heedfull / Edwin

There are no people in heedfull’s collective.

Huffduffed (34)

  1. ADAM BUXTON ON DAVID BOWIE (EDIT) FOR BBC RADIO 6 MUSIC(2013)

    A personalised journey through the career of David Bowie by really long time fan, Adam Buxton.

    Some of the music in the show has been edited for copyright reasons.

    This programme was originally broadcast on 31st March 2013 on BBC Radio 6 Music.

    ===
    Original video: https://soundcloud.com/adam-buxton/adam-buxton-on-david-bowie-2013-for-bbc-6musicedit
    Downloaded by http://huffduff-video.snarfed.org/ on Mon, 05 Aug 2019 22:32:05 GMT Available for 30 days after download

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  2. polling-is-ubiquitous-but-is-it-bad-for-democracy

    https://www.npr.org/2016/02/11/466405233/polling-is-ubiquitous-but-is-it-bad-for-democracy

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  3. Journalling

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  4. Joanne Fairchild Miller

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  5. Investing in Yourself Is the Key To Success - Dan Miller on Personal Development

    Dan Miller shares how the rule of investing in yourself has applied to his success and others and how it can apply to your unique situation.

    http://www.48days.com/podcast-investing-in-yourself/

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  6. Algo trading

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  7. Flipping the Script

    Our brains are constantly hard at work writing scripts and narratives about how other people perceive us. Trouble is — according to best-selling author and researcher Brené Brown — most of those stories simply aren’t true. Here, she expertly debunks our inner monologues and reveals how editing your thoughts can help you, and your team, work better together.

    ===
    Original video: https://soundcloud.com/slacksingleservings/the-stories-we-tell-ourselves/s-8oh5l
    Downloaded by http://huffduff-video.snarfed.org/ on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 11:17:29 GMT Available for 30 days after download

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  8. Simple But Not Easy — Salt of the Earth

    In 1999 Jason Fried started a design consultancy with a few friends. They called it 37signals and their launch consisted of publishing a page that listed 37 things they believed. 17 years later they’re still in business, though their company looks totally different. They’ve shifted to building software tools and have renamed 37signals after Basecamp, a project management tool which is their most successful product.Jason recommends people keep things simple - e.g. spend less than you make - and avoid trying to optimize every component of your company, which can be tempting, especially in software. His perspective is refreshing and his advice is simple to understand but not easy to follow without discipline.Jason recommended a few books in our conversation:Maverick: The Success Story Behind the World’s Most Unusual Workplace Paperback by Ricardo SemlerThe Effective Executive: The Definitive Guide to Getting the Right Things Done by Peter F. DruckerTurn the Ship Around!: A True Story of Turning Followers into Leaders by L. David MarquetThanks to Jason Fried, and our sponsor MailChimp.

    http://www.saltpodcast.com/episodes/simple-but-not-easy

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  9. Nathan Curtis – Building Scalable Design Systems and Style Guides » UIE Brain Sparks

    Nathan: I think you need to broaden your spotlight, because I don’t think either of those approaches is the best approach. The first one that ends up being a really negative approach is a mandate, coming out with some design system that everybody has to use. It’s massive. It’s sort of monolithic.

    It’s created by, hopefully, a representative subset of people, but to all the other people that didn’t have a voice, they won’t see it as legitimate. And so, mandating, particularly early on, isn’t going to work really well.

    The other thing that I have sensed doesn’t get as much traction is when people build things for themselves and then just open it up for other people to use if they want to, because think about platforms.

    If you’re designing for a Web-based marketing site, and you have all these Web-based products, and you have all these Android and iOS apps, and you might have a bunch of Windows apps that you also sell to your customers that are embedded in things like SQL Studio. All these things that don’t necessarily carry through all of the aspects of the core design language, for example, but could still benefit from aspects of the system.

    All these other people are going to dismiss you. Instead of like, “OK, that’s great. It’s a Web component. I have to use their big monolithic CSS file just so I can get a button. I’m not going to do that. I’m just going to build it myself.”

    The best teams can see beyond themselves and start to look at their design system as, in part, somewhat of an abstraction, and also they try to think about their design system in a more modular way.

