Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more edtechdev's commentslogin

For me, an issue is that the most popular frameworks are created by huge companies who primarily rely on ads and tracking data, so everything requires massive/complex server-side resources, which are too expensive for someone like me who just wants to make free and open source web apps. I was hopeful about the 'unhosted' movement 10 years ago, but it kind of fizzled, as seemingly have related projects like pouchdb and solid. I'm hopeful about recent posts using sqlite in the browser and w3's storage foundation, but they are still in development, not really ready for prime time anytime soon. pwa's and the like seem to not be in much favor anymore, either.

Browser vendors (controlled by the same huge companies) blocking websql and poorly supporting things like pwa are other examples of this issue.


Has anyone made a note-taking tool (like notion/obsidian/logseq) that builds off of a computational notebook tool (like jupyter/observable/starboard)?

Mainly just needs wiki style links and backlinks and a search function.


There's Emacs's Org Mode.


nothing computational in there


That's not true. Org has a subsystem called Babel that can run code in lots of different languages, and it's pretty easy to add support for new ones.


Org Babel is the computational bit



it's a shame that "Show org source" is broken, but thanks, I'm intrigued.


I don't think this is true either. I went to one of the pages, https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/intro.html, clicked "Sow org source" and it took me to https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/intro.org.html, which does very nicely show the Org mode source code.


It's only broken on the front page, which tries to take you to https://orgmode.org.html/ when it should go to https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/index.org.html


If you want to see examples, look at the tutorial:

https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/intro.html

As for the source of that page, look at the Worg Maintenance section at https://orgmode.org/worg/

I haven't edited them yet, but I believe Worg is mostly org files on a Git repository - so you can clone it and see the source of all articles there.



mkdocs + mkdocs-material + mknotebooks


This is how Western Governors University works - they have separate instructors and evaluators. Not sure how well it works in practice, however. I have read a few complaints.


Been looking into terminusdb, an open source graph database implemented in prolog and rust. Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867767


One example today relates to teaching (in college). Most instructors (~75%) predominantly lecture, even though hundreds of studies have shown that increases the failure rate of students by 55% on average compared to teaching with some active learning. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111 We're losing hundreds of thousands of STEM major students because of that alone, disproportionately students from underrepresented groups. https://www.pnas.org/content/117/12/6476


Drupal has become more targeted to enterprise. For sites you're developing yourself, wordpress can do the same stuff as drupal now, especially with advanced custom fields (ACF). Another alternative is Statamic.


statamic is incredible...I can't recommend it enough...such a breath of fresh air


Thanks for the kind words!


Yeah, Wikipedia also has a more in-depth list: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies


Indeed a private website does not seem a great place for a master list of anything. Github or Wikipedia seem like much better places. Since it is possible to extend discussion on the validity of any member of that list, or indeed add new ones.


Github and Wikipedia are both privately-owned.

The definitions given for these "logical fallacies" are packed with rancourous comments that don't throw light on the nature of the fallacy. The names given for them are not the standard names; the classical Aristotelian fallacies are usually named in Latin (and they aren't all there).

And indeed, a lot of the so-called fallacies are not fallacies at all, because they aren't a type of faulty argument or reasoning; they're just sayings.

This is a much better list of fallacy definitions: https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/Introduction%20to%2...

It doesn't claim to be a "master list"; in fact it states on the front page that a complete list is impossible.


Agree that GitHub would be a great place for it. It's an incredible resource, and indeed (from bottom of page):

> Open Courseware | OCW |This work is dedicated to the Public Domain..

A benefit of having such a doc on GitHub would be the ease with which others could critique and contribute, potentially making the list stronger.


Yeah the lack of open source prevented me from committing to observable, too, so I look forward to trying dataflow out.

Just in case this is of interest to others, some other open source browser-based computational notebook tools include:

* Starboard https://starboard.gg/ * And of course there's always Jupyter, but it requires a server component

And this isn't the same thing, more of a javascript playground (open source alternative to codepen and the like), but see also Slingcode: https://slingcode.net/


Thank you for the awesome recommendations! Note that Dataflow isn't open source yet, though.



This is a junk article written by a right winger who writes for the "American Council on Science and Health" which you can read more about here:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/american-counci...

This article was written just to troll up attention for his book that came out the same year (2012) with a title that makes the bias more obvious: "Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left."

I've never heard of the guy before, but it only took a minute of googling to find that out.

I recommend people try the "lateral reading" technique when you come across articles like this. Essentially, Google the source to see if it's biased and unreliable like this is. More on lateral reading and the SIFT technique (stop, investigate, find, trace) https://library.nwacc.edu/lateralreading/sift


There's actually decades of research on how to more effectively teach math, including the effectiveness of inquiry based learning approaches, which are more effective.

See the MAA's Instructional Practices Guide: https://www.maa.org/programs-and-communities/curriculum%20re...

Here's info on research on the effectiveness of inquiry learning in math: https://theconversation.com/who-learns-in-maths-classes-depe... https://www.colorado.edu/eer/research-areas/student-centered...


You seem to be knowledgeable in this area. Is it weird to ask you to summarize these links, especially in the context of the more concrete discussions in this thread?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: