Medium that reveals flaws - Revision history

Issa at 04:09, 16 July 2021

2021-07-16T04:09:03Z

Issa at 19:30, 17 May 2021

2021-05-17T19:30:55Z

Issa at 18:21, 29 March 2021

2021-03-29T18:21:27Z

Issa at 18:21, 29 March 2021

2021-03-29T18:21:00Z

Issa at 01:48, 12 March 2021

2021-03-12T01:48:45Z

Issa at 19:15, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T19:15:06Z

Issa at 00:57, 17 December 2020

2020-12-17T00:57:50Z

Issa at 21:57, 10 December 2020

2020-12-10T21:57:00Z

Issa at 00:58, 9 December 2020

2020-12-09T00:58:49Z

Issa at 00:58, 9 December 2020

2020-12-09T00:58:16Z

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 * Designed interfaces: "But the new representations you develop may be held entirely in your mind, and so are not constrained by traditional static media forms. Or even if based on static media, they may break social norms about what is an “acceptable” argument. Whatever the reason, they may be difficult to communicate using traditional media. And so they remain private, or are only discussed informally with expert colleagues." [http://cognitivemedium.com/tat/index.html]
 * Writing/language in general has a little bit of this flavor (see, e.g. [https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z8q1K5a8i95qARkpFwS45qqtQzM8th82TkeUg Writing forces sharper understanding], and "Converting thoughts to speech slows down the thinking, but increases the discipline and may dramatically enhance creative outcomes"<ref>https://help.supermemo.org/wiki/Creativity_and_problem_solving_in_SuperMemo</ref>), but in my view it is not sufficiently exacting. Jonathan Blow likes to talk about how fiction writers can write any bullshit they want.
 Non-examples:

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 * Empty sections similarly make intent vs execution obvious.
 * Designed interfaces: "But the new representations you develop may be held entirely in your mind, and so are not constrained by traditional static media forms. Or even if based on static media, they may break social norms about what is an “acceptable” argument. Whatever the reason, they may be difficult to communicate using traditional media. And so they remain private, or are only discussed informally with expert colleagues." [http://cognitivemedium.com/tat/index.html]
-* Writing in general has a little bit of this flavor (see, e.g. [https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z8q1K5a8i95qARkpFwS45qqtQzM8th82TkeUg Writing forces sharper understanding]), but in my view it is not sufficiently exacting. Jonathan Blow likes to talk about how fiction writers can write any bullshit they want.
+* Writing/language in general has a little bit of this flavor (see, e.g. [https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z8q1K5a8i95qARkpFwS45qqtQzM8th82TkeUg Writing forces sharper understanding], and "Converting thoughts to speech slows down the thinking, but increases the discipline and may dramatically enhance creative outcomes"<ref>https://help.supermemo.org/wiki/Creativity_and_problem_solving_in_SuperMemo</ref>), but in my view it is not sufficiently exacting. Jonathan Blow likes to talk about how fiction writers can write any bullshit they want.
 Non-examples:

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 * Empty sections similarly make intent vs execution obvious.
 * Designed interfaces: "But the new representations you develop may be held entirely in your mind, and so are not constrained by traditional static media forms. Or even if based on static media, they may break social norms about what is an “acceptable” argument. Whatever the reason, they may be difficult to communicate using traditional media. And so they remain private, or are only discussed informally with expert colleagues." [http://cognitivemedium.com/tat/index.html]
-* writing in general has a little bit of this flavor (see, e.g. [https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z8q1K5a8i95qARkpFwS45qqtQzM8th82TkeUg Writing forces sharper understanding]), but in my view it is not sufficiently exacting. Jonathan Blow likes talk about how fiction writers can write any bullshit they want.
+* Writing in general has a little bit of this flavor (see, e.g. [https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z8q1K5a8i95qARkpFwS45qqtQzM8th82TkeUg Writing forces sharper understanding]), but in my view it is not sufficiently exacting. Jonathan Blow likes to talk about how fiction writers can write any bullshit they want.
 Non-examples:

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 * Empty sections similarly make intent vs execution obvious.
 * Designed interfaces: "But the new representations you develop may be held entirely in your mind, and so are not constrained by traditional static media forms. Or even if based on static media, they may break social norms about what is an “acceptable” argument. Whatever the reason, they may be difficult to communicate using traditional media. And so they remain private, or are only discussed informally with expert colleagues." [http://cognitivemedium.com/tat/index.html]
 Non-examples:

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 * [[Jonathan Blow]] makes the point that a video game designer must create a system with consistent laws/mechanics, whereas a novelist does not need to do so.
 * "Do the math, then burn the math and go with your gut": writing down actual calculations and probabilities and so forth enforces consistency and a crisp model in a way that just using verbal reasoning + intuition doesn't. ([[Paul Graham]]'s advice to [[do things that don't scale]] might be similar.)
 * [[Redlink]]s on a MediaWiki wiki makes the divergence between ''intent'' and ''execution'' obvious, in a way that "just don't link to it if the page doesn't exist" (the default on the web) doesn't.
 * Empty sections similarly make intent vs execution obvious.
@@ Line 27: / Line 28: @@
 To some extent, whether a medium reveals flaws is a matter of degree. For example, speech allows people to mumble their way through the parts they are uncertain about, which written text does not allow. So relatively speaking, even prose is a medium that reveals flaws, just not as much compared to something like a table.
 [[Category:Learning]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:15, 27 February 2021
Line 27:		Line 27:

	To some extent, whether a medium reveals flaws is a matter of degree. For example, speech allows people to mumble their way through the parts they are uncertain about, which written text does not allow. So relatively speaking, even prose is a medium that reveals flaws, just not as much compared to something like a table.		To some extent, whether a medium reveals flaws is a matter of degree. For example, speech allows people to mumble their way through the parts they are uncertain about, which written text does not allow. So relatively speaking, even prose is a medium that reveals flaws, just not as much compared to something like a table.
		+
		+	[[Category:Learning]]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Examples:
-* A table makes it obvious when one of its cells is missing information. Once you specify the column names and instances (rows), that automatically gives a spot for n*m cells which must be filled. If the same information is presented as an essay or new reporting, it is not so obvious which pieces of info are missing.
+* A table makes it obvious when one of its cells is missing information. Once you specify the column names and instances (rows), that automatically gives a spot for n*m cells which must be filled. If the same information is presented as an essay or news reporting, it is not so obvious which pieces of info are missing.
 * [[Jonathan Blow]] makes the point that a video game designer must create a system with consistent laws/mechanics, whereas a novelist does not need to do so.
 * "Do the math, then burn the math and go with your gut": writing down actual calculations and probabilities and so forth enforces consistency and a crisp model in a way that just using verbal reasoning + intuition doesn't.

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:58, 9 December 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	A '''medium that reveals flaws''' is a medium that reveals ~~that~~ flaws of the content produced in it.	+	A '''medium that reveals flaws''' is a medium that reveals the flaws of the content produced in it.

	Examples:		Examples: