#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Options

# Quora

I joined Quora twice: first under the name John Baez (by accident), then under the name Azimuth Project.

Today I got an email from Quora saying everyone needs to use their real name and telling me to change "Azimuth Project" to my real name. So, I don't think that idea will work. Too bad! - though I can see why they want this; without a policy like that I can easily imagine Quora becoming dominated by users like Pepsi and Coke.

So, what should we do? Naturally we can post answers under my name. If they let me, I can even say these answers were generated by the Azimuth Project. But the problem is that this tends to identify the Azimuth Project with John Baez. I want people to realize that it's more than just me.

We could have Curtis post the answers on Quora.

We could have various people post the answers on Quora.

We could do this and simultaneously look for some other forum that allows "Azimuth Project" to answer questions.

• Options
1.
edited May 2011

One borderline possibility: does it look like you could get away with "John Baez and the Azimuth Project" as a user name? That gives a real person, still links you and the project more than you probably want but may go some way to acheiving your goals?

(FWIW, I probably won't contribute much to the Quora process, basically because i don't know that much stuff to a "fairly complete answer" level. My skills are better with the wiki style bits where you can add good info to a page without the claim that, at any point in time, the page is a fairly complete set of relevant stuff.)

Comment Source:One borderline possibility: does it look like you could get away with "John Baez and the Azimuth Project" as a user name? That gives a real person, still links you and the project more than you probably want but may go some way to acheiving your goals? (FWIW, I probably won't contribute much to the Quora process, basically because i don't know that much stuff to a "fairly complete answer" level. My skills are better with the wiki style bits where you can add good info to a page without the claim that, at any point in time, the page is a fairly complete set of relevant stuff.)
• Options
2.
edited May 2011

I can try "John Baez and the Azimuth Project" and see if it gags.

FWIW, I probably won't contribute much to the Quora process, basically because i don't know that much stuff to a "fairly complete answer" level.

I bet you can and will contribute to the Quora process, unless the whole process turns out to suck and we abandon it.

First, if you read existing answers to questions on Quora, you'll see the standard is fairly low: someone asks a question and a bunch of people try to answer. It's not like an encyclopedia. So, I imagine that a clear, readable, paragraph-or-two-long answer is what we're aiming for here. We just need to be better than the rest. And the idea is that we'll work out the answers by chatting on the Azimuth Blog. So, to contribute, all you need to do is add a piece of information, or correct a mistake someone else made.

The goal is to 1) give people more to talk about on the Azimuth Blog, 2) let them know that their conversations are actually going somewhere, 3) transfer information to a place where more (and different) people may read it, and 4) let more people know about Azimuth.

It seems like a potentially good feedback loop, and a concept worth exploring even if Quora turns out not to be the best instantation of this concept.

Comment Source:I can try "John Baez and the Azimuth Project" and see if it gags. > FWIW, I probably won't contribute much to the Quora process, basically because i don't know that much stuff to a "fairly complete answer" level. I bet you can and _will_ contribute to the Quora process, unless the whole process turns out to suck and we abandon it. First, if you read existing answers to questions on Quora, you'll see the standard is fairly low: someone asks a question and a bunch of people try to answer. It's not like an encyclopedia. So, I imagine that a clear, readable, paragraph-or-two-long answer is what we're aiming for here. We just need to be better than the rest. And the idea is that we'll work out the answers by chatting on the Azimuth Blog. So, to contribute, all you need to do is add a piece of information, or correct a mistake someone else made. The goal is to 1) give people more to talk about on the Azimuth Blog, 2) let them know that their conversations are actually going somewhere, 3) transfer information to a place where more (and different) people may read it, and 4) let more people know about Azimuth. It seems like a potentially good feedback loop, and a concept worth exploring even if Quora turns out not to be the best instantation of this concept.
• Options
3.

Or we can simply ignore Quora as a pompous web site we have absolutely no interest in.

Comment Source:Or we can simply ignore Quora as a pompous web site we have absolutely no interest in.
• Options
4.

A lot of people use Quora. I don't care whether Quora is "pompous". What matters to me is starting up feedback loops that get more people involved in the Azimuth Project. Right now the Azimuth Project is nowhere near close to living up to my dreams for it, because far too few people are involved. It's not ramping up exponentially the way I want. I want to try lots of things to fix that problem.

