gadgets

There are 6 posts tagged gadgets (this is page 1 of 1).

The Zettelkasten as a Knowledge Management System and Beyond

There are a few topics that have been on my mind for decades, one of which is how to store and retrieve information and knowledge in a meaningful way—essentially, a Memex. In the 90s, I was a fan of Apple’s HyperCard, and since then, I’ve tried many things, but nothing has proven reliable. Data formats have disappeared (like Apple’s HyperCard), and even though the technical possibilities today are much broader than back then, I don’t have the impression that they have solved the fundamental problem. There is no quick fix that reads articles and books for you and also makes you understand them. I don’t trust summary services like Blinkist, not to mention that they don’t help me with scientific articles either.

In recent months, I’ve turned again to a system that I had used in the 90s but abandoned in favor of HyperCard: the Zettelkasten. Not just any box with index cards, but a Zettelkasten following the Luhmannian principle. Niklas Luhmann was one of the most significant sociologists of the 20th century, with an incredible number of academic publications to his name. His Zettelkasten, which actually consists of several boxes, contains about 90,000 slips and is being digitized at Bielefeld University. Luhmann attributed his productivity to this Zettelkasten system, and after several months using it, I can understand why. So how does the Zettelkasten work?

First of all, there are a few fundamental principles:

  • The quality of a paper depends on what has already been written. In an ideal world, the thoughts in the Zettelkasten are already formulated well enough to be directly incorporated. The goal of the Zettelkasten, therefore, is to generate insights that are worth publishing.
  • Everything you read is processed and placed into the Zettelkasten. Rather than following a strict plan (as is often recommended when writing academic papers), everything goes into the Zettelkasten and is, if possible, linked together right away. Luhmann himself always wrote his slips with the thought in mind of how they would fit into the existing notes. But new ideas can also emerge from the Zettelkasten at any time.
  • Writing about everything instead of starting directly with a hypothesis also has the advantage of reducing exposure to confirmation bias, which causes one to ignore anything that might challenge the hypothesis.
  • Highlighting in a text is useless, the learning effect is zero. According to Luhmann, thinking cannot happen without writing. Handwritten notes are preferable to those typed on a computer, as they tend to capture the essence better, thus facilitating understanding.
  • The Zettelkasten is not an archive, nor is it an idea graveyard like Moleskine notebooks.
  • There is no information hierarchy; thoughts can simply be inserted into Luhmann’s system wherever they fit. For example, if you have a note numbered “1,2,1” and another “1,2,2,” you can just insert a “1,2,1,a” if a thought is missing here. There’s no need to pre-think endlessly about what the best structure is.
  • Self-discipline is more important than IQ. A smart working environment ensures that you don’t face resistance from the start.
  • Daily work with the Zettelkasten leads to a new KPI for knowledge workers: How many notes are created each day!

How exactly does the Zettelkasten work?

  • When reading a text, “Literature Notes” are created, which contain only your own thoughts about the text, written in your own words.
  • These then lead to “Permanent Notes,” which are added to the Zettelkasten. The Literature Notes are discarded (this is also why I sent back my Scribe, since the Literature Notes could not be created with it).
  • Additionally, there are “Fleeting Notes,” which contain all the ideas you have.

The Zettelkasten system is highly minimalist, with no fancy notebooks or software tools. The reduction, or even restriction, to what is essential also stimulates creativity and thinking (see Stokes 2001 and Rheinberger 1997). Of course, there are software solutions like The Archive, and they would have advantages for me: I don’t always have my Zettelkasten with me. On the other hand, I’ve learned that when I’m sitting in front of a computer or iPad, I tend to get distracted. Therefore, I now carry index cards with me.

Here is an interesting video about Luhmann’s Zettelkasten, where he explains it himself starting at minute 37:26:

And here is the researcher who is now delving into the Zettelkasten:

 

When “Free” eventually turns into subscriptions: tado and reMarkable

On October 13, 2021, reMarkable announced that the previously free cloud service would now be limited, and the truly exciting features would become paid for new users. I had suspected this earlier, just as I had with tado. tado had announced a subscription in August 2018, but they backtracked for the first customers. While I had to purchase the new app for about 20 euros to use the new features, at least I don’t have to pay any subscription fees.

With both companies, I wasn’t sure why they didn’t include a subscription model from the start. Because in both cases, it was clear that costs would increase as more users accessed the servers. For reMarkable, the costs would be even higher since they offer 8 GB of cloud storage. It should have been obvious from the beginning that at some point, a subscription would have to be introduced to offset the growing costs associated with the increasing number of users. Did both companies avoid the subscription model because they thought it might deter buyers? Aren’t the first customers usually early adopters who are less price-sensitive?

I sold my reMarkable a few months ago, not because of the impending subscription model, but because I simply want fewer gadgets, and it didn’t fit into my workflow. At the end of the day, reMarkable is a niche product, because the desire for focus in a time when distraction is either sought or found by distraction is only present in a small number of users. Even though I think it’s a great product, I don’t believe it will ever be widely adopted by the masses.

