Summary of “3 Ways to Build a Data-Driven Team”

Foster critical thinking: While much of the current discussions around data focus on the role of technology and AI, it is really the human side of the equation that will remain the biggest differentiator for teams and organizations.
As organization turbocharge their ability to gather more and more data – and it’s not so much about size, but rather about quality – what matters most is having people who can ask the right questions to the data.
Although people will differ in their general predisposition towards critical thinking, you can help them develop whatever potential they have if you put in place the right incentives, give people accurate feedback, and establish an informal and non-hierarchical learning culture where people can share views and ideas.
The implications are obvious: if you want your team to embrace, or at least keep up with, the current data revolution, and approach work in a more evidence-based way, you will need to train them.
Many top universities – including the Ivy Leagues – offer free online courses on AI, data visualization, and data science, and leading corporations in this space, such as Google, offer a wide range of free resources and online courses on AI, analytics, and big data.
Hire the right people: When it comes to the training of quantitative, data-driven, or fact-based reasoning skills, there is well-established evidence for the competencies that predict individuals’ likelihood to learn and display these skills.
More specifically, individuals with higher quantitative or numerical ability levels will find it much easier to pick up any training related to data analytics.
This may sound obvious, but the practical implication is that if you want your team to be quantitatively skilled, your best bet is to avoid hiring people with lower levels of numerical reasoning ability.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Ellie Kemper on her journey from Onion headlines to Kimmy Schmidt to memoir writing”

Ellie Kemper has made a career out of playing sweet, unflaggingly optimistic characters like cheery receptionist Erin on The Office and the Emmy-nominated title role in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt.
Even in an email or something, I think that voice comes across.
Because I’m certainly-I guess I shouldn’t say this-I haven’t had a life exciting enough to be called a memoir, I don’t think.
I’m going to drop the termite comparison, but the point is when I’m watching something like this, you think, “Well, okay, how is this happening?” I see it unfolding before me, and then all of the sudden, it’s being made into this beautiful whole, as in W-H-O-L-E, and I don’t notice it happening individually.
I would start to worry, “Wait. Are these writers writing Erin according to how they’ve observed me behaving?” And then I would get worried about that, but I think there’s definitely some similarities between me with both of those characters.
So if there is no movie, I will feel happy with the way all the characters’ stories are wrapped up, but I think it would be fun to just see if I can do it for them.
I feel corny saying this, but I was inspired when I was playing Kimmy because I do think she’s an inspirational character.
I think how they manage to be so funny while doing that is really insane, because they did pull that off in every single character.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Why you have already bought your last car”

The central idea is pretty simple: Self-driving electric vehicles organised into an Uber-style network will be able to offer such cheap transport that you’ll very quickly – we’re talking perhaps a decade – decide you don’t need a car any more.
The typical electric car has around 20 moving parts compared to the 2,000 or so in an internal combustion engine.
Most electric car manufacturers expect their vehicles to keep on going for at least 500,000 miles.
You still think that car parked outside your flat is worth having?
The more vehicles in the network, the better the service offered to consumers; the more miles self-driving cars do, the more efficient and safer they’ll get; the more electric vehicles manufactured, the cheaper each one will be.
Should the battery run low the network will send a fully charged car to meet you so you can continue your journey.
According to the tech visionaries it won’t be long before the whole market tilts irreversibly away from car ownership and the trusty old internal combustion engine.
There will be downsides: millions of car industry workers and taxi drivers will be looking for new jobs, for a start.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Exploring the Uncanny, Sci-Fi Dystopias of Simon Stålenhag”

