51–60 of 279 posts
I am endlessly fascinated by how twitter has now become a dumping ground for complex topics that are difficult to read and follow. But what happened to the old blogs?
I've been dabbling in personal knowledge bases for a long time now. I remember the when I discovered tags -- thought it was the best thing ever. The first good implementation in the wild (for me) was del.icio.us. Eventually I ran into all the problems that the linked thread describes. "Movie" or "movies"? "Book" or "books"? In any case, I still think flat tag lists are better than a directory tree structure ("Content…
> backlinks > recent innovation Ted Nelson is rolling in his Xanadu
A few months ago I worked on some proof-of-concept code for searching tagged data: https://github.com/aaviator42/Cha I now work full-time in a role where part of my duties is designing a content tagging system and its search functionalities. It's very interesting and fun! Lots of puzzles. How do you weigh different tags? How do you do fuzzy searching ('city' should match with plural ('cities'), misspellings ('citys')…
That sounds like a very good use case for word embeddings.
I think tag aliases are fine, but in my opinion, tags should not have hierarchies. That is just opening the can of ontology worms, and most systems are ill-equipped to deal with ontologies...including ontological systems. Tags are just dumb strings which label data. They are basically KeyValues, where the value is just always equal to True. We don't think of KVs as hierarchical unless they are explicitly a path strin…
Tags are just dumb strings that label data, but tags are also data. If I can't label tag:"red" a tag:"colored" in your system, it's not great. It's not much better if I'm labeling things tag:"colored-red" because if I'm doing that and there's no central validation to add semantics to that relationship, I'm going to end up with tag:"red" things, tag:"colored" things, tag:"colored-red" things, and probably even tag:"color-red" and tag:"red-color" things.
edit: what's so bad about cycles when it comes to a tag being assigned another tag that has been assigned the original tag? It's just a mutual implication. There's nothing wrong to me with adding a single tag and seeing five more added automatically. It means that you're building a knowledge base.
This seems like one of those Eternal Problems that people, whether librarians, programmers, or hobbyists, stumble across, think they'll make headway in, then discover that they've really managed to progress just a few feet across a vast and hostile surface of landmines, pitfalls, and lures. Each "obvious" step (I'll have parent relations to define a context!) is only yet another bargain with the Devil, who laughs at…
Sure, I could have spent a thousand hours refining it, but the improvement would have been marginal and it still would need human interaction.
I am endlessly fascinated by how twitter has now become a dumping ground for complex topics that are difficult to read and follow. But what happened to the old blogs?
It's lower effort to make a stream of consciousness post one sentence at a time, and as a bonus, there's a built in audience / discovery network where they're posting.
tagged data
key=value tagged data
hierarchically tagged data (we just found the the unix filesystem!)
hierarchical key = value tagged data (oh damn, it's ldap, we dug too deep.)
I am endlessly fascinated by how twitter has now become a dumping ground for complex topics that are difficult to read and follow. But what happened to the old blogs?
It's lower effort to make a stream of consciousness post one sentence at a time, and as a bonus, there's a built in audience / discovery network where they're posting.
I was just having a conversation similar to this where it was explained "this is just how people my age do things". While attempting to avoid boomer/millennial tropes, this does make me wonder how much different schooling is now vs then (hoping to avoid those memes too).
I was always getting in trouble for just saying whatever came to mind vs slowing down to think if it really needed to be said or more specifically how it was said.