This response to my tweet is a common objection to targeted advertising.

@KevinCoates correct me if I'm wrong, but basic point seems to be that banning targeted ads will lower platform profits, but will mostly be beneficial for consumers.

Some counterpoints 👇

Donna Strickland, one of this year's Nobel Laureates, was not considered "notable enough" for Wikipedia as late as this May—reported by a number of sites, including the Independent. I dug into this a little. Here's the data—

This is the first deletion, back in 2014. A bit hard to read between the lines, but the basic story that an admin had Stickland's page "speedy deleted"—i.e., deleted without debate. The method was something called Copyright Jujitsu.

In particular, the admin had the page deleted not because of notability, but because it included a photograph of Strickland that had ambiguous copyright status. This is a method that people developed to get rid of content they didn't want, but also didn't want to debate.

"Copyright Jujitsu" because it is usually used against spam from companies; a PR officer uploads promotional material to Wikipedia. Instead of debating whether it's neutral, the admin can say "we'd love to have it, but the material appears to violate your company's copyright".

Usually the PR office and the IP office are separate in a company, and the idea of releasing promotional material under public domain is such a legal nightmare that the PR person goes away.

1. This is "Hollie The Card".

She's a Doctor, Physician, PhD, MA, Clinical Psychologist, Hospital Consultant, PTSD consultant, Long Covid Consultant.

(Thread)

2. Although sometimes she’s also an AUTHOR and English Academic.

3. A Hospital Consultant and ex Gymnast.

(Pinterest public profile)

4. A Physician, Doctor, or hospital consultant.

A “Hospital Consultant”, would probably mean a senior doctor, in the UK at least.

5. Hollie changes her Twitter picture and bio so often, it’s hard to keep up with her qualifications.

#Thread
Lessor known facts of Sudarshan Chakra or Neela Chakra of Puri Jagannath Temple.

The metal wheel at the top of Bhagwan Jagannath temple is also known as Neela Chakra (Blue Wheel). The wheel is made of eight metals comprising of.. 1/n

iron, copper, zinc, mercury, lead, brass, silver & gold. It's circumferance is about 36 feet & it is so designed that there is a wheel within the wheel. The circumferance of the inner wheel is about 26 feet. Eight hubs join together the inner and the outer wheels. 2/n

There are decorative designs on the outer wheel. The thickness of the Neela Chakra is 2 inches.The wheel is said to be Bhagwan Vishnu's most powerful weapon, Sudarshana Chakra. Inside Jagannath temple, Lord Vishnu's wheel is also worshipped in the name of 'Sudarshana'. 3/n

But inside the temple Sudarshana is not in the shape of a wheel, but in the shape of a small wood pillar placed to the left of image of bhagwan Jagannath. It is believed that the same Sudarshana is also at the top of the temple and is known by the name of Neela Chakra. 4/n

There is a specific category of people among the temple sevaks to serve the Neela Chakra and they are known as Garuda Sevaka or Chunara Nejoga. The pilgrims hold these sevaks in high esteem because everyday at Sunset. 5/n

The 2018 State of JavaScript survey is out. They got 20,000 responses and have some delicious, delicious data. I'mma thread in some highlights:

First up: JavaScript flavors. There's TypeScript at 47% adoption, a tad higher than npm's own survey results (which said 46%). npm's survey is coming up again soon and will ask about TypeScript in a lot more detail.

I really, *really* like SoJ's "would not use again" question, which lets people who've abandoned a tech self-identify. This is noticeable in the graph above with Flow users -- 41% of people who've used Flow say they wouldn't use it again.

Now JavaScript frameworks. It's been a full year since npm's survey, so these numbers differ from ours in the directions I expected:
React 65% (vs. 60%)
Vue 29% (vs. 24%)
Ember 5% (vs 4%, I was expecting a bigger rise)

But there's a shocker in here: Angular.

npm's survey had Angular at 40% last year and SoJ has it at either:
- 58% (if you include those who don't want to use it again)
- 24% (if you count only those who like it)
Since npm's question didn't ask if they intend to *continue* using it I think that might explain this.