First experiences with the Apple Silicon Macs with the M1.

I have already experienced a processor change at Apple. My Apple career began in 1996 with a PowerBook 5300, which I absolutely loved—despite its 640×480 pixel grayscale display. On the one hand, a Mac laptop at that time was still something very special and rare (admittedly, at an exorbitant price, but it had been provided to me by my then employer), and it had a keyboard that felt incredibly good and, above all, sounded wonderfully. On the other hand, compared to the Windows PCs I had used before, it was also extremely reliable. With 8 MB of RAM and a 500 MB hard drive, it was also quite well-equipped. This PowerBook was the first to feature a Motorola PowerPC processor, so there had already been a kind of transition shortly before.

In 2006, Apple switched to Intel processors, a move that was extraordinary at the time, especially since in the 90s, Apple had aired commercials where a Motorola processor roasted an Intel processor. For the transition, Apple offered a program called Rosetta, which allowed PowerPC applications to run on Intel-based Macs. Typically, these programs ran slower. The commercial was actually referenced again when the first Intel Macs were introduced, around minute 1:05 of the presentation.

Now another transition. In 2019, I bought the 16″ MacBook Pro after many years with a MacBook Air. I hadn’t kept any other Apple computer longer than the Air, but over time, it had become too slow for what I was doing with it (R, a lot of work in the terminal with sed, awk, Lightroom, etc.). I hadn’t upgraded earlier because I absolutely didn’t want the awful butterfly keyboard. The return to scissor-switch keyboards began with the 16″ MacBook, but I still couldn’t get used to the huge device. Not to mention, it became incredibly hot and loud, and the battery life was far from Apple’s claims. For example, when I trained a machine learning model, the MacBook got so hot that I didn’t need to heat my office anymore. And during any Zoom or Webex call, the battery drained faster than an ice cube melting in the summer heat.

I spend quite a bit of time waiting for the results of a calculation, even if it’s only 20 or 30 seconds sometimes, but it adds up over the day, and sometimes it’s several minutes or even hours. I usually know in advance how long it will take, but I don’t start another task for just half a minute because it disrupts my train of thought. Data analysis is also a meditative act for me. So, the speed of a computer is extremely important. Not just for data analysis, but for all other tasks on the computer as well. It just has to feel smooth.

The speed of a calculation in R depends on many factors:

  • Memory (yes, R loads everything into memory)
  • Processor speed
  • Parallelization

For memory, the first Apple Silicon models aren’t particularly well-equipped—16 GB is the maximum. It doesn’t help that the path from the processor to memory is especially short. The operating system uses part of the memory, the running programs also use some, so there’s not much left. Especially when working with large files, as I often do, which can sometimes reach 50GB or more, swapping is almost “predetermined.” Parallelization is not possible yet, as the necessary packages are not available—Homebrew, for example, is still not available.

Additionally, R is currently not available for the new Macs. It lacks (still) a Fortran compiler, and this is not only a problem for R but also for many machine learning software extensions for Python. Who would have thought that this old programming language could still have such a big influence today? Of course, R also runs via Rosetta, but then I could have just not bought a new Mac and let myself be used as a beta tester for Apple 🙂 But, small spoiler: Even with Rosetta, the Intel version of R runs faster on the M1, and it seems that’s not just the case for me.

I initially purchased a Mac mini with 8GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD to test how good the performance actually is and whether I could make the transition. I was able to pick up the Mac mini the same day from the Apple Store, and from the start, I was amazed at how smooth everything felt on this computer. R worked flawlessly, though RStudio showed error messages frequently. No big deal. But it soon became clear that the memory limitation was an issue. When trying to process a 200GB file (using sort, awk, sed in the shell), at some point, the hard drive filled up with swapping, and the process failed. Okay, maybe the mini is just a bit too weak for that task. What surprised me, though, was that not once did the fan kick in—this would not have been the case with the 16″ MacBook Pro. So, all in all, everything seemed great…

…except for the Bluetooth. My Mac mini also had the well-known Bluetooth problems. Specifically, the mouse loses its connection multiple times a day, which is extremely inconvenient when you’re showing a demo during a video conference. Not good, very frustrating. I tried all sorts of tips, including using a wired connection to the network instead of Wi-Fi. No improvement. It’s unclear whether this is a hardware or software issue. A chat with Apple Support dropped multiple times, and eventually, I got tired of it because, you know, I have a job too. An update to the Big Sur beta helped a little, and as of yesterday, the computer is running on 11.1, so I’m hoping it will be better now, and that it’s not a hardware issue.

Another not-so-pleasant experience was the sound. I have never experienced an Apple computer with such poor sound quality—my old PowerBook 5300 probably sounded better. They could have definitely done much more with the sound.

