How can I get the most of these summaries? How can I thoroughly understand the content, before summarising? How can I get to the bottom of things, rather than superficially skimming?
- AT LEAST read the log thrice, links within twice, links within links once.
- Write down thoughts/questions arising as I read the log/links within; add layers deeper than the above three plies to reading list.
- Briefly summarise the linked content separately, so I’m sure I understand it.
And, it turns out the above 3/2/1 reading scheme is a DEEP ocean: fewer than 20 lines in (to the first of at least three readings), and I’m reading this (first of at least two readings), which leads to all sorts of intrigue (that will take WAY more than the at-least-once reading to grok!)! Look at that – exclamation nestled within exclamation!(!)
I don’t yet understand the argument MP makes for miner collusion (and (how) did this get resolved?!), nor why Diana didn’t want to write the Messenger Shoots Back article. Speaking of the latter, I was struck by its conclusion:
At the end of the day, I see this as a clash of two approaches that are indeed irreconcilable: either expose rot as early and clearly as possible, at all costs and settling for nothing less than full eradication or otherwise mend and make do, working around the issues as best one can, minimising costs. I must say that I don’t really condemn either – people afford what they afford and make their choices accordingly.
I want however to make it as clear as I can that this is the choice being made, the choice that killed BitBet, the choice that split tmsr. Your choice to make at every turn, too.
It seems all my dealings with Diana have involved her resolutely taking the former stance, with me bumbling about the latter.
Deep it may be, indeed – that’s the good part! Anyway – is it boring?
On first read it’s perfectly fine to not understand all sorts – it’s even a good sign that you are reading something interesting after all, since how else would you learn anything if you understood it all on first read? Keep track of those bits and parts that require more knowledge and do not get stuck on them, that’s all. The other side of deep is to know also what is enough *for the current goal* and how to gradually integrate new things. It takes some time and practice, like most learning.
Re summaries of logs specifically – did you ever read my summaries of #trilema logs? Perhaps read one side by side with one of Nicole’s summaries of #trilema logs and one of your summaries of #o logs and compare. One of the best “tricks” for figuring out more and faster is exactly this: compare and contrast, especially the new/unfamiliar with the known/familiar.
On 2 side notes: 1. glad to see you are sticking to it 2. do use the ?b=first&e=last#select selection mechanism for when you want to reference a specific paragraph from an article, it works. (And heh, there’s an article about that, too!)
Comment by Diana Coman — October 8, 2020 @ 7:23 am
Anything but – turns out it’s superficiality that’s dull! The only cure for boredom being interesting work, or how did it go?
Yes, go deep without drowning (particularly need to avoid rabbit-holing as avoidance-through-work).
Thanks for the tips – I’ll compare with your and Nicole’s versions; and yea – need to get my head around the selection mechanism!
Comment by Daniel Godwin — October 9, 2020 @ 12:08 pm
I missed my two articles target this week. While away for three days visiting friends and taking care of stuff back home, I still could’ve made the time to get another article finished. I wasted time again by having to go back and correct lazy work, rather than doing it properly the first go. And while I’ve really enjoyed delving deeper into the latest log summary, depth is no excuse for tardiness.
Priority for the week ahead is to *focus* – get the work done early in the day, meet the publishing goal come hell or high water, and THEN relax. :)
Comment by Daniel Godwin — October 11, 2020 @ 11:49 pm
[…] the first draft of this article), I’m beginning to see their power once properly learned. Again, I’m struck by how much return there is in going deeper with stuff – in this case, […]
Pingback by Does Not Compute « Young Hands Club — November 1, 2020 @ 4:15 am