People who think an unconnected addition is a good idea.

• Some people think that making an addition to A and then B makes it better.
• Some people think it’s “Unconnected additions.”
  • If the link is connected and you get a C, then it’s “better than A.”
  • At stage B, it feels rather worse.
    • Because we consider a network of closely linked links to be a good thing.
    • Strictly speaking, maybe it’s not getting worse.
      • Because the cost of discarding the additions and returning them to A is cheap.
    • The cost of an additional “A→B” without context is much cheaper than “B→C” linking
  • If you’re going to add something new, why not at least link to it from an existing one?
    • I mean, this [Zeros and ones and hundreds.
    • B is added to A, so it has increased or decreased in value.
      • Increased from 0 to 1.
    • But there are “ways to get more.”
      • There is a way to turn 0 into 100.
  • Can I include it in Narrow observation range or not?
  • You’re not seeing the context.
  • What is a “pulse”? - Don’t you understand that there is a Knowledge Network?

relevance - The Intellectual Production of Engineers - - p.3 - - p.4 - Simply adding without doing the latter is not very beneficial.

• A series of pictures of two people saying different things

Related:. - Evergreen notes must be closely linked

criticalinfobox

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/脈絡ない追加を良いと思う人 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.