How should we evaluate tools for thought? There's no simple metric, as far as I can tell. The best tools change your paradigm anyway, so your old metrics (books printed per year?) aren't what matter. Here's one (vague, but focusing): how much meaning is unlocked on the margin?
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
That is, you can talk about Mathematica's value by asking how many students use it, or if it helps their test scores, or by timing people solving problems using different tools. But its most significant value is in producing marginal profound mathematical insights.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 22 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđaPrikaži ovu nit -
It's all a variant of Kay's "Sistine chapels per generation," I guess! But the marginal meaning doesn't have to be a grand edifice: Twitter's most powerful metric as a tool for thought is in creating transformative (off-platform) personal connections.
3 proslijeđena tweeta 32 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđaPrikaži ovu nit -
It's not clear how to get leading indicators for any of this! As far as I can tell, you want to be on the lookout for very strange stories, like
@mairwatching casually making an animation system in Smalltalk at age 12. Do any of you have good leading indicator stories here?1 proslijeđeni tweet 15 korisnika označava da im se sviđaPrikaži ovu nit
perhaps a /leading/ indicator is people attracted to use it for old thoughts and end up somewhere new. I don't have this phrase right but... "more of the same but faster" So if the "faster" is faster enough... Is your example: person tried old thing (animation), did new thing?
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.