    If you look at Google’s material design, I don’t know if this was exactly their intent, but there are separate parts that you can engage with. There’s the spec, there’s the description of how the design system works, and all its key parts of motion, space, color, the fab button, and so on.

    Separate from that, there’s a polymer library to build apps with. Separate from that, there’s a material design lite library to build sites with. Those are two separate things that if you’re building a site that if you want to use material design, suddenly that’s your ticket. But material design as its core is not necessarily a mandated, single toolkit for people to use. It’s a lot bigger than that.

    I think that the other thing that I’ve observed Salesforce writing about some is that they actually break down their design system into all its composed decisions. Essentially, their design system at its core is a bunch of design decisions that you break down into different property value pairs, primary color 1, primary color 2.

    How can you actually think about it in that way so that somebody building on a Window’s platform can suddenly engage with the iconography, the editorial concerns, and some of your design patterns, even though they’re not going to use your header component that goes on top of your website, because it’s wholly inappropriate in that kind of environment.

    If you can break it down into those different pieces, you have a better chance for not just having other people sense the value that you can provide for them, but you take a different mindset of instead of designing just for the product you’re working on, you’re just myopically, with horse-blinders on, you’re thinking a little bit more broadly about what you’re doing and the impacts it might have.

    https://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2015/09/09/nathan-curtis-building-scalable-design-systems-and-style-guides/

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

  10. Checking in with ‘Turtle Traders’ 30 years later

    The Eddie Murphy comedy “Trading Places” celebrates its 30th anniversary this summer.The box office hit explored whether a person who has no formal training can make millions in the markets.The two main characters, Mortimer and Randolph had two counterparts in Chicago traders William Eckhardt and Richard Dennis.Dennis reportedly made his first million by the age of 25. A few months after the movie hit theaters, Eckhardt and Dennis put an ad in the newspaper looking for new talent.“The ad looked like the New York Yankees looking for a starting shortstop,” Michael Cavallo said. He was already in commodities, for the beverage department at General Cinema. But the idea of working with Dennis was on a whole other level.The ad read something like this: a group of applicants would be trained in Dennis’ proprietary concepts, trade only for him and get a percentage of the profits.Chicagoan Jim DiMaria was among those picked. DiMaria says he got an $18,000 draw.“That was enough to pay my grocery bills and I knew that was going to be secure,” DiMaria said.The name turtle came from Dennis, who thought he could train traders as fast turtles were raised in farms.Michael Covel is the author of The Complete Turtle Trader. He says Dennis and Eckhardt believed the markets were a reflection of people and their decision-making or their human behavior. “If a market was moving up, you want to be following that trend, if it’s going down, you want to be following that trend and the idea being if the market is moving down, you’re shorting the market to make money if the market drops,” Covel explained.Dennis and Eckhardt took around 20 people: about half with no business background. Michael Carr is a Wisconsin native who worked for the company that created Dungeons and Dragons. Carr and the other Turtles had three and a half to four years to make money after two weeks of training. He says part of the recruiting process included answering personality questions like “how important is money to you and why? and ‘would you rather be good or lucky?’”Carr, Cavallo and DiMaria won’t say how lucky they were. But they didn’t lose money.But not all of the Turtles made money. Several were dropped early in the program. Richard  Dennis and William Eckhardt declined to be interviewed for the story. DiMaria would describe the experiment as a success.“If this were in fact the dollar bet (like the one made in Trading Places), which is the theory, (then, yes) can trading be taught…but maybe not to just anyone,” DiMaria said.Michael Covel says the lessons learned from the Turtle Traders continue today.“I think they’re seen as visionaries and very successful traders,” Covel said.Today, Cavallo is in Massachusetts and works for the Clinton Foundation. Carr is a freelance writer in Wisconsin. DiMaria is still trading with his own firm.Yolanda Perdomo is a host and producer at WBEZ. Follower her @yolandanews.

    http://www.wbez.org/sections/film/checking-turtle-traders-30-years-later-107909

    —Huffduffed by heedfull

Page 1 of 4Older