Comment Source:A lot of people use Quora. I don't care whether Quora is "pompous". What matters to me is starting up feedback loops that get more people involved in the Azimuth Project. Right now the Azimuth Project is nowhere near close to living up to my dreams for it, because far too few people are involved. It's not ramping up exponentially the way I want. I want to try lots of things to fix that problem.
• Options
5.

How old is the Azimuth Project? You have a decent sized group here already. You're generating interesting discussions. You're interviewing interesting people.

Just be patient. Keep it up. They will come. Finish your paper on entropy and get back to Azimuth.

It would help if Azimuth starts showing up more in Google searches. The blog occasionally shows up in a search probably because it is hosted on Wordpress.

Not sure how to go about it, but it would be nice if Azimuth showed up when you google "Save the planet" or "Climate science". Or something similarly obvious.

I don't remember ever seeing an Azimuth forum discussion show up in a google search.

Comment Source:How old is the Azimuth Project? You have a decent sized group here already. You're generating interesting discussions. You're interviewing interesting people. Just be patient. Keep it up. They will come. Finish your paper on entropy and get back to Azimuth. It would help if Azimuth starts showing up more in Google searches. The blog occasionally shows up in a search probably because it is hosted on Wordpress. Not sure how to go about it, but it would be nice if Azimuth showed up when you google "Save the planet" or "Climate science". Or something similarly obvious. I don't remember ever seeing an Azimuth forum discussion show up in a google search.
• Options
6.
edited May 2011

If you do a search on a bit of terminology that's only used in a few places on the web, Azimuth wiki pages do come up. It doesn't look it's generally considered "significant" enough to get a high ranking if there are others who write about the issues. To come up after a search for, say, "Save the planet", there'd have to be at a minimum a reasonable number of uses of that term on the site, which I suspect there aren't.

Thinking about the problem though, I wonder if Azimuth is being penalised by (1) the long-term citing of paper abstracts and (2) some pages seeded with quotes from Wikipedia. I recall reading that search engines were trying to penalise sites that just reproduce other sites content (as an awful lot of sites do), maybe that's partly downranking the Azimuth project.

Comment Source:If you do a search on a bit of terminology that's only used in a few places on the web, Azimuth wiki pages do come up. It doesn't look it's generally considered "significant" enough to get a high ranking if there are others who write about the issues. To come up after a search for, say, "Save the planet", there'd have to be at a minimum a reasonable number of uses of that term on the site, which I suspect there aren't. Thinking about the problem though, I wonder if Azimuth is being penalised by (1) the long-term citing of paper abstracts and (2) some pages seeded with quotes from Wikipedia. I recall reading that search engines were trying to penalise sites that just reproduce other sites content (as an awful lot of sites do), maybe that's partly downranking the Azimuth project.
• Options
7.
edited May 2011

John Baez wrote:

So, what should we do? Naturally we can post answers under my name. If they let me, I can even say these answers were generated by the Azimuth Project. But the problem is that this tends to identify the Azimuth Project with John Baez. I want people to realize that it's more than just me.

First, it allows us to create a topic called Azimuth Project. Then people can follow that topic to pick up all the related questions in their stream.

Second, we can mix up the people who answer the questions. They can simply state at the top of the answer that it is an official collaborative answer from the Azimuth Project. This will reinforce the idea that others can join up, that it is a group.

The goal is to 1) give people more to talk about on the Azimuth Blog, 2) let them know that their conversations are actually going somewhere, 3) transfer information to a place where more (and different) people may read it, and 4) let more people know about Azimuth.

It seems like a potentially good feedback loop, and a concept worth exploring even if Quora turns out not to be the best instantation of this concept.

You hit on the reasons that I thought networking into Quora would be a good idea. And, as you stated, even if Quora isn't the tool, the process is valuable and we'll learn enough to perhaps find a better place.

Or build one. I'm working on a KickStarter.com proposal to fund an effort to build better collaborative tools. Working on the Azimuth Project got me started thinking in this direction. We really need a massive cross-domain collaboration that extends beyond science and engineering if we are to have maximal effect.

