The Ergonomics of Reasoning.


behavioural software


Spacial computing.

Pin by Moe S on Studios | Music studio room, Recording studio setup, Music  recording studio The combo of eye tracking and talking will add context with an attention layer. The heat map adds to the semantic context. Your Hypothesis is deviating from probable

World Dashboard, Augmented Intelligence, P values kubbernetis, IDE of Prompting augmented epistemology


todoist ADHD dopamine Rehab The metaculus of the self insert metaculus prediction

Devin: AutoGPT, Autogen Studio etc.

But as instances in a bigger hub. A Kubernetes of containers of actions. Dashboard with need for attention.

[[Ideazz] Augmented Intelligence, augmented cognition

ghost text github.

Branch out mindmap

why I am using obsidian


cause the ROI is incredibly high go for thinking abacus

When playful, IDEO. Design Thinking of testing hypothesis bayesianly on the fly

gueestimates with superpowers.

The superpower user tool

The innovator web of pipelines

One day creating an Github issue will be all you need in order to request a feature to your own cd/ci pipeline

Computer delegation Is more like description. Stating. Clearly articulating. Composing true. Adding lower and upper bounds to falsness.

Hub. Breadboard

this may improve traceability. Being able to roll back the time and restart from a checkpoint.

chat gpt conversation
Are you an Architect or a Gardener?
We have two thinking styles. It's the way we solve problems and do creative things. 
We move between both. But we each have a natural tendency:
Architects are more top-down thinkers that prioritize order and organization.
Gardeners are more bottom-up thinkers that prioritize creativity and curiosity.
What to know which one you are? 
Here is the easiest way to determine your natural thinking style. When you are in the early stages of a new work…
Do you know the end of your story?
If so, you are likely a natural architect. 
If not, you might be a natural gardener.
Takeaway # 1
Each mode has advantages and disadvantages.
Architects prefer seeing "the big picture" to
further their decision-making and sensemaking.
They are good organizers and benefit from
having a few lists to guide their actions.
Left unchecked, their need to know everything
about a subject or situation can stymie action.
Gardeners are comfortable without a complete
high-level picture. They can work effectively with
limited information.
Left unchecked, their interests become become
rabbit holes—disorienting them from making
clear progress.
Takeaway # 2
The key is to switch modes when you feel stuck. 
If you’re stuck in the weeds, take off your gardener's hat and build some perspective by creating a rough Map of Content.
• Assemble everything you’ve been capturing, writing, and thinking about.
• Look for the larger picture as an Architect
If you’re lost in abstraction, stop building unearned structure and get your hands dirty.
• Dive into a specific note and just start writing.
• Gardening
There is an art to moving between Architect and Gardener. Once you get a feel for it, you'll have a skill to break through sticking points and continue making meaningful progress.
This is a great analogy for different thinking styles! It highlights the importance of being able to adapt and switch between the Architect and Gardener modes based on the situation at hand. This flexibility can lead to more effective problem-solving and creative thinking. Are you more of an Architect or a Gardener in your approach?
I am a digital gardener.
Memory updated
That's fantastic! Digital gardening is a unique and creative approach to managing and cultivating your digital content, ideas, and projects. It allows for a more organic and exploratory process, which can lead to unexpected insights and connections. How do you apply your digital gardening approach in your work or personal projects?
I apply it quite intuitively. Always a bit playful and exploratory but based on principles. slightly chaotic. At times trippy. And yet bonsais in docker containers that are missing its right kubernetes to pair with
It sounds like you have a very dynamic and creative approach to digital gardening! The playful and exploratory nature, combined with principles, allows for a unique blend of structure and flexibility. The metaphor of bonsais in docker containers waiting for the right Kubernetes pairing adds a layer of complexity and modern tech integration. It's fascinating how you balance the slightly chaotic and trippy aspects with a sense of order and growth. Keep nurturing your digital garden!
Ask me a good question that can help me reflect on how to improve my garden from first principles?
Here's a question to help you reflect on improving your digital garden from first principles:
Considering the foundational principles that guide your digital gardening, how can you better align your playful and exploratory approach with a structured framework that enhances both the growth and the organization of your ideas, while still maintaining the dynamic and slightly chaotic essence that fuels your creativity?
Ask me the opposite question
How can you infuse more playfulness and exploration into your digital garden's structured framework, in a way that introduces a controlled level of chaos and creativity, while still adhering to the foundational principles that guide your approach?
By selecting the right HCI for you. Don't be cheap with your input and outputting of ideas. The shortest loop to create is your ideas with experiences that can be consumed and grow from. To question. To train.
