Comment by lijogdfljk | Hacker News Reader

Comment by lijogdfljk | Hacker News Reader

I hope this isn't true, hah. I don't really invest in any existing PKMs but i nevertheless spend a fair bit of time writing the foundation of my own.

Regardless of the implementation, i want something to archive and/or retain (in the working memory sense) my conclusions. As without repetition i feel like a majority of what i read, and any conclusions therein, evaporate. Maybe the author would argue that if i want to retain it i should study it! .. but i don't, it's just some article i read.

Are my only choices to invest heavily or become increasing narrow minded? The things i actually invest in i know quite well.. but what does that matter? I'd like to be generally, reasonably informed. I'd like some minor effort spent reading broad topics to not be in vain. Besides, even if i invested heavily - there's only so many hours in the day; only so many things i can invest in to properly retain.

It seems reasonable to me to seek software to aid in this. But it feels like the author is attacking the idea of PKM just as much as the implementations. I can imagine many implementations are akin to snake oil.. but the goal seems reasonable. No?

I see knowledge as being a dag where the edges are directional and where the edges actually mean something, meaning multiple types of edges. Generic backlinks are nowhere near sufficient and lead to the sort of combinatorial explosion the author talks about. But when you have "statement" and "statement" necessitates "conclusion", (the edge means "necessitates") then reviewing the graph over time can actually lead toward you paring down the graph and distilling it to the knowledge that is most useful to you.

> and any conclusions therein, evaporate.

I'm in a similar but different boat: my brain remembers the conclusion but discards all of the "useless" details used to arrive there. This works fine on a personal level, but when someone challenges your position, you find yourself unable to defend it because all of the supporting details have long since evaporated.

So PKM might be useful to archive away the details after you reach a conclusion.

I highly, highly recommend having your own private wiki. It is the 80/20 sweet spot of PKM.

> I'm in a similar but different boat: my brain remembers the conclusion but discards all of the "useless" details used to arrive there. This works fine on a personal level, but when someone challenges your position, you find yourself unable to defend it because all of the supporting details have long since evaporated.

> So PKM might be useful to archive away the details after you reach a conclusion.

100%. I hold the same mindset!

I've been playing with an app idea that helps people communicate these sorts of conclusions to each other to whatever level of detail they require. You can drill all the way down to the premise/axiom level if you want but you don't have to. The graphical animation is nice, but like you say, a private wiki can get you most of the way there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com