135 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2020
    1. Qualities That Keep You in a Sick System Loyalty Patience A strong work ethic Optimism Self-sacrifice A need to be useful to others Forgiveness Farsightedness Trust Hope You don't need to lose these qualities to get out. But if you're stuck and trying to figure out what's keeping you in, remember that people rarely get stuck because of their vices. They're usually caught by their virtues.

      me at work and life in general. inertia

    1. The great promise of the Semantic Web was that it would be readable not just by humans but also by machines. Pages on the web would be meaningful to software programs—they would have semantics—allowing programs to interact with the web the same way that people do. Programs could exchange data across the Semantic Web without having to be explicitly engineered to talk to each other.

      one use case: JIT not just JIC

    2. As a result, search engines came to ignore the <meta> tag in favor of using complex algorithms to analyze the actual content of a webpage.

      this is why we can't have nice things.

      human, spams, selfishness

      metadata x PageRank == CV x trial period == the dialogue x subtext == what they say x what they do

    1. It is the natural trajectory of business to seek out new ways to drive revenue from products like microwaves, televisions, refrigerators, and speakers. And now that microwaves and TVs can effectively operate as mini-computers, it feels inevitable that manufacturers would look to collect potentially valuable data — whether for resale, for product optimization, or to bring down the sticker price of the device.
  2. Jun 2020
    1. News can no longer be (only) about the mass update. Stories need to be targeted to those who might be able to improve the situation. And journalism’s products — which are more than its stories — must be designed to facilitate this. News needs to be built to engage curiosity about the world and the problems in it — and their solutions. People need to get lost in the news like they now get lost in Wikipedia and Facebook. There must be comprehensive stories that get the interested but uninformed up to speed quickly. Search and navigation must be improved to the point where satisfaction of curiosity is so easy it becomes a reflex. Destination news sites need to be more extensively hyperlinked than almost anything else (and not just insincere internal links for SEO, but links that are actually useful for the user.) The news experience needs to become intensely personal. It must be easy for users to find and follow exactly their interests, no matter how arcane. Journalists need to get proficient at finding and engaging the audience for each story. And all of this has to work across all modes of delivery, so it’s always with us. Marketers understand this; it’s amazing to me that the news industry has been so slow to catch on to multi-modal engagement.

      everything would work perfectly if we had all of these and people are actually rational and diligent with infinite resource.

    2. I don’t want the product with the best content overall, I want the product that is going to serve me up the best content every single time, regardless of whether or not it was created in-house.

      discovery, aggregation, curation. narrator

    3. People spend hours roaming Wikipedia; they don’t spend hours on bbc.co.uk or cnn.com or nytimes.com or news.yahoo.com (which actualy has a far bigger audience than any traditional news outlet.) Wikipedia also tends to take the top spot in Google results, which means that more people link to it than they do to any news site.

      or google just ups the ranking of Wikipedia in their algo

    1. If people search through your website, will you guide them to topics first, or will they get a list of individual stories and updates to stories? Does your front page even hint at the fact that people can get more than just the daily news at your site?
    2. If you eventually do manage to find the information you need, kudos. You’re obviously very committed to learn more. But wasn’t the whole “we need context” meme prompted by the acknowledgement that most readers get confused and quit way before that stage?
    1. For the longest time, whenever I read the news, I’ve often felt the depressing sensation of lacking the background I need to understand the stories that seem truly important. Day after day would bring front pages with headlines trumpeting new developments out of city hall, and day after day I’d fruitlessly comb through the stories for an explanation of their relevance, history or import. Nut grafs seemed to provide only enough information for me to realize the story was out of my depth.
    1. What happened five  minutes ago is great, but “10 things you need to know about health care” is more useful. We need journalists thinking that way more commonly. As participants in the news system, we need to demand that. We should say, we don’t understand this topic. Build stuff on your own for topics you don’t understand. Find the best links, pull them together. The web rewards context. The pieces that provide it become seminal pieces rewarded by search engines over time. Start with the users and their need to participate in the news and have a handle on the world.

      idealistic worldview. many journalists would love to be able to. the problem is systemic. start by onboarding media corporations

      AND

      both. can. exist.

