3 ms·

Got you, I was a bit on edge from previous not so fun exchanges on another thread. I go by Feynman's logic: if you can't explain it simply you don't understand

Got you, I was a bit on edge from previous not so fun exchanges on another thread. I go by Feynman's logic: if you can't explain it simply you don't understand it. Redundancy doesn't seem to me to be a good thing in documentation. Would make it harder to parse and maintain...

bayindirh 2y ago
> Got you, I was a bit on edge from previous not so fun exchanges on another thread. Ah, that happens, no problems on my side whatsoever. > I go by Feynman's logic: if you can't explain it simply you don't understand it. That's true, but in reality it needs a couple of passes to distill down, which needs time. An example of a live document I have written can be given as [0]. Can it be better? By miles. How much time does it need? An amount I don't have right now. "When you're poor, everything is expensive" works for time, too. So, I try to do my best when I have time, and polish it later when I have additional time for it. [0]: https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Hardware/Installing+a+Home+Server+on+a+Raspberry+Pi+3 https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Hardware/Installing+a+Home+...
latexr 2y ago
> Redundancy doesn't seem to me to be a good thing in documentation. Would make it harder to parse and maintain And increases the word count, making it less likely someone will even begin reading it.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  You don't need to repetitiously write things over and over again. You can link or reference the relevant parts with clickable links. This way your document will look compact and neat while having all the necessary information contained in everywhere and every part of your documentation. Also interconnected documents reduce the burden of repeatedly updating duplicate parts. You reference or link it, and update and change it for once. Note: Yes, I have intentionally and knowingly written that way.

3 ms·

Got you, I was a bit on edge from previous not so fun exchanges on another thread. I go by Feynman's logic: if you can't explain it simply you don't understand

by namaria 2y ago

bayindirh 2y ago
> Got you, I was a bit on edge from previous not so fun exchanges on another thread. Ah, that happens, no problems on my side whatsoever. > I go by Feynman's logic: if you can't explain it simply you don't understand it. That's true, but in reality it needs a couple of passes to distill down, which needs time. An example of a live document I have written can be given as [0]. Can it be better? By miles. How much time does it need? An amount I don't have right now. "When you're poor, everything is expensive" works for time, too. So, I try to do my best when I have time, and polish it later when I have additional time for it. [0]: https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Hardware/Installing+a+Home+Server+on+a+Raspberry+Pi+3 https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Hardware/Installing+a+Home+...
latexr 2y ago
> Redundancy doesn't seem to me to be a good thing in documentation. Would make it harder to parse and maintain And increases the word count, making it less likely someone will even begin reading it.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  You don't need to repetitiously write things over and over again. You can link or reference the relevant parts with clickable links. This way your document will look compact and neat while having all the necessary information contained in everywhere and every part of your documentation. Also interconnected documents reduce the burden of repeatedly updating duplicate parts. You reference or link it, and update and change it for once. Note: Yes, I have intentionally and knowingly written that way.