There are people who think there’s something else to it, like “Something will happen! You will become a man!” Something like that.
There’s an interview with Ari Aster, the director, in which he’s asked why he made a film that’s about so much family drama, and he said something like: “Because stories about family drama don’t sell. I had to make a horror movie.”
How do you feel your work is, going forward, responding to that, if it’s responding to that at all? Can you picture a world in which technology is not something that is used as a tool of exploitation?
Now it’s like, “No, it is okay for you to say that you have been robbed of something,” and that is where I’m scared of technology.
Do you think that as an artist, and specifically as a Swedish artist, that this is something that is going to be reflected in your work going forward?
We might learn something about the world, but it’s really the first post-apocalyptic thing I’ve ever done.
The Electric State is kind of on the verge of something happening and Tales from The Loop and Things from The Flood they’re basically-they’re basically just realism with robots thrown in.
To me it’s like something about her heart not giving up, and keeping on going, and it’s some sparkle of love.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Race and Pop Culture: A Roundtable Conversation”

Yes, the religious right was attacking the NEA and major art institutions, but the white liberal critical establishment was also attacking works by people of color and dismissing it as “Identity politics.” There is the game-changing Whitney Biennial in 1992 that featured works by predominantly people of color that was a critique of the art institution itself and made critics practically apoplectic.
When it comes to critiquing POC-fronted works, how do you see the conversation playing out differently among white critics and critics of color? Does it ever feel like there are separate conversations happening? Relatedly, do you ever feel like it’s not “Your place” to critique a work? And do you think that applies to other critics?
Which on one hand, I do think some critics of color who are new to the game do not know how to balance talking about aesthetics, the history of the medium, and the political dimension of a work.
It’s been depressing to me the degree to which the conversation about POC creators has focused on getting to make mainstream work and be hired by large media companies but so much less on elevating work made outside the system.
EAJ: It’s funny how many critics have coded work by women and people of color as personal or “Autobiographical,” whereas work by white men is somehow transcendent of that.
As much as we can’t separate those the art and the artist, does it ever feel like it simplifies the conversation around art, where a “Good person” translates to a “Good work” and a bad person therefore creates “Bad work.” For example, after the Junot Díaz controversy, in which he was accused of sexual misconduct, there was a lot of criticism of his previous work – was some of it valid, and did some of it conflate him with his work?
EAJ: There is a conflation happening around personhood and the work itself that’s now part of “Branding.” You definitely see some people trying to use that as cover to inoculate themselves from criticism.
Let’s talk about how art and politics intersect in 2018, when it comes to the work itself.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How to Decide What to Do With Your Life”

The question burns in your mind - you want to figure out what to do with your life.
Paradoxically, continuing to think about what to do with your life without, you know, actually doing anything, wastes time too.
I’ve been fortunate enough to more or less figure out what I want to do with my life at least for the near future.
It’s easy to think about a new path you want to take in your life.
You can’t really decide what to do with your life prior to acting.
The beginning steps to figuring out what to do with your life are simple.
You’ll Never “Figure Out” What to do With Your LifeYour life isn’t a multiple choice test.
Your problem isn’t figuring out what to do with your life.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Nicolas Cage: ‘If I don’t have a job to do, I can be very self-destructive'”

Nicolas Cage is the greatest American actor working today, full stop.
Only Cage superfans said such things; in the eyes of the rest of the world, well, sure, he could act – he did win the 1996 Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas, after all – but he was too eccentric, too laughably over the top, just too damn Cage-y to be taken seriously.
In a 2013 Reddit Ask Me Anything, Ethan Hawke confirmed that he, too, is a Cage superfan: “He’s the only actor since Marlon Brando that’s actually done anything new with the art of acting; he’s successfully taken us away from an obsession with naturalism into a kind of presentation style of acting that I imagine was popular with the old troubadors.”
These days Cage lives in “Well, the ROMANTIC way to put it would be the Mojave desert, but the CRUDE way of saying it is I live in Las Vegas”.
Cage is incredibly watchable as the devastated lumberjack, Red, who sets out to avenge the death of his girlfriend at the hands of a cult leader.
These are the very actors Cage always wanted to be like, having grown up watching them with his beloved father, Augustus Coppola, who made sure his son was grounded in the classics.
Cage’s various attempts to explain his acting style, using terms such as “German expressionist”, “Western kabuki” and, my personal favourite, “Nouveau shamanic”, haven’t done much to dispel the impression he is, at the very least, a little bananas.
Did Presley not find it strange that, before they married, Cage had dressed as her father onscreen twice, in Wild at Heart and Honeymoon in Vegas?

