3 ms·
What a fun post! The one thing I'd try to add or note is that, in a more public environment, I'd love to see more ability to signal how baked we think our shit
by rektide 5y ago
What a fun post!
The one thing I'd try to add or note is that, in a more public environment, I'd love to see more ability to signal how baked we think our shit is. A lot of being online is just fun & merry making & not heavy, is apt for spitballing & play & exploration, but that mixes in with so many serious, real, important shares in the mileau. Just having a knob, high or low bakedness, seriousness, doneness: this kind of information or annotation or metadata could help us better navigate our information spaces so much more clearly.
Some bloggers have adopted attaching epistemic status to their posts. Gwern for example has a write-up on his blog's use of "status"[1], which is to inform the reader essentially of how far they've gotten diving into the topic.
[1] https://www.gwern.net/About#confidence-tags https://www.gwern.net/About#confidence-tags
- divbzero 5y agoI really like the idea of indicating epistemic status for posts. The closest to that for code might be version numbers where anything under v1.0 should be taken with a grain of salt. This dynamic of spitballing-or-serious appears on HN sometimes when a personal project gets shared by a third party, is good enough to attract serious comments/critiques, but then the author of the project chimes in to say “I totally didn’t expect this to be shared here it’s definitely a work in progress…”
- bthallplz 5y agoThat's a very cool idea and quite applicable to sites with pages that change over time, such as personal wikis. I think I'll add it to my personal wiki! (Feeds for posts of various maturities can be provided, too, which would be nice!)