推文荐订 #35
美食在屏幕之外 内容在创造之中
所谓内容创业到底是啥？
海明威不会被称为内容生产者，我们读到好的书看到好的电影也不会称赞多么棒的“内容”，你在路上听播客也不会认为这是“content”，商品化的新（自）媒体使内容尴尬（媚俗——cringe详见之前推送的解读应该可以在achieve里面搜到），希望小型出版商和个人创造者能够重新定义被污染的内容。（引用较长，见末尾）
附：✍️ Life Designed: Writing Guide, Laser Mode, Maker Mind & Hope https://tomaslau.com/newsletter/?rh_ref=bef939a9美食媒体的未来就在你的收件箱里
https://www.tastecooking.com/the-future-of-food-media-is-in-your-inbox/
传统媒体的美食专栏逐渐式微或僵化，本应是最平民的话题现在却变得精英主义，虽然本篇介绍的我一个都没订阅，但对烹饪的关注总是保留着，食谱和菜谱的隐喻如影随形。
附：food porn 打假 https://t.me/Legolimens/372
GPT-3生成的西瓜饼干配方https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/28/tech/ai-recipes-sound-human/index.html慢药——像慢食运动一样，把人放在利润之前
https://psyche.co/ideas/slow-medicine-like-slow-food-puts-people-ahead-of-profit
『慢药』使患者有机会（话语权）分享实际发生的情况，并使医生注意到微妙但重要的细节，慢性病需要医生把重点从效率转移到护理上。
附：《与病对话：全科医生手记》哈佛培养的是经理而不是精英
https://palladiummag.com/2020/07/27/harvard-creates-managers-instead-of-elites/
只有一小部分大学生有机会体验通识教育想要赋予和塑造的投入到领导公共利益事业的知识、历史素养、批判性思维和道德责任。高等教育体系辜负了培育“公民领袖”的机构使命。
作为招聘策略的煤气灯效应：进行校招的企业往往强调自己公司的实力雄厚并且对求职者以轻描淡写的方式签署合同——隐含着“这是你能找到的最好工作”的意思来利用学生的短视和焦虑。
附：《大学精神档案》https://book.douban.com/series/3810
大学人文读本 https://book.douban.com/series/1379抖音和分院帽
TikTok’s algorithmic sorting hat: “To help a network break out from its early adopter group, you need both to bring lots of new people/subcultures into the app...and help these disparate groups to 1) find each other quickly and 2) branch off into their own spaces.”
该页面的内容是通过算法生成的，算法考虑了您以前看过，喜欢过或分享过的视频。它是最终的时间杀手，并且非常容易上瘾，因为它永远不会耗尽内容。该算法经过编程，可以专门为您调整和调整Feed。它将向您展示可能具有您喜欢和喜欢的内容的视频。平台上有很多利基市场，例如游戏或喜剧，如果您一次又一次地播放相同类型的视频，则可以调整供稿以仅向您显示自己的利基市场。
附：【書摘】《監控資本主義時代》https://www.voicettank.org/single-post/2020/08/06/080601
森林里的野生动物监视相机以保护的名义把自然（如同公共空间一样）变得军事化https://reallifemag.com/camera-traps/真相在付费墙里，但谎言却是免费的
This article from Current Affairs is why I wanted to make this podcast. The business models for media and tech are broken and The Truth Is Paywalled but the Lies Are Free. The line that sums it up? "What’s amazing is that the difficulty of creating this situation of 'fully democratized information' is entirely economic rather than technological."
白人至上主义者会免费给你科普什么是种族和智商，你想要好好反驳访问正版的学术期刊则需要几十美元（虽然有sci-hub，但作者们并没有UBI，就算作者想免费送书出版商也不会干，卫报有信托基金、the Intercept 有亿万富翁资助，纽约时报和新共和等就必须和所谓的品牌供应商形成合作关系，这就是为什么读者的订阅和捐助是对独立媒体最好的支持）
附：赢家通吃到“输家”也有能力消费（全民基本收入是资本主义2.0）https://timjrobinson.com/universal-basic-income-is-capitalism-2-0/把罪犯当人https://thecorrespondent.com/622/heres-a-radical-idea-that-will-change-policing-transform-prisons-and-reduce-crime-treat-criminals-like-human-beings/82346083644-25c15760
挪威的累犯率全世界最低，有厨房、图书馆、攀岩墙和音乐工作室等等，网上之前常看到像度假村一样的免费监狱，但其实更像一个宁静的社区，在监人员需要完成种植耕作等劳动，一个“激进”的想法（基于斯坦福监狱实验和破窗效应等）。
附：美国监狱的人道主义危机（罪犯不仅被剥夺公民权利还被剥夺了人性——不仅死于新冠，还死于看守的虐待和暴力）https://undark.org/2020/07/28/prison-deaths-overlooked/为什么初学者应该从事教学
https://tatianamac.com/posts/why-beginners-should-teach/
教学相长，刚入门的能够有更多同理心，也会对错误保持更多的宽恕，一起改正错误是非常令人鼓舞的，对抗冒充者综合症等等。
附：克服自我否定倾向https://startupbros.com/21-ways-overcome-impostor-syndrome/生产力软件并不存在
https://thenextweb.com/growth-quarters/2020/08/06/there-is-no-productivity-software-syndication/
资本不能代替劳动，更高效率并不意味着更高的生产力，真正的生产力软件是完成核心工作的工具，找到更好用的日程清单GTD并不是目标，让收件箱清零仅在没有更重要事情的时候才重要。
“Stop measuring days by degree of productivity, and start experiencing them by degree of presence.”
— Alan Watts
附：《心之道——致焦虑的年代》
https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/06/alan-watts-wisdom-of-insecurity-1/"By the Books" (Mailchimp): I may have mentioned my love of Microsoft Bob aesthetic in here before – especially these days, as I'm craving all things tactile – and so I love this mini-project that Mailchimp put out of books, essays, films, and podcasts, neatly arranged on "bookshelves" that move when you brush your cursor against them. – By The Books is an online literary festival to support rising voices. 在线文学节的一个展示页面（瘟疫时期的友谊与爱，还有相关书影音等）
附：https://t.me/zeong/1146
“We never call anything that’s good ‘content’. Nobody walks out of a movie they loved and says, ‘Wow! What great content!’ Nobody listens to ‘content’ on their way to work in the morning. Do you think anybody ever called Ernest Hemingway a ‘content creator’? If they did, I bet he would punch ‘em in the nose.” – Greg Satell, 2015
The word ‘content’ makes many of us cringe. Not least because we use ‘content’ as a catch-all phrase to describe very different types of creative output. A 15,000-word piece of investigative journalism and a sponsored influencer post about a vegan shampoo brand – in the eyes of platform algorithms, it’s one and the same. It’s all just stuff that goes into the space that’s there to be filled.
Of course, that’s what content is to social platforms: fuel for their data collection engine. Big Tech realised early that there is little money in content, but a lot of money in a content delivery model. Kudos to them, I guess.
Figuring out how to make content the actual business model again (and not just fodder for the business model) remains a huge challenge for publishers everywhere. If you squint hard enough, though, you may see the beginnings of a paradigm shift.
As we’re growing increasingly weary of algorithmic curation that keeps flooding our zone with shit, some of us make more intentional decisions about their media intake. We increasingly turn to (and are willing to pay for) more relatable, human voices that respect our attention and build meaningful connections.
Maybe, just maybe, with small-scale publishers and individual content creators leading the way, we can turn the tide and redefine the meaning and value of ‘content’. – Kai