    2. Journalists may think, we’re doing so much and now you want to provide context!? Think like an engineer. Make it an imperative to do work you can re-use to provide context. You can use that subduction plates info graphic again and again with every story you write about earthquakes. It’s redefining the notion of “today” value. You’re writing something TODAY that’s only appending something that’s already valuable. Engineers don’t do work they can’t re-use. Do work you can use next time.

      sure this will be nice. but how do we get there? and is it worth the investment and learning curve?

      the good media will "get" this and do some balancing act

    3. Wikipedia is structually inspiring to us. Instead of bifurcating the story into a bunch of components, Wikipedia was pulling information together. Wiki works really well over time. It’s often the first choice people go to for news a year after something’s been in the headlines. Currently we present it as “more information”. The consumer doesn’t necessarily want “more information”. We want to present the minimum you need to understand a subject, and then develop that as your need for more increases.

      because we think we don't have time. everything is urgent, important

      NOW == GOOD

      obsessed with speed

      but again, it's not zero sum. there is place for both styles

    4. The web also rewards news providers who provide context. People are far more likely to re-visit the wikipedia page or the topics overview a year after a news event. Thompson’s “The Money Meltdown” site pulled together the best links to explain the financial crisis. Matt posted it on his blog and in one month, 50,000 unique visitors came along and looked at it 75,000 times. It speaks to a desire. It’s all about pulling together links, in some cases. What’s difficult right now is automating it. Link barns as topic pages aren’t working.

      basically: there's a demand for evergreen essays. but there's also demand / place for soundbites and torrent of throwaway patchy breaking news

    5. There’s also very little reward for providing context if you’re a journalist. News reporters see it as doing something “extra”, providing “more info”

      forced to type faster than they can think

    1. Prismatic gets a percentage of the revenue increase that it generates for publishers, while developers pay a flat monthly fee based on usage, Cross says. It’s still working out pricing for hedge fund API usage. (As a point of comparison, the revenue model for the old Prismatic was the same as the current model for publishers. “We just meant for it to be more like Adsense/Adwords where we ran all this in our own consumer products too,” Cross notes.)

      the plague of monetisation

    1. What comes next?   I think context is the next hurdle.    Social context and page based context.

      relevance == context, no?

    2. Google.com has suddenly become the source for pages — not conversations, not the real time web. 

      just remembered the "twitter allows for near real time view of the world" notion early 2010...

    1. The bit.ly links that are created are also very diverse. Its harder to summarise this without offering a list of 100,000 of URL’s — but suffice it to say that there are a lot of pages from the major web publishers, lots of YouTube links, lots of Amazon and eBay product pages, and lots of maps. And then there is a long, long tail of other URL’s. When a pile-up happens in the social web it is invariably triggered by link-sharing, and so bit.ly usually sees it in the seconds before it happens.

      link shortener: rich insight into web activity...

    1. Links can sidestep this debate by seamlessly offering context and depth. The journalist can break a complex story into a non-linear narrative, with links to important sub-stories and background. Readers who are already familiar with certain material, or simply not interested, can skip lightly over the story. Readers who want more can dive deeper at any point. That ability can open up new modes of storytelling unavailable in a linear, start-to-finish medium.

      storytelling: digital, not digitised

    1. you could say the same thing about a lot of new productivity apps as well - they’re trying to capture something intangible about the way we work, collaborate, share and organise. Now that we’re all locked down, half the software engineers on earth are sitting at their computers swearing at their tools and thinking of new ways to collaborate, with video, text, voice, screen sharing, or something else again, and with synchronous or asynchronous models, or something else. But the interesting ones here aren’t just ‘video’, or ‘screen sharing’ or ‘notes’ - they’re bets on how to present that differently, and to work differently. They’re bets on psychology and on how people might feel about working that way.
    1. I regularly get people coming to me and asking me to write a book. I always pass because I can’t imagine writing in a format that has an end. I can’t imagine writing in a format that doesn’t provide instant feedback. I can’t imagine writing in a format that requires a structure. I can’t imagine writing in a format that isn’t a stream of consciousness. I can’t imagine thinking about what I am going to write more than ten minutes before writing it. I can’t imagine killing trees to carry my words. So I will continue to write a blog. It’s the perfect format for me. AVC is way more than a book. It is a living breathing thing that sustains me and that is me.
    1. “I blog in Spanish and English for different reasons. In English I blog to communicate my ideas and views, in Spanish, where for some unknown reason many more people comment, I write to learn. The collective intelligence of my commentators is greater than mine.” Martin Varsavsky Founder and CEO FON
    1. inbound items fall into three categories: Must be acted on immediately. Can be discarded. May be of future interest to ourselves, our colleagues, or others.
      1. just in time
      2. irrelevant
      3. just in case
    1. Flickr has been on my radar for a while now, but I only recently began to start playing with it. I'm impressed as hell. After my first 10 minutes of playing with it, I found myself thinking "why don't we build stuff like this at Yahoo?" In other words, I realized that we could probably learn a lot from this when it comes to building next generation applications at Yahoo. (Whether or not we do is a whole separate topic of discussion.)

      and then ironically, yahoo killed it

    1. So here is the real difference: scrolling is a continuation; clicking is a decision. Scrolling is simply continuing to do what you’re currently doing, which is typically reading. Clicking, however, is asking the user to consider something new…is this new thing the same as what I’m already doing, or something new? Obviously this is a small interaction…but think about it in scale. Hundreds or thousands of decisions taken together add up to real friction.

      momentum, inertia, interrupted flow

    1. The more I use del.icio.us and observe other folksonomies, the more I realize that we don’t use them to find “stuff”. We use them to discover “personally-related stuff”, which is really hard to do with a search engine.

      searching vs tagging.

      clay says: search is for finding. tag is for keeping

      tags are contextual and personal

      searching are keyword-dependent but more or less more objective

    1. And then the competition and newer technology trounced them. When the cloud made bookmarks saved on one browser easily accessible in another, users didn't need a separate service.

      hm. bookmarking to queue or to distribute links for multiple reading experience / devices?

    1. Digg's v4 release on August 25, 2010, was marred by site-wide bugs and glitches. Digg users reacted with hostile verbal opposition. Beyond the release, Digg faced problems due to so-called "power users" who would manipulate the article recommendation features to only support one another's postings, flooding the site with articles only from these users and making it impossible to have genuine content from non-power users appear on the front page. Frustrations with the system led to dwindling web traffic, exacerbated by heavy competition from Facebook, whose like buttons started to appear on websites next to Digg's.[21] High staff turnover included the departure of head of business development Matt Van Horn, shortly after v4's release.[22]

      how much of digg's demise is caused by this v4 technical fail?

  3. www.tumblr.com www.tumblr.com
    1. Opting out of ads or paying not to have ads will be the likely initial way that we'll all move towards the inevitable truism of platform business, which is that ad-only models aren't predominant for a reason.

      I personally wouldn't bother to pay. I'll just block the ads or get the content / tool someplace else. Abundant alternative options....

    2. The only reason why consumers likely expect free things on the internet if they do today, whether they actually want it or not, is entirely because the industry has trained them to do so, believing that they wouldn't pay. Even though consumers have been paying for information and services on the internet for more than seven or eight years.

      where? I never paid for anything.

