Phil 7.19.17

7:00 – 8:00 Research

  • Never re-OCR a PDF text in Acrobat. It screws up all the highlighting, because Adobe.
  • Based on what I’m reading in C&C, I think the next experiment might be to look at how to facilitate and map discussion groups. Roughly the same research browser concept – provide support for search in a variety of affordances, but also have a chat room where the discussions take place. Supporting points from user searches could be shared with other discussants. A copy of the annotated web page (highlights, etc) would appear as a new tab in the other browsers as a ‘shared from’. In this way, the important axis of the discussion could emerge and be factored into the map.
  • Ok, back to the reading. These were an important couple of pages:
  • It justifies our emphasizing how obsolete are the distinctions between factual and value judgments, the one exercising an informative influence, and the other a normative influence. Yet others continue to adhere to these distinctions. [p 97]
  • Each time the assessment is arrived at by ordering the terms on a scale, one of whose poles has in our eyes greater importance than the other. It is in relation to this pole that we place persons, things or ideas. [p 98]
    • This is what I was discussing above. It should be possible to determine what these poles are, and create maps using them. These maps will have utility, because they reflect what is important in the discussion.
    • A second issue is to be able to show the pattern where what is important changes. A timeline of pole eigenvectors might be helpful.
  • In a social environment, as soon as this hierarchy becomes explicit, individuals and groups clearly move towards the dominant pole. They seek to become more than they were, and this more so than others: more loyal, more courageous, more tolerant, more patriotic, more modern, and so on. This occurs particularly in novel circumstances, where experience does not relativize values or the image individuals wish to have of themselves. [p 98]
    • So, what does explicit mean here?
  • This is most certainly very apparent nowadays, where the value assigned to novelty, to being avant-garde, to the fact of being different, is very high. [p 98]
    • I think this is the motion part that leads to flocking and other dynamic behavior (e.g. fashion trends). Novelty is always attractive, because as animals that had to hunt and gather, we understand at a genetic level that stasis means that we starve.
  • the normative hypothesis of the theory: the tendency defined by the dominant values and attitudes is accentuated during the discussions, meetings, etc., and determines the directional shift of the decisions that lead to group consensus. [p 98]
  • To sum up: it may seem strange that groups spontaneously swing away from the just mean and the conformity they should adhere to. But they do not do so regardless of the direction, which is towards the norm to which they all adhere. This is why one can scarcely ask whether a consensus is going in the right or the wrong direction, without asking on what basis it has been established and by whom. Stated in statistical terms, this hypothesis predicts that the mean of the choices on which the group members reach agreement is closer to the dominant pole of its scale of values than the mean of the initial choices made by each one of them separately. [p 99]
  • In many respects this hypothesis is the most important one. It indicates how greatly the direction taken by collective opinions and judgements is predetermined, no matter what one does. Thus they are predetermined by the store of previous knowledge and values, and up to a certain point by the collective memory that all share before they meet, and which are all ingrained in them. [p 99]
    • This is the inertia of the group moving across belief (value????) space. And this is why the flocking algorithm, based only on heading and velocity is appropriate.

9:00 – BRI

  • See if GeoMesa example works again
  • Unable to run hdfs dfs -mkdir /hbase/lib because safe mode was on. Went on a disk-cleaning rampage, including removing libre office and got safe mode off
  • And because I was on a roll, installed Bleachbit and gave it a shot
  • Still fails the GeoMesaIngest tests due to a null pointer. Going back to the HBaseQuickStart program.
  • My new IntelliJ needed to download many things
  • Quickstart works! So we’re back to the starting gate. Now why is GeoMesaIngest blowing up?
    org.springframework.web.util.NestedServletException: Request processing failed; nested exception is java.lang.NullPointerException
    	at com.vistronix.geomesaingest.web.GeoMesaIngestControllerTest.testIngestJson(
    Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
    	at com.vistronix.geomesaingest.service.GeoMesaIngestor.ingestJsonData(
    	at com.vistronix.geomesaingest.web.GeoMesaIngestController.ingestJson(
  • Ok, it turns out that the Mock tests are accessing the actual controller that is in turn accessing the db, which not right at all. Need to rewrite the current tests and add some more, as well as change the schema so that it works with documents and not patients
  • Also need to be able to handle queries? A person would bridge several documents. How should that work? What does the test look like
  • Realized that -1.0 was a bad flag for no geocoordinate. Changed it to 999 as a static final double