Amen. It’s easy to laugh, but we merely laugh at ourselves. After 17-odd years helping support this community, I’m increasingly of the view there isn’t an easy solution (NO: not AI, not blockchain, not [meme]). Indeed, if it seems easy, we’re just low-balling the problem.
But easily missed in this weeks meet-up Mark Bernstein note’s is this observation (video at time c.58:26) where he say’s “Community makes this practical”. The point is not individual (lest I appear to point to own involvement). The point is far deeper and one I identify with deeply. It is the communication within the overall community that enriches the design space. Even if some only turn up to kvetch, it still tells a tale. They may be right: viewed from where they sit it may be that nothing makes sense. Indeed, the most fascinating part of 14+ years of writing aTbRef is learning what—in a way I couldn’t guess—is not obvious.
For those looking from a wider view, we see the role of the human in the loop. One day, albeit not today, some software might ‘just’ figure this all for us. Enlightened self interest of work needed doing now tells us to engage.
I think the biggest lacuna in understanding of KM/PKM systems is the role of the human mind. We are so obsessed with the value of our time (to otherwise do … what?) that we don’t engage. All the most interesting Tinderbox use I’ve seen over the years shows engagement by the user. Don’t misread that as ‘lots of code’. Again, as in this week’s meet-up talk, you may not need [function] and don’t worry if you don’t. Use what you need.
From my experience, PKM is not a case of “can’t the computer do it because I’m too lazy to contribute.”