer density of useful tools and practical ideas, especially in disciplines like journalism and library science. Education, not so much.
  3. I find a Storify that sums up the conference

 

…and a tweet in the Storify about TinEye, a reverse image lookup tool I had totally forgotten about.

I upload it to TinEye and, yes, it does search gifs.  Here are the results.

25 results – TinEye

Please note that this search engine came up with 25 hits from over 21.2 billion images in 0.5 seconds.

Filtering for the oldest example of a jpg I find one on the site, Boozemovies.

 

P.S. Here are all the links in one place using the ultraneat web archiving tool, Webrecorder:

Webrecorder

Blind Spots of Engagement

Here is a gif that shows what? Connectedness? Engagement?  Frequency? All of the above or none?

Here is the larger visualization.

Here are my notes on  #digciz tweets from Martin Hawksey’s event hashtag visualization :

I feel engaged with the subject digital citizenship and I am trying to “ante-up” by sharing digital objects that show I am an engaged digital traveller (Storify curation, comic, image quotes, #4wordstory).  What I found is that the gif  above shows I am engaged with people who already know me and are engaged with me.  According to the gif above, I haven’t engaged with any of the principals who have organized #digciz.

So…I have engaged on my end, but only a “few but fine” who want to play crack the whip with me on the other end.  I think this reveals a profound blindspot–if I put the food down where the goats can get to it, they will eat.  Nope.  It is very similar to the classic teacher trope–if I am teaching they are learning.  How does this blindspot feel?  Disappointing and discouraging.  And it hints that either I should dampen my enthusiasm or amplify it.  The former feels like folding and cutting my losses and the  latter like I am doubling down for no good reason other than stubborness (and the few folks who are engaged). Since time is a zero sum reality this feels risky, assuming that Hawksey’s tool measures something more than frequency and reciprocal direction.

2. I share=you share.  This observation dovetails with the number one above, but points to another blindspot:  I assume that because someone doesn’t reciprocate, that they are not a good #digciz.  Is this true?  Is reciprocation a central principle of being a good citizen online?  I use this gif frequently to argue for that position.

Is this true?  Does the visualization measure reciprocation? Is much of what happens in a “citizenship space” hidden just like much of nature is unrevealed and often an unknown unknown? Or is lurking one of those known unknowns that we fail to account for, that is impossible to account for?

Is this visualization good enough to be a roadmap?  I don’t think so for one main reason–it doesn’t take into account emotion.  Venkatesh Rao has some striking comments on this idea:

60/ Uncertainty shows up as felt emotions: anxiety at being late, exhilaration at beating odds, felt freedom at being early, anger at being betrayed, gratitude for being unexpectedly aided.

61/ Your roadmap is simply the landscape of upcoming known-unknowns (including, crucially, around people/trust) made legible enough for your instinctive management behaviors to kick in. 

62/ For this to happen, they must provide a sense of subjective proportion/importance in ways that cue emotional responses to people, events, and new information. 

63/ A roadmap that does not evoke emotion is not a roadmap.

I could argue that this viz amounts to a trust map, but only in the vaguest of ways. Frequency and double-headed arrows don’t equal trust.

3. I think the ultimate blindspot I am finally seeing is that engagement is risky.  It is a risk you choose to take or not.  I am used to giving away my self and go hang the risk, but when confronted with the roadmap visualization above I have to ask whether or not to keep on down this road with this map.  When you reach 60, this is not an idle question.

What I have decided, as John Boyd once remarked, is to fight the enemy, not the terrain.  Fight the blindspot, not the roadmap.  I will carry on for awhile with #digciz with a measure of leeriness and worldly weariness and some forced cheeriness, hoping that the game is worth the candle.