735 karma · joined July 9, 2015
[0] https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/66d43597/elife-s-new-...
But then what if I have multiple windows open because the other has some reference codebase? Do I keep that in a separate desktop instead? It’s just perplexing.
It works. A big issue with computer notetaking software, I've realized, is that I was spending too much time trying to figure out where to put things: what note should this be connected to, which folder should this be in, etc. Dumping everything into a single document, under today's date, gets rid of that. The other issue this solved was that I never looked back at what I'd written previously: opening a bunch of files was too tedious to ever do unless I was explicitly looking for something. With this, I can just scroll down and see what I was doing last week, immediately.
The sheer amount of garbage I had to turn off made me give up and close it half way through. Which is a shame, because there seems to be good tech underneath all the garbage.
[0]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/deployedge/microsoft-edge-...
[0]: https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/89106 [1]: https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/89106/reviews#t...
https://web.archive.org/web/20220915181526/https://godotengi...
Does the person you’re replying to make decisions about how profits are allocated in the company? What product the company is going to make? Do they make the big hiring and firing decisions? No, probably not. They’re likely a software engineer. They sell their labor in order to be able to make money and sustain themselves. Ergo they are part of the working class.
There's always obvious things to catch: do all of the data points plotted on this graph make sense? Does a predictive model fall back to chance performance when it should? Should the authors need to z-score in order to see this effect? Other labs typically use X statistical model here: why are these people using something different, and how should I expect the results to change? If my brain is having a difficult time understanding how they went from raw data to a given plot, that's usually an indication that something's fishy.
Then you need to check for consistency between the results. Figures should come together to tell a coherent story. If there are small discrepancies in what Figure 1 and Figure 3 are telling you, investigate. It could be that the authors are hiding something.
Then there's sociological factors: how much do I trust the work that this group puts out? Being in higher-prestige journals is actually an indication that you should be more skeptical of the results, not less. There's more riding on the results telling a neat and coherent story, and more space to hide things in (given that you typically need to do 2 or 3 papers worth of experiments to publish in Nature these days).
Unfortunately, there's a great deal of bullshit published every day. Every paper has a little bit of it. The trick is to get great at spotting it and getting something out of the paper without getting discouaged with science as a whole.
Other than that, the main issue I struggle with in these PKM/Zettelkasten style note taking apps is discoverability. I write down a lot of notes, but it is hard for me to find my way back to them. The benefit of hierarchy-based notetaking systems, where things get placed in folders and subfolders, is that at least I can get a big picture of my database at a glance. I've yet to find a nice way of doing this in logseq and its cousins.