The orginal article.

Summary of “Google DeepMind founder Demis Hassabis: Three truths about AI”

The 2016 victory by a Google-built AI at the notoriously complex game of Go was a bold demonstration of the power of modern machine learning.
As significant as that achievement was, DeepMind’s co-founder Demis Hassabis expects it will be dwarfed by how AI will transform society in the years to come.
“I think about AI as a very powerful tool. What I’m most excited about is applying those tools to science and accelerating breakthroughs,” he said.
For its part, DeepMind is looking at how machine learning and other AI-related technologies can be applied to areas such as protein folding and quantum chemistry, he said.
“But, of course, true intelligence is a lot more than just that, you have to recombine it into higher-level thinking and symbolic reasoning, a lot of the things classical AI tried to deal with in the 80s.”.
“One way you can think about our research program is ‘Can we build out from our perception, using deep-learning systems and learning from first principles? Can we build out all the way to high-level thinking and symbolic thinking?’.”
DeepMind is researching how to advance AI in areas that would allow systems to reason at a level that’s not possible today and to transfer knowledge between domains, much the same way a human who’s driven a car can apply that knowledge to drive a van.
“AlphaGo doesn’t understand language but we would like them to build up to this symbolic level of reasoning – maths, language, and logic. So that’s a big part of our work,” he said, adding DeepMind is also working on how to make learning more efficient, in order to reduce the huge volume of data needed to train deep learning systems today.

The orginal article.

Summary of “About time: why western philosophy can only teach us so much”

One of the great unexplained wonders of human history is that written philosophy first flowered entirely separately in different parts of the globe at more or less the same time.
All cultures have a sense of past, present and future, but for much of human history this has been underpinned by a more fundamental sense of time as cyclical.
When we imagine time as a line, we end up baffled: what happened before time began? How can a line go on without end? A circle allows us to visualise going backwards or forwards for ever, at no point coming up against an ultimate beginning or end.
Thinking of time cyclically especially made sense in premodern societies, where there were few innovations across generations and people lived very similar lives to those of their grandparents, their great-grandparents and going back many generations.
Many non-western traditions contain elements of cyclical thinking about time, perhaps most evident in classical Indian philosophy.
“One lives in a place more than in a time,” is how Stephen Muecke puts it in his book Ancient and Modern: Time, Culture and Indigenous Philosophy.
More important than the distinction between linear or cyclical time is whether time is separated from or intimately connected to place.
The tradition of western philosophy, in particular, has striven for a universality that glosses over differences of time and place.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The California Sunday Magazine”

Outspoken, attuned to social media, a creative basketball mind, someone who’s keenly aware of the pressures that society puts on modern players, Kerr would be the first to say that Jackson has been a major influence in how he thinks about the game and how he leads.
It’s a long year, and players were tired, and they had shown some vulnerability.
Jackson Bringing on a very volatile player who’s very talented and a surprising addition to your team -  - has given you some new things to conjure up as far as coaching and taking a load off some of the other scorers.
It’ll be an intellectual challenge that our core players, I think, will really enjoy.
Kerr First, my playing career was about as strong an apprenticeship as anybody could possibly have if they wanted to get into coaching.
Once you make it in the league - once you realize, “OK, I’ve made it, and I can make a living, and I’m going to play for a while.” - then you start to think about how you can use your influence for something better.
Whereas the NBA got out in front of all of it just by being partners with the players and being pretty upfront and outspoken themselves, going back to the stuff a few years ago and really beyond.
He’s one of the most unique players who’s ever played.

The orginal article.