Comment Source:John Baez wrote: >So, what should we do? Naturally we can post answers under my name. If they let me, I can even say these answers were generated by the Azimuth Project. But the problem is that this tends to identify the Azimuth Project with John Baez. I want people to realize that it's more than just me. In thinking about this overnight, this is really an opportunity rather than a problem. First, it allows us to create a topic called Azimuth Project. Then people can follow that topic to pick up all the related questions in their stream. Second, we can mix up the people who answer the questions. They can simply state at the top of the answer that it is an official collaborative answer from the Azimuth Project. This will reinforce the idea that others can join up, that it is a group. >The goal is to 1) give people more to talk about on the Azimuth Blog, 2) let them know that their conversations are actually going somewhere, 3) transfer information to a place where more (and different) people may read it, and 4) let more people know about Azimuth. >It seems like a potentially good feedback loop, and a concept worth exploring even if Quora turns out not to be the best instantation of this concept. You hit on the reasons that I thought networking into Quora would be a good idea. And, as you stated, even if Quora isn't the tool, the process is valuable and we'll learn enough to perhaps find a better place. Or build one. I'm working on a KickStarter.com proposal to fund an effort to build better collaborative tools. Working on the Azimuth Project got me started thinking in this direction. We really need a massive cross-domain collaboration that extends beyond science and engineering if we are to have maximal effect.
• Options
8.
Another "save the world" effort is the Google charitable arm's RE
Comment Source:Another "save the world" effort is the Google charitable arm's RE<C effort. In setting up they said that probably the only way to stop coal burning was to develop cheaper sources of energy. However they excluded nuclear. Recently they've said that getting non-nuclear renewables cheaper than coal was an "aspirational" goal that they don't actually think they can achieve. But they're going to ignore this and continue. Which is a shame because we could use all those R&D resources for SN<C (SN = safe nuclear). Nuclear power is a complex multi-faceted area, as we see by the many ideas in play. Maybe this is where Azimuth math and physics expertise could be most effectively deployed.
• Options
9.
edited May 2011

I got this email from Quora today:

Hello John,

For the present, usernames must reflect an individual user's real, full name and nothing else. Please feel free to show your affiliation with the Azimuth Project in other parts of your profile - e.g. the tagline or bio - but your username must reflect your name alone. Could you please edit your username accordingly? You will not be able to edit on Quora until this matter is resolved.

Thank you,

So, I'll change my name from "John Baez (for the Azimuth Project)" to "John Baez", and we'll have to think of something else.

Comment Source:I got this email from Quora today: > Hello John, > For the present, usernames must reflect an individual user's real, full name and nothing else. Please feel free to show your affiliation with the Azimuth Project in other parts of your profile - e.g. the tagline or bio - but your username must reflect your name alone. Could you please edit your username accordingly? You will not be able to edit on Quora until this matter is resolved. > Thank you, > Quora Admin So, I'll change my name from "John Baez (for the Azimuth Project)" to "John Baez", and we'll have to think of something else.
• Options
10.

Curtis wrote:

First, it allows us to create a topic called Azimuth Project. Then people can follow that topic to pick up all the related questions in their stream.

Second, we can mix up the people who answer the questions. They can simply state at the top of the answer that it is an official collaborative answer from the Azimuth Project. This will reinforce the idea that others can join up, that it is a group.

Okay. All this sounds good.

I don't know how creating topics works. Can one take an existing question and its answers and add it to that topic? Maybe you can create an "Azimuth Project" topic and do that?

Here are some topics we should look at

Comment Source:Curtis wrote: > First, it allows us to create a topic called Azimuth Project. Then people can follow that topic to pick up all the related questions in their stream. > Second, we can mix up the people who answer the questions. They can simply state at the top of the answer that it is an official collaborative answer from the Azimuth Project. This will reinforce the idea that others can join up, that it is a group. Okay. All this sounds good. I don't know how creating topics works. Can one take an existing question and its answers and add it to that topic? Maybe you can create an "Azimuth Project" topic and do that? Here are some topics we should look at * [Climatology](http://www.quora.com/Climatology) * [Sustainability](http://www.quora.com/Sustainability)
• Options
11.
edited May 2011

Curtis wrote:

Or build one. I'm working on a KickStarter.com proposal to fund an effort to build better collaborative tools. Working on the Azimuth Project got me started thinking in this direction. We really need a massive cross-domain collaboration that extends beyond science and engineering if we are to have maximal effect.