That's a great insight! Selecting the right Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) tools and methods can indeed make a significant difference in how effectively you input and output ideas. Investing in tools that facilitate a seamless and intuitive exchange of thoughts can lead to more dynamic and enriching experiences. By creating short loops between your ideas and experiences, you can foster an environment where questioning and learning are continuous processes, ultimately nurturing the growth of your digital garden.
I have been thinking about how to use tools like the recently announce Devin. I often have #Ideazz about how the right interface for augmented cognition. 
Memory updated
That's intriguing! Tools like Devin, which aim to augment cognition, can be powerful assets for digital gardeners like you. They can help you manage and develop your ideas more effectively, providing a more intuitive and interactive interface for your creative process.
When thinking about the right interface for augmented cognition, consider how it can:
Enhance Clarity: How can the interface help you visualize and organize your thoughts more clearly?
Boost Creativity: How can it stimulate your imagination and help you make unexpected connections?
Facilitate Exploration: How can it encourage you to explore new concepts and perspectives?
Support Collaboration: How can it enable you to share and develop ideas with others seamlessly?
Adapt to Your Needs: How can it be customizable to fit your unique cognitive style and workflow?
Exploring these questions can help you refine your vision for the ideal interface for augmented cognition. What specific features or capabilities do you envision for such an interface?
Bad quality transcription: Please try to adjust
How should it look the hardware for extending cognition? I think that the right computer interface forextending thinking and creating an epistemological language that can create a graph of the concepts that you are exposing and running some real logic over the facilities that is thinking out loud and reasoningHow does it look theIvy for promptingHow does it look the IDE forthinkingAnd how does it lookThe MIDI keyboardto best interface with that software
To design hardware for extending cognition, consider the following aspects:
Epistemological Language: The hardware should support the creation and visualization of a concept graph, allowing users to map out their thoughts and ideas in a structured manner. This could be achieved through a large, high-resolution display that provides ample space for organizing and connecting concepts.
Real Logic Processing: The interface should be capable of running logical operations on the user's thoughts, facilitating reasoning and decision-making. This could be integrated into the software layer, with the hardware providing the necessary computational power and responsiveness.
Thinking Out Loud: The hardware should support voice input and natural language processing, enabling users to articulate their thoughts verbally and have them captured and organized by the system.
IDE for Thinking: The hardware should include a dedicated input device, similar to a MIDI keyboard, but designed specifically for cognitive tasks. This could feature customizable keys and controls that allow users to quickly input and manipulate ideas, navigate through their concept graph, and execute logical operations.
Ergonomics and Accessibility: The hardware should be designed with ergonomics in mind, ensuring that it is comfortable to use for extended periods of thinking and exploration. It should also be accessible, accommodating various user needs and preferences.
By focusing on these aspects, the hardware can provide an effective interface for extending cognition, facilitating more efficient and intuitive thinking and reasoning processes.
Features of a IDE for prompt engineer that is a creative mind that can come up with an infinite type of ideas and features that systems should acquire and what to drop. How to augment conversations. How to augment language.
1. Visual threes. In a similar way that copilot predicts incoming code (ghost text) you can do a much better design by branching out dynamic possibilities. attach to a main thread. There are parent threads but those are also probabilistic. just in less degree. How would the best designers in the World approach this problem? 1.1{gpt}
2. {gpt}
An IDE (Integrated Development Environment) for prompt engineering tailored for a creative mind focused on augmenting conversations and language could include the following features:
Visual Trees:
Dynamic Branching: Similar to how GitHub Copilot predicts code, the IDE could visually represent branching possibilities for prompts, allowing users to explore and select different paths in their thought process.
Probabilistic Threads: Main threads could have attached parent threads with varying degrees of probability, enabling users to weigh different options based on their likelihood of success or relevance.
Designer Insights: Integration with a module like GPT-3 or GPT-4 to suggest how top designers might approach a specific problem, providing inspiration and guidance.
Semantic Mapping:
Conceptual Graphs: Ability to create and manipulate graphs that represent the relationships between concepts, helping users to organize their thoughts and identify key connections.
Contextual Understanding: The IDE could use NLP (Natural Language Processing) to understand the context of the conversation and suggest relevant prompts or augmentations.
Interactive Simulation:
