[[Knowledge Management]], [[Reproducible [[Social [[Science]]]]]], and [[Academic Workflow]]s – 100 Tweets for @threadapalooza 2020, let's go
#roamcult #𐃏

Pandoc is a magical piece of software, and if you're not using it for your academic writing you're missing out. Compile (basically) any document format to (basically) any other document format.
While Pandoc is fantastic, it's a bit like ffmpeg: extremely powerful, but without GUI apps too few people will use it. ffmpeg has a ton of GUI apps that basically just wrap the CLI, Pandoc doesn't have enough of them.
Citekeys + CSL files + Pandoc can easily cut ~10+ hours from your writing workflow. Citekeys come from LaTeX-Land, you can use them through Pandoc with anything. And CSL files make it super easy to switch citation styles.
Since many journals have their own version of popular formats, every journal should be required to publish a CSL file, LaTeX and Word Pandoc template ready for submission. I don't want to think about the collective hours wasted formatting stuff for submission.
Why Pandoc you ask? The one true document format are text files. Lindy effect - they've been around from the beginning, they will be around until the end. Everything else can be created from them – so write your stuff in text files, then use Pandoc.
"That contradicts your devotion to @RoamResearch!" Yeah, no. If Roam had shitty plain-text export like Evernote, sure. But I can get stuff easily as Markdown (plain text), so I lose nothing and gain a world of features. Use Roam, export to Markdown, publish w/ Pandoc.
Citekeys are powerful because they are unique ids for whole papers. And unlike DOIs they are _memorable_. citekey:doi = domain:ip
Think in terms of Roam, papers should have unique IDs for paragraphs, so I can do einstein1905movement/ASDJKSL to link to a specific paragraph
PDFs are a horrible format and should die in a fire. I don't know enough about document formats, but I know there are better ones out there that give the illusion of "uneditable" and that PDFs suck. But Lindy strikes again: we're stuck with them, I fear.
Talking about "permanence", I feel there's a lot of tension to be resolved around the question of "what do we actually know right now in this particular subfield"? The more we move to pre-prints and "public peer review", the less legible fields become, bc volume increases.
At least in the social sciences, there is way to much emphasis on "contributing to theory". I've received and seen others receive too much feedback along the lines of "this doesn't contribute much to theory". We need to falsify more, not introduce endless mods to theory.
Fun paper on that from International Relations

More from Software

Are you a Designer or a Developer?👨‍💻

Here are some Google Chrome extensions that can make you better in 2021. 🔥🍀

(Thread) 🧵👇

https://t.co/zGir5E5U0J: https://t.co/PVx1wlX0Se is the easiest way to stay updated on the latest programming news. Get the hottest dev news from the best tech blogs on any topic you can think of.

2. CSS Peeper: CSS Peeper is a CSS viewer tailored for Designers. Get access to useful styles with our Chrome extension. Its mission is to let Designers focus on design, and spend as little time as possible digging in a

3. UX Check: UX Check makes heuristic evaluations quick and easy. The extension will open up Nielsen's Ten Heuristics in a side pane next to your website.

4. Checkbot: Checkbot finds critical SEO, speed & security problems before your website visitors do
Tests 100s of pages at once for broken links, duplicate titles, invalid HTML, insecure pages, and 50+ other

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x

The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x