M2.7 shows significant improvement in complex editing capabilities for Office Suite (Excel/PPT/Word), better handling multi-turn modifications and high-fidelity edits.
令人惊讶的是：MiniMax M2.7在处理Office套件(Excel/PPT/Word)的复杂编辑任务时表现出色，能够更好地处理多轮修改和高保真编辑。这表明AI已经超越了简单的文本生成，能够理解和执行复杂的办公软件操作，可能会彻底改变人们使用Office软件的方式，从手动操作转向AI辅助的智能工作流程。
A card-based collaboration tool that leverages information visualization. Pinterest for collaborative teams with expandable data.
Looks interesting and I've got a beta invite, but not sure if it fits any of my needs, particularly with an eye toward note taking.
A Comprehensive Collection of Second Brain Tools
A .csv downloadable list of note tools and related productivity applications
Airtable link: https://airtable.com/appip8TXg2OuHTati/shr1KApA0zHtZRdzd/tbl7OoiJ2jtMCpM5Q?backgroundColor=yellow&layout=card&viewControls=on
Frictionless Tools Capture Cards – Red — These are my index cards of choice. More sturdy than the standard variety. I like the grid design. Takes fountain pen ink better too. Unfortunately, they are no longer available. I purchased several packages before they stopped being sold.
Frictionless Tools' Capture Cards were custom 3 x 5" index cards, printed in vertical orientation with a square grid pattern on most of the card. The top was usually split in half between equal grey and red rectangles for titles/dates/headings and a slightly thinner single long rectangle as a footer at the bottom.
Patrick Rhone indicates on 2018-01-24 that they had quit manufacturing them by that date.
sometimes I’m afraid I’m more fighting the tools than doing research. Sometimes it seems to me there’s too much friction, and not the productive kind.
relation to Note taking problem and proposed solution?
This seems to be a common reality and/or fear.
https://borretti.me/article/unbundling-tools-for-thought
He covers much of what I observe in the zettelkasten overreach article.
Missing is any discussion of exactly what problem he's trying to solve other than perhaps, I want to solve them all and have a personal log of everything I've ever done.
Perhaps worth reviewing again to pull out specifics, but I just don't have the bandwidth today.
Increasing your use of tools without increasing your exposure to distractions is a great way to increase your abilities and get a lot more done.
For the tools of learning are the same, in any and everysubject; and the person who knows how to use them will, at any age, get themastery of a new subject in half the time and with a quarter of the effortexpended by the person who has not the tools at his command.
Tools are instruments to achieve something, and systems are the organization of such.
Feels like there's more here if we delve a bit deeper...
https://ljvmiranda921.github.io/life/2022/08/04/pen-and-paper/
Sometimes, I find digital apps urging me to integrate with another application or extension: connect to calendar, install this, install that (and sure, it may also be my own damn fault). They force me to get into a “system” rather than focus on what the tool provides. It’s overwhelming. Over-optimization leads to empty work, giving me a feeling of productivity in the absence of output, like quicksand. It hampers me from doing actual work.
https://www.tana.inc/
You might have arrived at this book because you heard about thisnew field called personal knowledge management, or maybe whenyou were trying to find guidance in how to use a cool new notetakingapp. Maybe you were drawn in by the promise of new techniques forenhancing your productivity, or perhaps it was the allure of asystematic approach to creativity.
The broad audiences for this book.
This may have been better place in the introduction to draw these people in.
Tiago's book follows the general method of the commonplace book, but relies more heavily on a folder-based method and places far less emphasis and value on having a solid index. There isn't any real focus on linking ideas other than putting some things together in the same folder. His experience with the history of the space in feels like it only goes back to some early Ryan Holiday blog posts. He erroneously credits Luhmann with inventing the zettelkasten and Anne-Laure Le Cunff created digital gardens. He's already retracted these in sketch errata here: https://www.buildingasecondbrain.com/endnotes.
I'll give him at least some credit that there is some reasonable evidence that he actually used his system to write his own book, but the number and depth of his references and experience is exceptionally shallow given the number of years he's been in the space, particularly professionally. He also has some interesting anecdotes and examples of various people including and array of artists and writers which aren't frequently mentioned in the note taking space, so I'll give him points for some diversity of players as well. I'm mostly left with the feeling that he wrote the book because of the general adage that "thought leaders in their space should have a published book in their area to have credibility". Whether or not one can call him a thought leader for "re-inventing" something that Rudolphus Agricola and Desiderius Erasmus firmly ensconced into Western culture about 500 years ago is debatable.
Stylistically, I'd call his prose a bit florid and too often self-help-y. The four letter acronyms become a bit much after a while. It wavers dangerously close to those who are prone to the sirens' call of the #ProductivityPorn space.
If you've read a handful of the big articles in the note taking, tools for thought, digital gardens, zettelkasten space, Ahren's book, or regularly keep up with r/antinet or r/Zettelkasten, chances are that you'll be sorely disappointed and not find much insight. If you have friends that don't need the horsepower of Ahrens or zettelkasten, then it might be a reasonable substitute, but then it could have been half the length for the reader.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnFHwl2Dbr0
Everything needs to have a "Why"? What is the context for capturing? What is the reason? How will it be used in the future? Why was it interesting?