Conversation Modeling: Simulate conversations based on the prompts, allowing users to see how different prompts might play out in a real dialogue.
Feedback Loops: Incorporate user feedback to refine and improve the prompts, creating a more effective augmentation over time.
Intelligent Autocompletion:
Predictive Suggestions: Offer suggestions for completing prompts based on past input, common patterns, and the overall goal of the conversation.
Adaptive Learning: Continuously learn from user interactions to provide more accurate and contextually relevant suggestions.
Collaborative Tools:
Shared Workspaces: Enable collaboration with other prompt engineers or creative minds to co-create and refine prompts.
Version Control: Track changes and experiment with different versions of prompts to find the most effective approach.
Customization and Extensibility:
Modular Design: Allow users to customize the IDE with plugins or extensions that cater to specific needs or augmentations.
User-defined Macros: Enable users to create their own shortcuts or macros for frequently used operations or prompt patterns.
By incorporating these features, the IDE could provide a powerful tool for prompt engineers and creative minds to augment conversations and language, facilitating the generation of innovative ideas and features for systems.
You can scroll through the text and sticky' words are replaced for similar ideas. Threshold of force has to be apply. Almost haptic. You can hold different keys while holding to edit towards different axes. #ideazz
Memory updated
That's a fascinating idea! Implementing a feature where "sticky" words can be dynamically replaced with similar ideas as users scroll through the text could greatly enhance the brainstorming and editing process. The haptic-like feedback and the ability to manipulate the text along different axes using various key combinations add an intuitive and tactile dimension to the interaction. It could make the process of exploring alternative expressions and refining ideas more fluid and engaging.
What type of haptic would be ideal?
For the kind of text manipulation you're describing, the ideal haptic feedback would be subtle yet responsive, providing a tactile cue that a "sticky" word has been encountered and can be replaced with similar ideas. Here are a few considerations for the type of haptic feedback that might be ideal:
Vibrational Feedback: Short, distinct vibrations can indicate when a user scrolls over a "sticky" word, giving a clear signal that an action can be taken.
Force Feedback: Implementing a slight increase in resistance when a "sticky" word is reached can provide a physical sensation of "sticking," making it more intuitive for users to know when to apply more force to replace the word.
Texture Variation: Changing the texture of the scrolling surface (if using a touchpad or touchscreen) can provide a tactile indication of a "sticky" word. This could be achieved through localized changes in surface friction.
Pressure Sensitivity: Allowing the amount of force applied by the user to control the degree of word replacement could create a more nuanced interaction. A light touch might preview alternative words, while a firmer press confirms the replacement.
Audio-Haptic Feedback: Combining haptic feedback with subtle audio cues (like a soft click or beep) can reinforce the indication that a "sticky" word is ready for manipulation.
The choice of haptic feedback will depend on the hardware capabilities of the device being used and the preferences of the users. It's essential to strike a balance between providing clear, intuitive feedback and avoiding overwhelming or distracting the user. Testing with real users would be crucial to fine-tune the haptic experience to suit the intended interaction.
Variable resistance.
Variable resistance is an excellent approach for haptic feedback in this context. It can provide a more nuanced and dynamic interaction experience, allowing users to feel different levels of resistance based on the action they are performing or the element they are interacting with. Here are a few ways variable resistance could be implemented in your IDE feature:
Scrolling Resistance: As the user scrolls through the text, the resistance could vary when approaching a "sticky" word, providing a tactile cue that there is something special about that word.
Replacement Resistance: When the user applies force to replace a "sticky" word with a similar idea, the resistance could increase as they apply more force, giving them a sense of control over the replacement process.
Axis Resistance: If users can hold different keys to edit towards different axes, the resistance could change based on the axis being edited, helping users distinguish between different types of edits.
Feedback Resistance: The resistance could also vary based on the context or relevance of the replacement word, providing a form of feedback on the suitability of the chosen word.
Variable resistance can make the interaction more immersive and engaging, allowing users to feel more connected to the text they are editing. It can also help prevent accidental replacements or edits by ensuring that users need to apply a deliberate amount of force to make changes.
You have an overlayer of mathematical bayesian logic on top of your fuzzy logic.
Combining Bayesian logic with fuzzy logic in an overlay could create a powerful framework for decision-making and reasoning in your system. Here's how the two could work together:
