Archives · novembre 2016 · Revue de liens

Veille hebdomadaire : du 05 au 11 novembre (revue de liens)

Par Christophe Deschamps · 11 novembre 2016

Ce texte a été publié le 11 novembre 2016. Il est conservé tel quel dans les archives d’Outils Froids : certains liens, outils et informations peuvent ne plus être d’actualité.

Dans cette revue de liens vous trouverez des logiciels, services en ligne et extensions pour navigateurs regroupés sous le terme générique d’ « Outils » et des articles (universitaires, de journaux) et documents divers (présentations, tutoriels, vidéos…) sous le terme « Contenus ».

Vous pouvez retrouver ces découvertes « au fil de l’eau » sur mon compte Twitter ou sur mon profil Diigo (auquel vous pouvez vous abonner en créant votre propre compte ou en utilisant le flux RSS).

Et puis j’ai rajouté une catégorie musique. Parce que.

Bonne(s) lecture(s)/expérimentation(s)/écoute(s)

30+ free tools for #dataviz and analysis – Tableau comparatifgallery: 30+ free tools for data visualization and analysis | Computerworld

Une extension pour personnaliser WordPress en profondeur

Lead Generator – Chrome Web Store

Pour trouver l’email d’une personne à partir de sa page LinkedIn et détecter si elle est prête à changer de job

Moreover, people who said they had changed their minds on these candidates often said that social media pointed their opinion in a more negative direction. Respondents who indicated they had changed their minds about Clinton were more than three times as likely to say that their opinion changed in a negative direction rather than a positive one (24% vs. 7%), and respondents who mentioned Trump were nearly five times as likely to say that their opinion became more negative as opposed to more positive (19% vs. 4%).
Still, it is important to note that the majority of social media users are not swayed by what they see in their networks. Some 82% of social media users say they have never modified their views on a particular candidate – and 79% say they have never changed their views on a social or political issue – because of something they saw on social media.
Overall, 20% of social media users say they’ve modified their stance on a social or political issue because of material they saw on social media, and 17% say social media has helped to change their views about a specific political candidate.

Psychologists and other social scientists have repeatedly shown that when confronted with diverse information choices, people rarely act like rational, civic-minded automatons. Instead, we are roiled by preconceptions and biases, and we usually do what feels easiest — we gorge on information that confirms our ideas, and we shun what does not.
if you see something you don’t like, you can easily tap away to something more pleasing. Then we all share what we found with our like-minded social networks, creating closed-off, shoulder-patting circles online.
Facebook’s data scientists have run large studies on the idea and found it wanting. The social networking company says that by exposing you to more people, Facebook adds diversity to your news diet.
A study published last year by researchers at the IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, in Italy, found that homogeneous online networks help conspiracy theories persist and grow online.
“This creates an ecosystem in which the truth value of the information doesn’t matter,” said Walter Quattrociocchi, one of the study’s authors. “All that matters is whether the information fits in your narrative.”
You would think that greater primary documentation would lead to a better cultural agreement about the “truth.” In fact, the opposite has happened.
We all tend to filter documentary evidence through our own biases. Researchers have shown that two people with differing points of view can look at the same picture, video or document and come away with strikingly different ideas about what it shows.
That’s because the lies have also become institutionalized. There are now entire sites whose only mission is to publish outrageous, completely fake news online (like real news, fake news has become a business).
“Where hoaxes before were shared by your great-aunt who didn’t understand the internet, the misinformation that circulates online is now being reinforced by political campaigns, by political candidates or by amorphous groups of tweeters working around the campaigns,”
“In many ways the debunking just reinforced the sense of alienation or outrage that people feel about the topic, and ultimately you’ve done more harm than good,”

Why Diverse Teams Are Smarter – HBR

Résultats commentés de plusieurs études récentes

Working with people who are different from you may challenge your brain to overcome its stale ways of thinking and sharpen its performance.
The researchers found that individuals who were part of the diverse teams were 58% more likely to price stocks correctly, whereas those in homogenous groups were more prone to pricing errors, according to the study, published in the journal PNAS.
By breaking up workplace homogeneity, you can allow your employees to become more aware of their own potential biases — entrenched ways of thinking that can otherwise blind them to key information and even lead them to make errors in decision-making processes.
It turned out that although groups with out-group newcomers felt less confident about the accuracy of their joint decisions, they were more likely to guess who the correct suspect was than those with newcomers who belonged to the same group.
The scientists think that diverse teams may outperform homogenous ones in decision making because they process information more carefully. Remember: Considering the perspective of an outsider may seem counterintuitive, but the payoff can be huge
Using statistical models, they found that companies with more women were more likely to introduce radical new innovations into the market over a two-year period.
The results revealed that businesses run by culturally diverse leadership teams were more likely to develop new products than those with homogenous leadership.
In a nutshell, enriching your employee pool with representatives of different genders, races, and nationalities is key for boosting your company’s joint intellectual potential. Creating a more diverse workplace will help to keep your team members’ biases in check and make them question their assumptions. At the same time, we need to make sure the organization has inclusive practices so that everyone feels they can be heard.

What Character Traits Do Geniuses Share in Common? From Isaac Newton to Richard Feynman

Newton was much more obviously alone than Feynman, but Feynman didn’t particularly work well with others.
Solitude. Concentration. Abstraction. In a nutshell, that’s what goes into the making of a genius.