Forum Posts Feed
Hierarchies or Networks?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by mdlynam
Jul 26, 2021 at 01:45 PM
I’m reminded of a Dr. Who episode in which time (or in this case information management) is all wibbly-wobbly (not just one thing).
I suppose I’d add ‘context’ to the list. I don’t think there’ll be software to match our brains for that (though I suppose software could provide a whack to the head to nudge us).
Posted by MadaboutDana
Jul 26, 2021 at 02:17 PM
An interesting example of outliner + comparison (apart from InfoQube – yes, okay, @pierre, you’ve convinced me: I’m finally going to try running this in Parallels!) is offered by Speare (http://www.speare.com), a web-based writing tool with multiple window panes (between which you can drag and drop paragraphs) as its primary selling feature.
It does look pretty neat, actually.
Cheers!
Bill
Posted by Jon Polish
Jul 26, 2021 at 04:01 PM
IQ takes time to learn. It is well worth the investment though.
Jon
MadaboutDana wrote:
An interesting example of outliner + comparison (apart from InfoQube
>– yes, okay, @pierre, you’ve convinced me: I’m finally
>going to try running this in Parallels!) is offered by Speare
>(http://www.speare.com), a web-based writing tool with multiple window panes
>(between which you can drag and drop paragraphs) as its primary selling
>feature.
>
>It does look pretty neat, actually.
>
>Cheers!
>Bill
Posted by BrainTool
Jul 28, 2021 at 03:28 AM
I’m continuing to love the ideas and references this thread is generating. Thanks All!
I’m hearing general agreement on the primary need for hierarchy - which I define as organizing ‘topics’ (and their notes and pointers) according to a containment relationship (for some notion of containment).
In addition, the ability to link things ‘horizontally’ across hierarchies into a network is generally desired. The new set of bidirectional linking tools (Roam et al) add unnamed ‘related’ relationships to the containment ones. IMO if you look at the information you are organizing as a set of nested topics (as in BrainTool) then a bidirectional link between two topics is the same as tagging each with the others topic hierarchy. (BTW BrainTool is inspired by ‘Topic Maps’. I wrote about them here[1].)
Then @Mdlynam’s ‘context’ and @MadaboutDana’s ‘comparison’ hint at the need to view the whole topic map at different levels of abstraction (eg zoom in and out, or split a view to navigate multiple paths independently).
All this is a long way from where BrainTool is right now, but I do think it is a good candidate for @Simons “collection chamber” (I’m working on the “search on steroids” part).
Thanks for the food for thought!
PS Totally agree that none of this is actually modeling our brains. But maybe it’s moving us along a continuum of increasingly sophisticated ways of getting thoughts and ideas out of our heads. From language, to writing, to the printing press, to telecommunications, to PCs, to the internet, to having all connected information in our pockets.
Once we get those neural implants [2] perfected we’ll be able to kick back in our chairs and annotate our memory palaces by smell if we want to! For now though, most of us are just happy to be able to close out some browser tabs without stressing that we’ll never be able to find them again.
Happy CRIMPing.
[1] https://braintool.org/2021/05/15/Organizing-your-life-with-a-Topic-Manager.html
[2] https://www.techtimes.com/articles/262957/20210716/neuroscience-researchers-use-neural-implant-help-paralyzed-man-talk-being.htm
Posted by MadaboutDana
Jul 29, 2021 at 03:21 PM
Ah, I did love your reference to memory palaces! Good ole’ Conan Doyle…
Just been rereading (in what little leisure time I currently have) Neal Stephenson’s “Snow Crash”.
Now, what about the hypercard stacks that are such a vital part of the infowarrior’s arsenal in his Metaverse? Obviously they require a 3D environment – or do they? Efficient/effective or not? It would, of course, be delightful to have a Librarian like the one that accompanies the p(P)rotagonist during his research, but even there, what do we think about the Librarian’s inability to follow analogies? Or summarise (although reading it again, I find that he does – en effet – summarise quite a lot)?
Any thoughts?