samh748

This one takes the cake.

It's just my broad perception of 1.0 vs 2.0 from the things I've read.

Embarrassing.

In the beginning (Web 1.0), it was one of static websites. Web 2.0 made it interactive, allowing for user input such as comments etc., which laid the foundation for the more recent explosion of walled-gardens and web-apps.

While it's easy to celebrate the old and criticize the new, in the end nothing is intrinsically "good" or "bad". With the web being a container of possibilities, it means we're free to dream, design, and defend whatever it is that we want the web to be.

That's my philosophical take anyway.

It's better now that HN has been giving some really great feedback, either on the specific work itself, or mostly from answering all my other questions surrounding it. This exchange of thought and ideas and different perspectives has been super helpful in getting myself to move forward.

With regards to the vision itself, my belief has been that, when I'm able to communicate my ideas enough to get others on board, will only be when I am done writing the essay itself! As in, the content of the work itself explains all the reasons why the work exists. If that makes sense.

But so far, I think having some people roughly get my idea has already been really helpful, so I don't feel nearly as isolated about it as a few months ago!

> Each of the 5 areas listed are being worked on my many in each field and what's lacking is how these come together that makes it cohesive.

This is a really great point. Often people look at it and think I'm simply doing a mix of self-help or other existing stuff, rather than the "elusive" synthesis that I'm going for.

Definitely need to work on my elevator pitch. In fact I've been wanting to, but often I would tell myself to not work on this, because supposedly it's wise to "write the introduction last". I know it's not written in stone, and I also know that it can be helpful to go back and forth, try writing but move on if it's stuck. I think with your push here I have a better sense of what I'm trying to do with this introduction/pitch. Even if it won't be the "final version", it'll be helpful in distilling this synthesis and like you said, to check to make sure it's even a real thing.

There's so much insight and points for reflection in everything you've said. Thank you so much!! This is all really good feedback, it really helps me to get going and put out more drafts and hopefully get more feedback as I go. :)

> even if you inspire someone else to pursue your vision, you will be their de facto leader and teacher

This is good reassurance and encouragement. :)

> most people’s conception of big issues is flawed, but if the issue you are tackling is uncommon and complicated, and tempts ridicule, then you have an unholy triad of poor feedback. How do you personally form priorities if this is true?

Are you able to expand on this? I'm not sure if I'm completely understanding it. You mean "uncommon and complicated and tempts ridicule" as in if the idea itself isn't good right? I would say my vision is more a "big issue" type, but it's a bit in-between: some more critical-thinking people may dismiss it as "obvious", while less-critical people would think it's irrelevant or don't understand it.

I think right now, I'm going to work on better articulating my vision, so that hopefully I can get more constructive feedback on it.

Thank you so much for your feedback so far! If you have more after taking a look at my previous post, I would love to hear it! But it's a long read so I would understand if you don't. :)

Interview via email, I'm so glad to know people do this! Slack/Discord makes sense too, prob something I can ask the interviewee.

I always say dumb stuff in person so that's likely my last option.

I do like your point about prioritisation. I definitely need to do more of this. Otherwise I end up wanting to learn in too many directions and end up not learning anything!

Tree style tab manager, that's my dream! Thanks for the rec!

Have you got any advice on doing good interviews? Or know of people who do it well?

EDIT: Also, do people do written interviews? As in, they never actually speak to one another, but just pass questions and answers back and forth?

Yes I do write, in fact it's my main intellectual activity nowadays. Like you said, it's great for making sense of our thoughts.

I know of Zettel but have been worried I'll get carried away with the set up and the atomic note thing which I'm not a fan of. I like the idea but it seems a lot of upkeep??

And thanks for the reminders in your last two paragraphs (I'm not in tech). Good to keep in mind :)

I'm quite new to these social science issues. If you're open, I would love to follow up with more questions. :)

I don't think my issue is with "stupid" people. I never think that of people. I think I exaggerated in my post regarding that point.

I think what's going on is more related to my over-attachment with these situations, and my anxiety and subsequent reactions to it.

Interestingly, I never cared to have friends or a social life until recently, after coming out of a depressive episode. It's like I've been living in a hole for 30 years, and now I'm out trying to make friends like a overly eager 6 year old, plus anxiety.

I think I'd much rather smalltalk with my colleagues than with people in the corporate world, or back in the suburds where I grew up.

And I think with my workplace, either because most of them are here for the job stability, or maybe because I live in Canada, a lot of our conversations aren't really conversations at all, but people talking to the air in a positive way so to make a harmonious environment. So often I start saying something and then realize the other person didn't hear me, and yet continue as if we totally get each other. That's what I meant by smalltalk.

Re your edit: Yeah based on all the replies so far I think I must've given the wrong impression in my original post. Too much emotion, makes it hard to interpret reality.

I think this maybe gets to the core of the problem, that it's not really to do with the social setting per se, but my attachment with it, and the expectations that go along with it.

Just like here on HN, I easily get carried away with idealizing the place and then become overbearing, too eager to impress. Same online or offline. Except maybe offline, what I've realized, is that people easily get overwhelmed by my eagerness, so they kinda just step back from it all, not wanting to get involved. Whereas online, I can't really overwhelm anyone cuz it's all thrown into the air, and anyone who cares will respond, and those who don't just move on. That's my theory anyway.

But in general, I think the context around us really does matter a lot, like you mentioned. Not just the types of people we meet, but the expectations we/I set up with it.

Another thought that I'm starting to explore, is that perhaps I'm the one that isn't smart enough or well-read enough to carry a conversation with anyone about anything. Whereas online/HN I can pick the topics I know about and go contribute there.

Lots to think about. Me + social life = confusion to the max. And I've been thinking about it and trying things out a lot, and still can't figure it out.

To be honest, many people I work with are pretty nerdy compared to people with "real/corporate jobs" (it's a university bookstore afterall), but I also feel that we all ended up here because we were the disenfranchised type of nerdy people, so we don't open up our nerdy sides very much. Which means we still end up doing smalltalk etc. It's not that bad, just boring.

EDIT: Come to think of it, the nerdy people at work are mostly the bookworm-type who are more into novels etc. I think I'm literally the only person in the entire place that likes textbooks and academic titles haha. HMMMM

What's your project about? I'm not actually a hacker (imposter!) so I might not be able to contribute