Comments on: the unbearable lightness … (2) http://www.neverendingbooks.org/index.php/the-unbearable-lightness-2.html lieven le bruyn's blog Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:45:28 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Dusanka http://www.neverendingbooks.org/index.php/the-unbearable-lightness-2.html/comment-page-1#comment-5267 Dusanka Thu, 08 May 2008 14:04:03 +0000 http://www.neverendingbooks.org/?p=35#comment-5267 <p>The EMS Committee on Women and Mathematics Weblog “ has survived :), and our statistics looks better and better.</p> The EMS Committee on Women and Mathematics Weblog “ has survived :) , and our statistics looks better and better.

]]> By: lieven http://www.neverendingbooks.org/index.php/the-unbearable-lightness-2.html/comment-page-1#comment-2850 lieven Wed, 12 Sep 2007 18:22:53 +0000 http://www.neverendingbooks.org/?p=35#comment-2850 <p>thanks javier, - maybe i was trying too hard lately to give 'objective' (that is,wikipedia-like) accounts of things (such as the posts on subgroups of the modular groups or mathieu groups and their applications). so maybe I was the one confusing the blog-format with something else... - i know i promised to write up notes of my talks last week on M-geometry and ill do that, eventually... (but perhaps, I should just put in on the arXiv...) - im still struggling with a way forward with this blog, but one thing your comment clearified is that I should probably follow my gut-feeling. A blog needs a personal touch rather than a clinical account of facts and proofs.</p> thanks javier, - maybe i was trying too hard lately to give ‘objective’ (that is,wikipedia-like) accounts of things (such as the posts on subgroups of the modular groups or mathieu groups and their applications). so maybe I was the one confusing the blog-format with something else… - i know i promised to write up notes of my talks last week on M-geometry and ill do that, eventually… (but perhaps, I should just put in on the arXiv…) - im still struggling with a way forward with this blog, but one thing your comment clearified is that I should probably follow my gut-feeling. A blog needs a personal touch rather than a clinical account of facts and proofs.

]]> By: javier http://www.neverendingbooks.org/index.php/the-unbearable-lightness-2.html/comment-page-1#comment-2848 javier Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:21:03 +0000 http://www.neverendingbooks.org/?p=35#comment-2848 <p>Different media for different aims.</p> <p>Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and encyclopaedic. No place for original research, personal opinions nor wishful thinking. It is good when looking for a quick definition, but not when trying to understand something ni depth. This "research" wiki would provide a place for such things.</p> <p>IMO, a blog is something else. If i want to learn about Kontsevich-Soibelman, I just go to the arXiv and read the paper. If I come here to read about it, that's because I am interested on your point of view on the subject, the way you consider some points more important and neglect some others. I learn from that, and I consider that this learning is at least as useful as the one I get by reading the paper (though I learn different things in every case).</p> <p>The blog post benefits from your thoughts and experience. Wikis benefit of collaboration. A wiki is good for storing loads of information. A blog is good for giving points of view. Both things have their place and their moment.</p> <p>The thread on sci.math shows nothing but the fact that some people have mixed up different media sources the wrong way. Also, not everybody find useful same things. But have for sure that some of us find this site useful. Maybe not useful for the same thing you originally had in mind, but useful anyway.</p> Different media for different aims.

Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and encyclopaedic. No place for original research, personal opinions nor wishful thinking. It is good when looking for a quick definition, but not when trying to understand something ni depth. This “research” wiki would provide a place for such things.

IMO, a blog is something else. If i want to learn about Kontsevich-Soibelman, I just go to the arXiv and read the paper. If I come here to read about it, that’s because I am interested on your point of view on the subject, the way you consider some points more important and neglect some others. I learn from that, and I consider that this learning is at least as useful as the one I get by reading the paper (though I learn different things in every case).

The blog post benefits from your thoughts and experience. Wikis benefit of collaboration. A wiki is good for storing loads of information. A blog is good for giving points of view. Both things have their place and their moment.

The thread on sci.math shows nothing but the fact that some people have mixed up different media sources the wrong way. Also, not everybody find useful same things. But have for sure that some of us find this site useful. Maybe not useful for the same thing you originally had in mind, but useful anyway.

]]>