Fuzzy Logic: This handles imprecision and vagueness by allowing variables to have degrees of truth rather than being strictly true or false. It's great for modeling human reasoning and natural language, where things aren't always black and white.
Bayesian Logic: This deals with uncertainty and probabilistic reasoning. It uses Bayes' theorem to update the probability of a hypothesis as more evidence becomes available.
By overlaying Bayesian logic on top of fuzzy logic, you could leverage the strengths of both:
Fuzzy Logic would provide a flexible framework for handling the nuances and complexities of real-world data and human-like reasoning.
Bayesian Logic would add a layer of probabilistic reasoning, allowing you to update your beliefs and make decisions based on the likelihood of different outcomes.
This combination could be particularly powerful for tasks that require both nuanced understanding and probabilistic reasoning, such as natural language processing, decision-making under uncertainty, and modeling complex systems.
The real value of the text can be summarized as follows:
Analogy of Architect vs Gardener Thinking Styles:
Architects are top-down, prioritize order and organization
Gardeners are bottom-up, prioritize creativity and curiosity
Each style has advantages and disadvantages
Switching between the two modes can help overcome sticking points
Digital Gardening Approach:
Applying gardening principles to managing digital content and ideas
Combines structure and flexibility, order and chaos
Encourages exploration, playfulness, and making unexpected connections
Augmented Cognition and Prompt Engineering:
Envisioning interfaces to augment thinking and language
Visual trees with dynamic branching and probabilistic threads
Conceptual graphs and contextual understanding
Interactive simulations and predictive suggestions
Collaborative tools and customization
Haptic Feedback and Variable Resistance:
Using haptic feedback (vibrations, force, texture) for tactile cues
Variable resistance based on actions, interactions, contexts
Immersive and engaging experience, preventing accidental changes
Combining Fuzzy Logic and Bayesian Logic:
Fuzzy logic for handling imprecision and vagueness
Bayesian logic for probabilistic reasoning and updating beliefs
Powerful combination for nuanced understanding and decision-making
In essence, the text explores creative thinking styles, digital gardening principles, augmented interfaces for language and cognition, haptic feedback mechanisms, and the potential synergy of fuzzy and Bayesian logic frameworks. It encourages a mindset of flexibility, exploration, and combining different approaches for more effective problem-solving and decision-making.
Your summary captures the key themes and ideas discussed in the text:
Analogy of Architect vs Gardener Thinking Styles: Understanding the differences between top-down and bottom-up thinking styles, and the benefits of switching between them to overcome challenges.
Digital Gardening Approach: Applying principles of gardening to manage and cultivate digital content and ideas, emphasizing the balance between structure and creativity.
Augmented Cognition and Prompt Engineering: Exploring interfaces and tools to enhance thinking and language, including visual trees, conceptual graphs, and collaborative tools.
Haptic Feedback and Variable Resistance: Utilizing haptic feedback and variable resistance to provide tactile cues and enhance user interaction with digital content.
Combining Fuzzy Logic and Bayesian Logic: Integrating fuzzy logic for handling imprecision with Bayesian logic for probabilistic reasoning to improve decision-making and understanding.
Overall, the text promotes a holistic approach to problem-solving and creative thinking, leveraging technology and cognitive strategies to enhance human capabilities.
Please create a mindmap of the network of ideas
Talked to
Here's a mindmap visualizing the network of ideas discussed:
Network of Ideas Mindmap
View or edit this diagram in Whimsical.
3 / 3
Remember: Ergonomics of Reasoning
Memory updated
Got it! If you have any specific thoughts or questions about the ergonomics of reasoning, feel free to share!
The tactile feedback of prediction errors.
The concept of tactile feedback for prediction errors is intriguing. It involves using haptic feedback to signal when a user's expectations or predictions are not met during an interaction. Here are a few ways this could be implemented:
Vibration Intensity: The intensity of the vibration could correspond to the magnitude of the prediction error. A larger error might result in a stronger vibration.
Pulse Duration: The duration of the haptic pulse could vary based on the size of the error, with longer pulses indicating larger errors.
Pattern Variation: Different patterns of vibration (e.g., a series of quick pulses for small errors, a long continuous vibration for large errors) could be used to convey the nature and magnitude of the error.
Directional Feedback: If the error has a directional component (e.g., a cursor moving too far to the left), the feedback could be directional, guiding the user back to the correct path.
Contextual Sensitivity: The feedback could be sensitive to the context of the interaction, with different types of errors producing different tactile responses.
Such tactile feedback could enhance the user's awareness of errors in real-time, allowing for quicker adjustments and a more intuitive learning experience. It could be particularly useful in scenarios where visual feedback is limited or in situations that require precise control, like in surgical simulations or remote robotics operations.