Things that don't work - DYNOMIGHT INTERNET NEWSLETTER

Tree-based knowledge organization. The physical world whispers to us to organize information into “trees”. For example, say you write something on a piece of paper, put the paper into a binder, put the binder into a box, put the box into a closet: OK. But on my computer, I have some folders that look sort of like this: (You’re reading “A”) The problem is, most projects end up needing some writing. And writing often needs some “projecting” like making plots. And sometimes I don’t get paid for stuff I thought I would and usually projects bleed into each other and sometimes I split something I was writing into pieces and I neglect the last piece and it remains in limbo for years. Every level of the hierarchy feels forced and artificial. Maybe there’s a better way, but my guess is that life is just too messy. Graph-based knowledge organization. If trees are too rigid, why not graphs? Wikis and Zettelkasten systems let you organize information into “nodes” of content that you can link to ea

Tree-based knowledge organization. The physical world whispers to us to organize information into “trees”. For example, say you write something on a piece of paper, put the paper into a binder, put the binder into a box, put the box into a closet: OK. But on my computer, I have some folders that look sort of like this: (You’re reading “A”) The problem is, most projects end up needing some writing. And writing often needs some “projecting” like making plots. And sometimes I don’t get paid for stuff I thought I would and usually projects bleed into each other and sometimes I split something I wa