She also describes how she collects notes in various formats (books, online articles, Kindle, Twitter, etc.) It primarily involves using Notion along with a variety of other sub-applications including Instapaper for sharing to Notion.
Dramatically missing from this presentation is the answer to the question "why" collect all this stuff? How is she using it in the future? What is the overall value? She touches on writing the why for herself as she's taking notes, but I get the impression that she's not actively practicing what she preaches, and I suspect that many don't. This leaves me with the impression that she's collecting with no end goal, which for many may be fine.
She's got a gaping hole in the processing section which likely needs a video unto itself and which would probably go a long way toward answer the "why" question above.
In looking at her other videos, I see she's using the phrase "second brain" and words like productivity. There seems to be a high level of disconnect between those using "second brain" and the "why do this?" question other than the simple idea of "productivity" which seems to be a false trap that gets people into the mindset of being a collector for collections' sake.
Almost hilariously she's got videos with titles like: - "I'm a productivity guru and I hate it." - "Productivity YouTube is brainwashing you"
She's titled the final portion of the video "Outro" which is actually displayed on the video UI. This might be useful for production purposes but should be changed or omitted for actual consumption.
The title "How I Remember Everything I Read" is pure clickbait here. It's more aptly titled, "How I Take and Save Notes". Where's the how I use this after? or how I review over it all to actually remember it/memorize it? There's nothing here to support this end of things which is the promise given in the title.
https://every.to/superorganizers/the-fall-of-roam
A user talks about why they've stopped using Roam Research.
I suspect that a lot of people have many of the same issues and to a great extent, it's a result of them not understanding the underlying use cases of the problems they're trying to solve.
This user is focusing on it solving the problem of where one is placing their data in hopes that it will fix all their problems, but without defining the reason why they're using the tool and what problems they hope for it to solve.
Note taking is a much broader idea space than many suppose.
https://reallifemag.com/rank-and-file/
An interesting example of someone who fell into the trap of thinking that a particular tool or tools would magically make them smarter or help them do a particular line of work without showing any deep evidence of knowing what they were doing. The discussion here flows over a number of mixed note taking domains with no clear thrust for what they were using it pointedly for. The multiple directions and lack of experience likely doomed them to failure here.
We need a reliable and simple external structure tothink in that compensates for the limitations of our brains
Let's be honest that there are certainly methods for doing all of this within our brains and not needing to rely on external structures. This being said, using writing, literacy, and external structures does allow us to process things faster than before.
Can we calculate what the level of greater efficiency allows for doing this? What is the overall throughput difference in being able to forget and write? Not rely on communication with others? What does a back of the envelope calculation for this look like?
A good structure is something you can trust. It relieves you fromthe burden of remembering and keeping track of everything. If youcan trust the system, you can let go of the attempt to hold everythingtogether in your head and you can start focusing on what isimportant:
Whether it's for writing, to do lists, or other productivity spaces, a well designed system is something that one can put their absolute trust into. This allows one to free themselves from the burden of tracking and dealing with minutiae so they can get serious work done.
It is impossible to think without writing; at least it is impossible in any sophisticated or networked (anschlußfähig) fashion.
The sentiment that it is impossible to think without writing is patently wrong. While it's an excellent tool, it takes an overly textual perspective and completely ignores the value of orality an memory in prehistory.
Modern culture has lost so many of our valuable cultural resources that we have completely forgotten that they even existed.
Oral cultures certainly had networked thought, Luhmann and others simply can't imagine how it may have worked. We're also blinded by the imagined size of societies in pre-agricultural contexts. The size and scope of cities and city networks makes the history of writing have an outsized appearance.
Further, we don't have solid records of these older netowrks, a major drawback of oral cultures which aren't properly maintained, but this doesn't mean that they didn not exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX-rpV5PPQ4
Reasons people quit:
Most of the reasons relate to social media and pressure of perfectionism related to it. Definitely fits into my productivity porn thesis.
These are all things for people in the digital garden space to watch out for in the future. Presenting one's learning in public can eventually evolve into something negative if not done for the correct reasons. Bullet Journal's rise to popularity in coordination with the rise of social media can be a means for forcing people to quit it all.
https://deepstash.com/ appears to be a note taking tool geared toward zettelkasten and productivity. It's got an interesting card-based UI.
<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'>Alan Jacobs</span> in re-setting my mental clock – Snakes and Ladders (<time class='dt-published'>07/01/2021 14:58:05</time>)</cite></small>
The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.
But are Google's tools really making us more productive thinkers? One might argue that it's attempting to do all the work for us and take out the process of thought all together. We're just rats in a maze hitting a bar to get the food pellet.
What if the end is a picture of us as the people on the space ship at the end of WALL-E? What if it's keeping us from thinking?
What if it's making us more shallow thinkers rather than deep thinkers?
Cross reference P.M. Forni.
We believe good tools lead to excellent creations.