BTW, please, please, please don't set up a program to build collaborative tools "in the web browser". This isn't a cry of luddism (honest!), it's just born of years of frustration in which people have decided to build applications "on the browser platform", completely forgetting that operating systems have "evolved" mechanisms like process monitoring, "nice" levels and run-time limiting, window managers, fine-grained system security, etc, all of which are missing in the browser "platform". Granted the browser programmers may have a couple of years of fun reinventing these already existing mechanisms (often with a "we can't clean up the problems with the prototype because it would break existing code" attitude), but it seems like a massive step backward to deliberately not use these mechanisms that have been created to make software more usable and reliable.

Comment Source:Curtis wrote: > Or build one. I'm working on a KickStarter.com proposal to fund an effort to build better collaborative tools. Working on the Azimuth Project got me started thinking in this direction. We really need a massive cross-domain collaboration that extends beyond science and engineering if we are to have maximal effect. BTW, please, _please_, **_please_** don't set up a program to build collaborative tools "in the web browser". This isn't a cry of luddism (honest!), it's just born of years of frustration in which people have decided to build applications "on the browser platform", completely forgetting that operating systems have "evolved" mechanisms like process monitoring, "nice" levels and run-time limiting, window managers, fine-grained system security, etc, all of which are missing in the browser "platform". Granted the browser programmers may have a couple of years of fun reinventing these already existing mechanisms (often with a "we can't clean up the problems with the prototype because it would break existing code" attitude), but it seems like a massive step backward to deliberately not use these mechanisms that have been created to make software more usable and reliable.
• Options
12.
edited May 2011

Robert K. Smart wrote:

Another "save the world" effort is the Google charitable arm's RE<C effort. In setting up they said that probably the only way to stop coal burning was to develop cheaper sources of energy.

Interesting!

It would be great if you could take information like this and add it to the Azimuth Library. This discussion forum is our short-term memory, but the Library is our long-term memory: information here evaporates over time, while there it accumulates.

It's not hard to do. Here's what I just did:

1. Clicked the "Azimuth Project" icon in my bookmarks.

2. Typed "RE<C" into the search box at top.

3. Clicked on the grey patch where it said Create a new page, named: "RE < C"

4. Googled "RE < C" and read the top page that came up.

5. Typed this into the new page:

## Idea ##

Google's **RE < C** project is aimed at developing utility scale renewable energy cheaper than coal:

* [RE < C](http://www.google.org/rec.html), website.

category: organizations

(I actually typed more, but this would suffice.)

Next I'll mention the existence of this new page here on the Forum.

However they excluded nuclear. Recently they've said that getting non-nuclear renewables cheaper than coal was an "aspirational" goal that they don't actually think they can achieve. But they're going to ignore this and continue.

Wow! Where did you hear that? Let me know and add a link to the page I just created. That would be a shocking admission of hypocrisy.

Which is a shame because we could use all those R&D resources for SN<C (SN = safe nuclear). Nuclear power is a complex multi-faceted area, as we see by the many ideas in play. Maybe this is where Azimuth math and physics expertise could be most effectively deployed.

Right now I'm leaning toward the idea that a mix of renewable and nuclear energy is the only technologically, economically and politically realistic strategy for decarbonizing energy production. If so, the Azimuth Project should not take sides in the current "war" between pro-nuke and anti-nuke forces, but rather educate both sides to accept the advantages of a multi-pronged strategy. This will also let us pull in the smartest people from both "sides".

I don't know nearly enough about nuclear reactors. I was going to interview Barry Brook about this, but we both let it drop, perhaps because we were distracted by Fukushima. I should get back to it.