    1. Luckily, tagging systems do not promote popularity lists the way blogs do. If they did, then this rich social tapestry might degenerate to popularity contests,

      tangent: seth godin: "if you A/B test a site many times enough, you'll end up with a porn site" // blanket lack of nuance but just gonna file it here for the moment

    1. But tagging, alone, is still not good enough. Even our many tags become useless if/when their meaning changes (in our minds) by the time we go retrieve the data they point to. This could be years after we tagged something. Somehow, whether manually or automatically, we need agents and tools to help us keep our tags updated and relevant.

      search engines usually can surface that faster (less cognitive load than recalling what and where you store something) than you retrieve it in your second brain (abundance info, do can always retrieve from external source in a JIT fashion)

    1. BitTorrent thus demonstrates a key Web 2.0 principle: the service automatically gets better the more people use it. While Akamai must add servers to improve service, every BitTorrent consumer brings his own resources to the party. There's an implicit "architecture of participation", a built-in ethic of cooperation, in which the service acts primarily as an intelligent broker, connecting the edges to each other and harnessing the power of the users themselves.

      web 2.0 in a nutshell: network effect

    1. For me the best part of Upcoming was being able to see what events my friends are going to. With their redesign, Upcoming decided to hide that behind two clicks. Now when you go to the site, I see whats popular in San Francisco, but I have to click to see what my friends are upto. Even on an events page, I can no longer easily see if any of my friends are going there. Instead I am shown the groups and tags. But I have to click to see who is attending.

      tiny changes to the UX. not understanding the JTBD of your product

    1. Coghead advances the state-of-the-art in a couple of other areas as well. First, Coghead allows you to create applications with meaty business logic. “Business logic” used to be the domain of enterprise applications like SAP and Oracle. Coghead has included an intuitive ‘process builder’ that lets people put real business logic in their apps.
    1. If you look at Jessica Kellgren-Forzad's Sims example, she compares a day in the life of "Alice" who has a chronic illness, to "Mary" who does not. Alice begins her day with 10 spoons and keeps having to stop throughout her day to rest as she is frequently on the brink. Mary, in contrast, begins her day with 30 spoons, and ends it with 20, not having to worry about her energy as she goes through her day.

      hm. so everyone has budget. ill ones just start with less.

      same with feeling burned out- like you're running on fumes

    2. Furthemore, abled people expend spoons; the issue is that they do generally not worry about them.

      Wondering how much "worry" here is "conscious of".

    3. Each one of these conditions can severely limit the amount of spoons I have in a given day. I wake up each day not knowing how much energy I'll have or how much pain I'll be in today. I have to carefully ration my spoons and spend a great deal of mental energy budgeting my spoons.

      Isn't this human conditions? Sure with varying degree. But we live with constraints and have to "budget" all the time.

    1. The man who publishes and edits an article written by an anonymous critic should be held as immediately responsible for it as if he had written it himself; just as one holds a manager responsible for bad work done by his workmen [who] would be treated as he deserves to be — namely, without any ceremony. An anonymous writer is a literary fraud against whom one should immediately cry out, “Wretch, if you do not wish to admit what it is you say against other people, hold your slanderous tongue.”
    2. However, the public is very much more interested in matter than in form, and it is for this very reason that it is behindhand in any high degree of culture. […] This preference for matter to form is the same as a man ignoring the shape and painting of a fine Etruscan vase in order to make a chemical examination of the clay and colors of which it is made.
    3. It is on form that we are dependent, where the matter is accessible to every one or very well known; and it is what has been thought about the matter that will give any value to the achievement; it will only be an eminent man who will be able to write anything that is worth reading. For the others will only think what is possible for every other man to think. They give the impress of their own mind; but every one already possesses the original of this impression.

      your thoughts are not your thoughts.

      every man is everyone else.

