Home
All the things I read, running through the streams across Twitter (2 accounts) in an intrinsically interdisciplinary subject, systems biology, require a more graphical approach to note taking, and less 'latency' of items left afloat in no-man's land:
-
fragmentary thought, condensed into 140 characters, else left unsaid,
-
unhealthy need to provide thoughts a unitary time frame in which to exist
- this suits web 1.0 projects such as blog posts for example, but thought is non-linear, scientific thought in particular only arises in distance, in re-evaluation and chance accession, hopping back and forth on one's own subjective timeline of objective observation as well as that of others who choose to share their experiences
-
I've heard complaints of recency effects in science, of online science being overly keen on novelty for its own sake, yet there's rarely challenge to this norm
- Twitter exists as streams, yet there's no good reason why a temporal stream cannot retain meaningful links for exploration along other axes than the time domain
In a separate project I've been exploring the idea of attention paid to concepts (a topic of study in the construction/development of artificial neural networks - ANNs - for 'machine learning')
- Set of mental tools used to engage with problem
- Set of {biases, constraints, thinking tools}
— via {{copermut :: Microservices Manchester - Architecture is Philosophy}}
- this has highlighted the value of leaving textual works open for semantic enrichment
- letting the reader participate through a low barrier to entry: easy access, small, modular building process on top of a textual/conceptual structure
- if coupled to attentional focus, the parts that grow will be aligned with the growth of thought on the topic, and as such branch naturally rather than appear dissonantly alongside
- in such instances, synthesis of the new items with the prior topic becomes prohibitive, even if meaningful linkage may exist
-
Complexity does not beget complexity, nor stability, nor simplicity. There are lots of airy, hand-wavey aphorisms going around about it, but it's just a natural occurrence in response to inherent ecological conflict
- Malik＋Henikoff, 2002：“Conflict begets complexity” ⇌ McCredie May：“Complex＋stable natural systems are likely fragile”
-
this project soon encountered a collapse from overcomplexity, failing to build due to an error
- it is fragile, and the issue of robustness requires separate consideration
- moreover, rather than 'fixing' its fragility, it would be better to consider the architectural modifications and implementing that in a fresh iteration - which may highlight further impropriety of design.
- see (notes from talk last night):
copermut:: Microservices Manchester-
- When you come down to it, you're buying into a distributed system
- your system is going to explode into lots of pieces
- see (notes from talk last night):
- permut.co
- spin.systems (WIP)