Comment Source:Robert K. Smart wrote: > Another "save the world" effort is the Google charitable arm's RE<C effort. In setting up they said that probably the only way to stop coal burning was to develop cheaper sources of energy. Interesting! It would be great if you could take information like this and add it to the Azimuth Library. This discussion forum is our short-term memory, but the Library is our long-term memory: information here evaporates over time, while there it accumulates. It's not hard to do. Here's what I just did: 1. Clicked the "Azimuth Project" icon in my bookmarks. 2. Typed "RE<C" into the search box at top. 3. Clicked on the grey patch where it said **Create a new page, named: "RE < C"** 4. Googled "RE < C" and read the top page that came up. 5. Typed this into the new page:  ## Idea ##   Google's **RE < C** project is aimed at developing utility scale renewable energy cheaper than coal:   * [RE < C](http://www.google.org/rec.html), website. category: organizations  (I actually typed more, but this would suffice.) Next I'll mention the existence of this new page here on the Forum. > However they excluded nuclear. Recently they've said that getting non-nuclear renewables cheaper than coal was an "aspirational" goal that they don't actually think they can achieve. But they're going to ignore this and continue. Wow! Where did you hear that? Let me know and add a link to the page I just created. That would be a shocking admission of hypocrisy. > Which is a shame because we could use all those R&D resources for SN<C (SN = safe nuclear). Nuclear power is a complex multi-faceted area, as we see by the many ideas in play. Maybe this is where Azimuth math and physics expertise could be most effectively deployed. Right now I'm leaning toward the idea that a mix of renewable and nuclear energy is the only technologically, economically and politically realistic strategy for decarbonizing energy production. If so, the Azimuth Project should not take sides in the current "war" between pro-nuke and anti-nuke forces, but rather educate both sides to accept the advantages of a multi-pronged strategy. This will also let us pull in the smartest people from both "sides". I don't know nearly enough about nuclear reactors. I was going to interview Barry Brook about this, but we both let it drop, perhaps because we were distracted by Fukushima. I should get back to it.
• Options
13.

David Tweed wrote:

BTW, please, please, please don't set up a program to build collaborative tools "in the web browser". This isn't a cry of luddism (honest!), it's just born of years of frustration in which people have decided to build applications "on the browser platform", completely forgetting that operating systems have "evolved" mechanisms like process monitoring, "nice" levels and run-time limiting, window managers, fine-grained system security, etc, all of which are missing in the browser "platform".

Preaching to the choir on this one. I hate Browser applications. They suck.

The programming interfaces lack the sort of modern tools that were available elsewhere 20 years ago. Debugging sucks, developing sucks, etc. The interfaces themselves are so inconsistent you have to figure out each one anew. Everyone now assumes that's the "modern" way but I was doing better work 20 years ago on Macs with MacApp and Object Pascal. The web still has a long way to catch up. The browser's era is done, we're moving to the App era again.

We'll be building native applications running against servers. There will probably be a web interface but that won't be the tool people will use. The targets will be Macs, iOS(iPhones and iPads), Android, Linux, and Windows. We'll probably start on Macs and iOS with the cross-platform abstraction layers for the other targets following a month or so behind.

John Baez wrote:

I don't know how creating topics works. Can one take an existing question and its answers and add it to that topic? Maybe you can create an "Azimuth Project" topic and do that?

I'll take a look and do something. Did you find a question you liked?

Comment Source:David Tweed wrote: >BTW, please, _please_, **_please_** don't set up a program to build collaborative tools "in the web browser". This isn't a cry of luddism (honest!), it's just born of years of frustration in which people have decided to build applications "on the browser platform", completely forgetting that operating systems have "evolved" mechanisms like process monitoring, "nice" levels and run-time limiting, window managers, fine-grained system security, etc, all of which are missing in the browser "platform". Preaching to the choir on this one. I hate Browser applications. They suck. The programming interfaces lack the sort of modern tools that were available elsewhere 20 years ago. Debugging sucks, developing sucks, etc. The interfaces themselves are so inconsistent you have to figure out each one anew. Everyone now assumes that's the "modern" way but I was doing better work 20 years ago on Macs with MacApp and Object Pascal. The web still has a long way to catch up. The browser's era is done, we're moving to the App era again. We'll be building native applications running against servers. There will probably be a web interface but that won't be the tool people will use. The targets will be Macs, iOS(iPhones and iPads), Android, Linux, and Windows. We'll probably start on Macs and iOS with the cross-platform abstraction layers for the other targets following a month or so behind. John Baez wrote: >I don't know how creating topics works. Can one take an existing question and its answers and add it to that topic? Maybe you can create an "Azimuth Project" topic and do that? I'll take a look and do something. Did you find a question you liked?
• Options
14.
edited May 2011

What is the one best thing everyone could do to slow down climate change?