    4. No greater mistake can be made than to imagine that what has been written latest is always the more correct; that what is written later on is an improvement on what was written previously; and that every change means progress.

      timeline-centric, chronological-oriented way we design our information architecture now

    5. The deplorable condition of the literature of to-day … is due to the fact that books are written for the sake of earning money. Every one who is in want of money sits down and writes a book, and the public is stupid enough to buy it.

      and this was true even in the 1800s.

      it's just human / society conditions

      incentives, money, social roles

    6. The author is cheating the reader as soon as he writes for the sake of filling up paper; because his pretext for writing is that he has something to impart. Writing for money [is], at bottom, the ruin of literature. It is only the man who writes absolutely for the sake of the subject that writes anything worth writing. What an inestimable advantage it would be, if, in every branch of literature, there existed only a few but excellent books! This can never come to pass so long as money is to be made by writing. It seems as if money lay under a curse, for every author deteriorates directly [whenever] he writes in any way for the sake of money. The best works of great men all come from the time when they had to write either for nothing or for very little pay.

      describing 99% of the books out there right now, self-publishing included.

      pitch pitch pitch, brand brand brand

      noise of people thinking in public, offering "perspective".

      does quantity have merits? up to the beholder. IMO yes.

    7. There are, first of all, two kinds of authors: those who write for the subject’s sake, and those who write for writing’s sake. The first kind have had thoughts or experiences which seem to them worth communicating, while the second kind need money and consequently write for money. They think in order to write, and they may be recognized by their spinning out their thoughts to the greatest possible length, and also by the way they work out their thoughts, which are half-true, perverse, forced, and vacillating; then also by their love of evasion, so that they may seem what they are not; and this is why their writing is lacking in definiteness and clearness.

      how to enable more "writing for subject's sake" in formal education?

    1. But that is changing.

      who would've thought we'd cycle back to being at war and distance

      as divisive as ever (?)

      how technology is accused of bringing the faraway closer but distancing the nearby

    1. I've been a party to many conversations on weblogs, and they have always always always ended with one of the protagonists blanking the opposing view. They just don't link to them. They delete trackbacks. They remove comments. They don't show technorati or referrer information. After this, the conversation always fractures into two sides, and invariably the two sides cease to have any contact at all and you end up with an echo chamber. On a mailing list, this just can't happen. You don't get flame wars on weblogs, true, but you don't get any meaningful discussion either.

      hm. good point. it's like arguing with your neighbor across the street, while standing inside, with the door open. you end up shutting the door when you're pissed

    2. If instead of commenting, you write a response on your blog, you are standing behind your words, and associating them with the rest of your writing. The social dynamics are very different; you think more before responding instead of posting a quick flame. You can't really spam, as you are only soiling your own garden.

      You can't really spam, as you are only soiling your own garden.

    1. Media is supported by ads, ads want clicks, clicks come from outrage, so therefore – the media’s goal has shifted to create as much outrage as possible

      incentives incentives incentives

    2. A good question to ask: “Who determines what is hate speech?“Also, who determines cultural appropriation?

      context context context

      framing framing framing

    3. If you can’t joke about bad things, there is no need for humor because sometimes all you can do in a bad situation is laugh

      reminds me of a recent podcast episode I listened to. was it liz gilbert on tim ferriss? yeah I think so. the part where she talked about rayya's death, and dying

    4. Just as journalists should be able to write about anything they want, comedians should be able to do the same and tell jokes about anything they please

      where's the line though? every output generates a feedback loop with the hivemind, turning into input to ourselves with our cracking, overwhelmed, filters

      it's unrealistic to wish everyone to see jokes are jokes, to rely on journalists to generate unbiased facts, and politicians as self serving leeches, err that's my bias speaking

    5. Media is supported by ads, ads want clicks, clicks come from outrage, so therefore – the media’s goal has shifted to create as much outrage as possible

      our social and media infrastructure are outrage machines, icentivised

    1. PC

      political correctness

    2. It's all magnified because the ones who are most extreme have the most sway on social media platforms, but its not REAL.
    1. Management in isolation struggles with constraints that can frequently be eliminated. Engineering in isolation seeks permanent fixes which sometimes don't exist and, even when found, often require an ongoing effort to put into place and maintain. Each needs the other to truly solve a problem.

