/blog

Watching this video from Curtis McHale yesterday emphasised how little I am using my digital garden and how little I really question what I do with the entries that I do have.

A system is only as good as the information contained within it. Or, rather, a system is only as good as the connections and threads within it.

Establish patterns, observe the Forms ¹, small acts for a cumulative effect. The complex arises from a multiplicity of the simple.

In true serendipitous fashion yesterday also saw Austin Kleon write about noting down A quote a day and seeing if, over time, he can find connections or interesting juxtapositions.

I don't feed enough into my system for it to be effective, there needs to be greater crossover between there and the blog. Anything I "like" should go there as well as here, anything I read and think "yes, this", anything that inspires me or think is interesting. It should all be filed away and, where relevant, linked to other things, categorised, referenced. I occasionally throw things in Google Keep for short term retention, bookmark websites, or mark things as "read later" among my RSS feeds – that all could be useful.

D minus. Must do better!

I had the MacBook Pro sat on the arm on the sofa.

It fell off.

Luckily the only damage was to the corner:

Normal:

In this light, "normal" is not a bad word, to be avoided. It's a concept that demands more attention. If the position in the middle is called "normal," then it makes it sound as though the other positions on the continuum are defective. – Ann Althouse

I cringe when someone uses the phrase “normal people” while describing a section of a service's users. Is that the best usage of the phrase? What does it make me, one who doesn't use the service in the “normal” way? Abnormal? Why would you call your user that? – Amit Gawande