Topics: Azimuth Project, Climatology, Climate Change

So now we can start to play. :-)

Let's show them the power of a fully operational Azimuth Project!

Comment Source:I added the question: *What is the one best thing everyone could do to slow down climate change?* Topics: Azimuth Project, Climatology, Climate Change So now we can start to play. :-) Let's show them the power of a fully operational Azimuth Project!
• Options
15.

Where did you hear that?

I guess from this news item. I don't think my interpretation is incorrect.

I'm not very good at determining what is worth long term memory. RE<C doesn't need any extra publicity. People will think "google is smart, so renewables must be possible", and I think that's wrong. I also think that Google buying up lots of renewable energy to run their business is merely misleading when it comes to the real question of whether society as a whole can take that path.

Across the Atlantic, David MacKay is among a number of people trying to convince the new Scottish government (no previous experience in government) that they can't just turn off all the coal and nuclear and run Scotland on offshore wind.

Meanwhile in Australia we see that the aim of Australia's planned carbon price is to turn off brown coal power generation and replace it with natural gas. But it is criminal to just burn gas in a giant power station. The beauty of gas is that you can pipe it around and do power generation close to the consumer and generate consumer heating as well. Not that I actually favour that: we can't achieve the reductions we want by switching to gas, quite apart from my expectation that peak gas is going to follow peak oil within a decade or two.

Comment Source:>Where did you hear that? I guess from [this](http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/04/28/idINIndia-56618320110428) news item. I don't think my interpretation is incorrect. I'm not very good at determining what is worth long term memory. RE<C doesn't need any extra publicity. People will think "google is smart, so renewables must be possible", and I think that's wrong. I also think that Google buying up lots of renewable energy to run their business is merely misleading when it comes to the real question of whether society as a whole can take that path. Across the Atlantic, David MacKay is among a number of people trying to convince the new Scottish government (no previous experience in government) that they can't just turn off all the coal and nuclear and run Scotland on offshore wind. Meanwhile [in Australia](http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/content/2011/s3223452.htm) we see that the aim of Australia's planned carbon price is to turn off brown coal power generation and replace it with natural gas. But it is criminal to just burn gas in a giant power station. The beauty of gas is that you can pipe it around and do power generation close to the consumer and generate consumer heating as well. Not that I actually favour that: we can't achieve the reductions we want by switching to gas, quite apart from my expectation that peak gas is going to follow peak oil within a decade or two.
• Options
16.

And I meant to add: 3 cheers for Kirk Sorensen. I hope he saves us. It certainly seems like a valuable exercise to track down these various R&D projects that might save us and seek out some independent expert opinion on their strengths and weaknesses. I'll try to start something along those lines or contribute if someone else beats me to it.

Saving the world can take a convoluted path. The Thorium story looked too hard in the US in the face of an under-resourced NRC. Then China picked up the project, planning to spend a lot of money to make it work. Now it turns out that I guess the US military is worried about that (as well they might), so maybe the Army can use its right to build nuclear facilities without NRC approval to get things moving in the US. Here's hoping America wins.

Comment Source:And I meant to add: 3 cheers for [Kirk Sorensen](http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/downloads/TEAC3%20presentations/TEAC3_Sorensen_Kirk.pdf). I hope he saves us. It certainly seems like a valuable exercise to track down these various R&D projects that might save us and seek out some independent expert opinion on their strengths and weaknesses. I'll try to start something along those lines or contribute if someone else beats me to it. Saving the world can take a convoluted path. The Thorium story looked too hard in the US in the face of an under-resourced NRC. Then China picked up the project, planning to spend a lot of money to make it work. Now it turns out that I guess the US military is worried about that (as well they might), so maybe the Army can use its right to build nuclear facilities without NRC approval to get things moving in the US. Here's hoping America wins.
• Options
17.
edited May 2011

If Quora doesn't work you may try also other question and answer sites on the knowledge market, Wikipedia has a good collection of links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_market . With some of them you could even make money with.

Comment Source:If Quora doesn't work you may try also other question and answer sites on the knowledge market, Wikipedia has a good collection of links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_market . With some of them you could even make money with.
• Options
18.

It seems to me that the Quora page is really difficult to navigate, and not user friendly. For example, the textbox for answers is really small. Or maybe there is a way to configure the layout?

Comment Source:It seems to me that the Quora page is really difficult to navigate, and not user friendly. For example, the textbox for answers is really small. Or maybe there is a way to configure the layout?
• Options
19.

The point of quora is not how good a tool it is, or whether or not it if the best technology.

The point of quora is that there are already a bunch of people there who we want to join in helping with the Azimuth Project.

You won't find them elsewhere. You'll find others perhaps.

Quora is the best collection of like minds I've found for helping Azimuth and I've been looking for months. Please bear with the problems and give it a chance.

Comment Source:The point of quora is not how good a tool it is, or whether or not it if the best technology. The point of quora is that there are *already* a bunch of people there who we want to join in helping with the Azimuth Project. You won't find them elsewhere. You'll find others perhaps. Quora is the best collection of like minds I've found for helping Azimuth and I've been looking for months. Please bear with the problems and give it a chance.
• Options
20.

Curtis Faith wrote: "The point of quora is that there are already a bunch of people there who we want to join in helping with the Azimuth Project."

I seem to have missed some information and I couldnt find it in this thread. Who are these people? What do they propose? To what extend are they related to the Zuckerberg Imperium? I ask, because if there are connections then one would at least need to think what to do about facebooks relationship to carbon: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/cool-it/ITs-carbon-footprint/Facebook/

Curtis faith wrote:"We'll be building native applications running against servers. There will probably be a web interface but that won't be the tool people will use. The targets will be Macs, iOS(iPhones and iPads), Android, Linux, and Windows. We'll probably start on Macs and iOS with the cross-platform abstraction layers for the other targets following a month or so behind."

Sounds brave to me to build collaborative tools with a kickstarter project! You may want to read Experiments in massive multiplayer online games for economic and political change

Comment Source:Curtis Faith wrote: "The point of quora is that there are already a bunch of people there who we want to join in helping with the Azimuth Project." I seem to have missed some information and I couldnt find it in this thread. Who are these people? What do they propose? To what extend are they related to the Zuckerberg Imperium? I ask, because if there are connections then one would at least need to think what to do about facebooks relationship to carbon: <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/cool-it/ITs-carbon-footprint/Facebook/">http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/cool-it/ITs-carbon-footprint/Facebook/</a> Curtis faith wrote:"We'll be building native applications running against servers. There will probably be a web interface but that won't be the tool people will use. The targets will be Macs, iOS(iPhones and iPads), Android, Linux, and Windows. We'll probably start on Macs and iOS with the cross-platform abstraction layers for the other targets following a month or so behind." Sounds brave to me to build collaborative tools with a kickstarter project! You may want to read [[Experiments in massive multiplayer online games for economic and political change]]
• Options
21.

Robert Smart wrote:

I'm not very good at determining what is worth long term memory. RE<C doesn't need any extra publicity.

My attitude is that if there's some big project that people are doing to tackle environmental problems, it should be mentioned in the Azimuth Project, regardless of whether it's good or bad, or whether it needs publicity or doesn't. Needless to say there are a lot of such projects and it will take a long time to get lots of them onto Azimuth Wiki. But if someone mentions one, I'll always wish it was listed on the Wiki.

People will think "google is smart, so renewables must be possible", and I think that's wrong.

Maybe you'll have more fun writing about nuclear power then. We've got some sadly deficient articles on various kinds of nuclear reactors!

Comment Source:Robert Smart wrote: > I'm not very good at determining what is worth long term memory. RE<C doesn't need any extra publicity. My attitude is that if there's some big project that people are doing to tackle environmental problems, it should be mentioned in the Azimuth Project, regardless of whether it's good or bad, or whether it needs publicity or doesn't. Needless to say there are a lot of such projects and it will take a long time to get lots of them onto Azimuth Wiki. But if someone mentions one, I'll always wish it was listed on the Wiki. > People will think "google is smart, so renewables must be possible", and I think that's wrong. Maybe you'll have more fun writing about nuclear power then. We've got some sadly deficient articles on various kinds of nuclear reactors!
• Options
22.
edited May 2011

Curtis wrote:

What is the one best thing everyone could do to slow down climate change?