      engineer to eliminate constraints, manage to put in places and maintain the fixes and improvements

    2. The engineers, likewise, realised that while they could fix a large part of the problem, they couldn't do it all. Had they sought to eliminate operators entirely, they would never have found a workable system. Instead, they automated what they could and relied on a well-managed organisation of human beings to handle the balance.

      werk it together

    3. No amount of management could overcome this limitation. But a series of incremental engineering fixes, starting with automated switchboards for human operators, then direct dial telephones, and finally direct worldwide dialing reduced the demand for operators to a level where universal telephone service became a reality.

      identify bottleneck, assess resource, scale of issue, extrapolate, plan and execute accordingly. in this case iteratively

    4. inside

      very reductionistically framed

    5. Engineers, derided as “nerds” and “techies” in the age of management, are taught not to manage problems but to fix them. Faced with a problem, an engineer strives to determine its cause and find ways to make the problem go away, once and for all.
    6. it's important to distinguish managing a problem from fixing it, for these are very different acts: one is a process, the other an event. Solving a problem often requires a bit of both.

      sounds like a profound framing but it doesn't really make sense. fixing and problem solving are also process. fixed OTOH is an event

    7. Once you possess the power to circumvent limitations, to control things most people consider immutable, you're liberated from the tyranny of events. You're no longer an observer; you're in command. You've become a hacker.

      gotta laugh at the way this is phrased

    8. Most extraordinary things are done by ordinary people who never knew what they were attempting was “impossible.” Hackers have seen this happen again and again; many of the most significant innovations in computing have been made by individuals or small groups, working alone, attempting tasks the mainstream considered impossible or not worth trying.
    9. Bob Bickford, computer and video guru, defined the true essence of the hacker as “Any person who derives joy from discovering ways to circumvent limitations.”
  4. 25000dawns.com 25000dawns.com
    1. I am all these things at once and cannot add up the sum

      https://poets.org/poem/song-myself-51

      Song of Myself, 51 Walt Whitman - 1819-1892

      The past and present wilt—I have fill'd them, emptied them. And proceed to fill my next fold of the future.

      Listener up there! what have you to confide to me? Look in my face while I snuff the sidle of evening, (Talk honestly, no one else hears you, and I stay only a minute longer.)

      Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, ==I contain multitudes.==)

      I concentrate toward them that are nigh, I wait on the door-slab.

      Who has done his day's work? who will soonest be through with his supper? Who wishes to walk with me?

      Will you speak before I am gone? will you prove already too late?

    2. “I am astonished, disappointed, pleased with myself. I am distressed, depressed, rapturous. I am all these things at once and cannot add up the sum.”
    3. guilt about the way we feel
    4. There are obviously ways of acting that aren’t allowable, but any emotion you and I might happen to feel, no matter how in or out of sync it is with the rest of the world, that’s a legitimate emotion.
    5. they seem somehow out of tune with what we should be feeling right now
    6. People talk about the way they hear birds sing in formerly busy city streets, but it is also true that people are hearing their own emotions sing out—sometimes shriek out—when they might once have been drowned out by the noise of the world, might have been lost alongside the hum of assumed predictability we used to have as white noise as we went through our busy days.
    7. What is my pain or dislocation in the face of those who have had death and destruction tear through their worlds?
    8. as if our own emotions aren’t allowed to be ours right now—they need to be compared to others, measured for appropriateness, and held out to public approval.
    9. I feel guilty for giving into anxiety right now when so much in my life is still stable
    10. I feel guilty about being sad right now because there are so many others who are so much worse off
    11. I feel guilty about being happy right now, because so many are sad
    1. I kind of wish there was an HN like job site that was widely used in corporate America but didn’t have all the ‘content’. Just an online resume

      wondering what's the original purpose of adding the news feed to LI, the product decision.

      lack of understanding I think. to drive "engagements" and keep eyeballs? what's the incentives and how do they relate to LI's biz model?

    2. The recruiter asks for your cv as a way to get paid
    3. The Paradox of Abundance: The average quality of information is getting worse and worse. But the best stuff is getting better and better. Markets of abundance are simultaneously bad for the median consumer but good for conscious consumers
    4. people on social media who have ever in their lives said anything that could be construed as "seriously questionable" (whose definition changes according to the times).

      re:how do you redeem yourself in this era of permanent documenting

    5. neutral tools like email.

      that abundance x scarcity loop

    6. I just couldn't keep up with the backlog of messages

      backlog fatigue

    7. block out the news feed and messaging

      a movement is due to pick up (again)?

    8. primary mechanism by which these platforms try to suck people into their content machine (there are other mechanisms like notification spam)

      how many people perceive this as a problem?

    1. There’s no reason it has to be that way, though. There are no technical barriers for why we couldn’t share our photos to our own sites instead of to Instagram, or why we couldn’t post stupid memes to our own web address instead of on Facebook or Reddit. There are social barriers, of course — if we stubbornly used our own websites right now, none of our family or friends would see our stuff. Yet there’s been a dogged community of web nerds working on that problem for a decade or two, trying to see if they can get the ease or convenience of sharing on Facebook or Twitter or Instagram to work across a distributed network where everyone has their own websites.

      we can but will we?

      in the era of misinformation, having independent sites / deplatforming / decentralising would be throwing gasolene to the fire no?

      in some ways it's better to have people "create" on select platforms, that can be policed, despite all the political and business incentives behind it

      distributed spam and fake news

      sure the signals will be weaker in that situation but social media platforms aren't going anywhere, so the amplifiers will still be there, with a lot more smaller pebbles and clusters where things can spark, grow, and proliferate

    1. knowledge as a service

      hm! first time I heard of this term

    2. Moreover, since decentralized apps are not managed by a central entity, they are censorship-resistant.

      double edged sword. uncontrollable information firehose

    3. data ownership becomes centralized and monopolized between a handful of omnipotent, global tech titans. These social media platforms turn their users into data producers and valuable data profiles

      abundance of [...] creates scarcity of [....]?

    1. kerja sama tersebut akan memberikan akses berupa Nomor Induk Kependudukan (NIK), nama, alamat dan keterangan di KTP

      perizinannya gimana ya

    1. A huge percentage of the Internet is the same information, repeated over and over again. This is especially apparent on film websites; they call it aggregation but it’s really just a nicer way to say regurgitation.

      everything is a remix

      and we need them to internalise. keep exposing ourselves to repetitive info we want to get.

      overcommunicate. repeat, rephrase, repackage.

      every perspective is useful. one will fit into the gap in your current mind

    2. Whenever you have an idea, jot it down (along with the date), then forget about it.The most important part of the process is to forget. Every idea seems amazing at the moment of inception, but once you sleep on it and check the notebook weeks later, you’ll find that your brain has already forgotten the weak ideas, but still thinks about the promising ones.

      good ideas will keep on haunting you

      you got good filters built-in

      allow the diffused mode to work its magic

    1. But when you create a tool that pastes commentary directly on top of my work without letting me opt-in and without providing a way for people to turn off the annotation on their pages, you are being irresponsible.

      inaccurate. the grafitti is on another layer

      • test private annotation
      • now, switched to public
    1. Like an annotation, a highlight anchors to its selection in the document and quotes the selection. Unlike annotations, highlights are always private (visible only to you, when you are logged in to Hypothesis) and do not provide the ability to add comments or tags. Highlights are useful when you want to easily access a passage of text from search or profile pages but you don’t need to attach a note to it.

      oh didn't know highlights are private by default. that explains sometimes it doesn't get carried over to the syndicated post on medium.com

    1. personality

      more important than most people want to admit. there is no bad publicity

    2. battery included

      just right

    3. prioritises

      know what to ignore

    4. ”digital”, not “digitised”