Great! I blogged about it here. Please, everyone: go over there and take a try at this question. It's a devilishly tricky question: I listed 50 possible answers, most of which can't possibly be right.

I'm sorry it took me a while to do this. I left Los Angeles on the 24th and arrived in Singapore on the 26th. I'm just catching up on the Forum now.

Comment Source:Curtis wrote: >I added the question: > _What is the one best thing everyone could do to slow down climate change?_ Great! I blogged about it [here](http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/the-one-best-thing-everyone-could-do-to-slow-down-climate-change/). Please, everyone: go over there and take a try at this question. It's a devilishly tricky question: I listed 50 possible answers, most of which can't possibly be right. I'm sorry it took me a while to do this. I left Los Angeles on the 24th and arrived in Singapore on the 26th. I'm just catching up on the Forum now. <img src = "http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/emoticons/spiral_eyes.gif" alt = ""/>
• Options
23.

Nice blog post John, you took things in the direction I had hoped and then some.

:-)

Comment Source:Nice blog post John, you took things in the direction I had hoped and then some. :-)
• Options
24.
edited May 2011

I'm afraid the official Azimuth Project answer to the question is going to have to 'unask the question' somewhat, because by its nature this question pushes the answer toward extreme measures that aren't politically feasible. Eric's reaction on the blog illustrates what would happen if we simply answered the question 'straight', without taking this into account.

Of course if we were politicians rather than scientists we would be completely accustomed to answering a different question than the one asked.

Comment Source:I'm afraid the official Azimuth Project answer to the question is going to have to 'unask the question' somewhat, because by its nature this question pushes the answer toward extreme measures that aren't politically feasible. Eric's reaction on the blog illustrates what would happen if we simply answered the question 'straight', without taking this into account. Of course if we were politicians rather than scientists we would be completely accustomed to answering a different question than the one asked.
• Options
25.

I got the following question which might be good for the Azimuth Project to answer:

Professor Baez,

While browsing through math.stackexchange site (it's something like mathoverflow's little brother) I noticed the following question:

and I don't think there is anyone who can give a better answer to it than you - so I was wondering would you do it? I'm sure that a lot of people who are 'regulars' on this site would like to read more about it!

Best regards,

Harun Šiljak

Comment Source:I got the following question which might be good for the Azimuth Project to answer: > Professor Baez, >While browsing through math.stackexchange site (it's something like mathoverflow's little brother) I noticed the following question: > [http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/42012/what-jobs-apply-mathematics-to-ecology-outside-of-academia](http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/42012/what-jobs-apply-mathematics-to-ecology-outside-of-academia) >and I don't think there is anyone who can give a better answer to it than you - so I was wondering would you do it? I'm sure that a lot of people who are 'regulars' on this site would like to read more about it! >Best regards, > Harun Šiljak
• Options
26.
edited June 2011

Are you going to answer that? I'm skimming math stackexchange every other day, but did not post an answer to this question because I don't know one.

Edit: If you would like to answer this, but don't want to create a user account for this purpose, I could post it in your name. Or in the name of Azimuth.

Comment Source:Are you going to answer that? I'm skimming math stackexchange every other day, but did not post an answer to this question because I don't know one. Edit: If you would like to answer this, but don't want to create a user account for this purpose, I could post it in your name. Or in the name of Azimuth.
• Options
27.

I would like to answer this question, but I'm not having as much free time in the last couple of days as I'd like, and it would take time for me to research this question: I'm a lot more knowledgeable about jobs in academia.

I should post this question on the Azimuth Blog. But I haven't even had time to write an answer to the last Quora question we did on Azimuth, about the effects of sea level rise in New York!

If someone wants to do something really really useful, they could take the discussion here and boil it down to a nice answer full of links:

Comment Source:I would like to answer this question, but I'm not having as much free time in the last couple of days as I'd like, and it would take time for me to research this question: I'm a lot more knowledgeable about jobs _in_ academia. I should post this question on the Azimuth Blog. But I haven't even had time to write an _answer_ to the last Quora question we did on Azimuth, about the effects of sea level rise in New York! If someone wants to do something really really useful, they could take the discussion here and boil it down to a nice answer full of links: * [How sea level rise will affect New York](http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/how-sea-level-rise-will-affect-new-york/), Azimuth Blog.