      To unpack in another post

    5. Timing

      Tipping point

    6. comes naturally

      low learning curve

    7. entrypoint

      again, reduce friction to get jobs done

    8. create hypertext

      master your keyboards, master your life

    9. See water
    1. real time

      the present

    2. artificial time

      the past and the future

    3. Live the questions now

      Questions are for:

      • asking
      • holding
      • living
    4. The future is nothing at all like I imagine it will be. It is always made of change.

      we can't ever know

    5. There are years I look ahead at New Years, and I imagine I have it all figured out. Then I am surprised at how things end up—nothing like what I imagined.

      expecting. positive future

    6. There are the years I torture myself with questions about what will happen next (what will chemotherapy be like? What will it be like to move to London? What will it be like when Naomi goes to university?). Then I’m surprised at how things end up—nothing like what I imagined.

      worrying. negative future

    1. It’s possible to change things on a large scale if we are able to communicate on a much greater scale. When everyone knows that everyone knows, changing what we do is much easier.

      but knowing != agreeing != doing

    1. don’t take advices from strangers on the internet

      no one can live your life for you. find what works for you

    2. Go along and figure things out

      everyone is figuring it out as they go. seriously

    1. contextualise

      a lot to be desired, just like browsing activities

    2. Just in case. For later but never. FOMO.

      testing replacing the native markdown highlighting == with inline HTML. seems to work.

    3. the act of screenshotting itself is the final act

      tsundoku -> screendoku

    4. indirect jobs and actual functions we assign to different apps

      we work with what we have. some tools are servicing the things they weren't designed for

    5. Just-in-Case paradigm to Just-in-Time

      want to explore this more

  5. May 2020
    1. they’re a new media form, with different possibilities from either essays or code, and with striking opportunities to go much further

      we run with what we have

      that author of Cognitive Productivity, created some tagging systems "confined" by his tool at hand

      people using twitter threads to branch out thoughts e.g. visa, and https://twitter.com/PeterorjustP/status/1139267256263872518

      people got hooked on roam because it allows "graph thinking", linking concepts (#roamcult)

      people enjoy andy's evergreen notes because it stacks like a paper, intuitive

      people enjoy sketchnotes and sketch summaries for talks, books because it's not as linear, easy to absorb

      people absorb tutorial and demos in videos better than text (at least I do) -- effective. e.g. knovigator, worldbrain, roam...

      youtube / instructional vids / media helps internalisation of tacit knowledge more (that basketball whiz kid who got the footwork down from studying on youtube)

      people enjoying figma because the UX is the best so far. miro as well.

    2. The skill of writing is to create a context in which other people can think.— Edwin Schlossberg

      note that the author / source name wasn't highlighted initially. debunks the notion of original intellectual work and misattributed quotes

    3. And although the origin of language is hotly debated and uncertain, it seems extremely unlikely to have been the result of a goal-driven process. It’s amusing to try imagining some prehistoric quarterly OKRs leading to the development of language. What sort of goals could one possibly set? Perhaps a quota of new irregular verbs?

      pure necessity x artificial projections / progression

    4. Here’s three classes of tools for thought which do:
      • algorithm
      • network effects
      • distribution and manufacturing
    5. Both Sketch and Figma have done this without needing to make an enormous investment in research.

      can collaborative research be patented?

    1. Research on motivation makes a distinction between two motivational systems. The approach system engages when people pursue a goal to achieve a desirable outcome. The avoidance system engages when people pursue a goal to avert some threat or calamity.

      approach: seek pleasure avoidance: avoid pain

    1. these words bring up all kinds of questions

      some thoughts when skimming through stream-of-consciousness journals like these

      if I want to absorb the information and "learn" faster, then reading faster or summarising the text is not the solution, because a text is already a compressed lossy encoded form of the initial thought. to decode it further and transfer it into my head would risk too much missing bits of information.

    1. talk to myself

      exhibitionist. don't want to shout into a void still

    2. test hypothes.is on WP

  6. Mar 2018