Despite the Bluetooth issues, after 2 days, I decided to also buy a portable Apple Silicon Mac. In full configuration (16GB RAM, 2TB SSD), it costs about the same as I could sell my 16″ MacBook Pro for on the used market, and at the same time, I get double the storage space. There used to be a rule that you should calculate how much storage you might need and then multiply that size by 4. Unfortunately, there are no 8TB SSDs for these computers yet.

The computer arrived after almost 3 weeks, one week earlier than expected. Here, I noticed a small speed boost, likely due to the doubled RAM. The 200GB file also went through smoothly now, thanks to enough space on the SSD. And, just like with the Mac mini, the computer hardly seemed to break a sweat. Only once did the computer get a little warm, but not hot, and certainly not as hot as the 16″ MacBook Pro. This is also reflected in the battery life. I have yet to drain the battery in a single day. No kidding. I plug the computer in at night, and I usually still have a few hours of battery life left. It’s a completely new feeling.

The Bluetooth issue also exists with the MacBook Air. This is unpleasant, and I wonder how it could have gone unnoticed in the tests Apple conducts. That a transition doesn’t go completely smoothly is understandable, and you’re always somewhat of a guinea pig when buying the first model after a major shift. For me, it’s a trade-off: How much time do I gain by having a fast computer versus how much time do I lose when something occasionally doesn’t work. The mouse connection is of course a hygiene factor; it should just work. But with the MacBook Air, I’m not as reliant on it. So far, I’m happy with my decision, though I would have preferred 32GB or even 64GB of RAM. But those options aren’t available yet.

The sound of the MacBook Air is much better than my old Air’s, but it doesn’t compare to the 16″ MacBook Pro. No surprise, the speakers are much smaller. Still, it’s better than the mini’s sound.

The instant wake feature actually works, and sometimes I wonder if the computer was even “asleep.” The keyboard sounds almost as nice as that of the PowerBook 5300, and if anyone wonders why a keyboard should sound good, well, aesthetics don’t stop at just the visual 🙂

Sonos: The Great Love That Didn’t Survive Everyday Life

I was probably one of the first buyers of Sonos speakers in Hamburg. The boxes were new, expensive, but exactly what I was looking for. And I was super happy and deeply in love with Sonos. I love music. And the ability to listen to my music in any room at any time was phenomenal. The app responded instantly, there were never any issues, and soon I had 3 speakers (there was only one back then, the large one) and a bridge to which I connected my hi-fi system. The latter never really worked well, so I stuck with the pure Sonos system.

As with any love, when everyday life sets in, the picture starts to get scratches. Although my Sonos family grew larger over time, the Sub was quickly added, along with 2 ones, 3 threes, and a Symfonisk, but over time, the system became more unpredictable. Eventually, I lost interest in listening to music with Sonos. Every time I wanted to start a song, I was already afraid it wouldn’t work flawlessly. The music would cut off, and the wildest error messages appeared in my once harmonious SONOS world:

  • Connection to Sonos product not possible
  • Cannot play the selected item
  • Cannot connect to the device. Please try again later.
  • Error adding titles to the list (1002)

Or sometimes, nothing would happen at all. The spinning wheel of death would appear. Or music would play and immediately stop, or it would skip to the next track, and so on… The software, whether on mobile or desktop, no longer responded in real-time.

Of course, my home network isn’t exactly simple. I had Google Wifi for a while, then switched to Orbi, and recently an AVM Fritzbox has been doing its job. I tried using cables, creating a separate network for the Sonos boxes, removing the Gen 1 devices to switch to Gen 2, but… nothing worked. Studying the support page (accessible at http://IP-ADDRESS:1400/support/review) didn’t help at all, the quality of the connections between devices was mostly suboptimal.

A few minutes later:

A few minutes later again:

My last hope was the Sonos Boost. For nearly 100€, you get a Wi-Fi extender, but it’s more like the Boost creates its own Wi-Fi network for the Sonos devices, so they no longer cause confusion in the main Wi-Fi network. You can see the Boost in the screenshots above, and what you can also see is that it doesn’t really improve the situation. It feels like there are fewer problems with the main Wi-Fi, but Sonos is still sluggish and mostly unresponsive. It got a little better after I removed the Symfonisk from IKEA. Apparently, Sonos doesn’t like these devices very much, or maybe the antennas in the devices just aren’t that good.

When you also consider that Sonos tried to persuade owners of old Sonos devices to dispose of them and buy new ones in order to enjoy the next generation of software, unfortunately, Sonos is no longer recommended. Through my PhonieBox experiment, I’ve learned that you can build Wi-Fi boxes more cheaply on your own.

Running with Artificial Intelligence: LifeBEAM Vi

In the middle of last year, I supported LifeBEAM’s Kickstarter campaign, and this week the LifeBEAM Vi arrived: “The first true artificial intelligence personal trainer”, supposedly the first real personal trainer based on artificial intelligence. LifeBEAM has so far mainly produced helmets for fighter pilots, which can measure vital signs with special sensors; so the company can already be expected to have some experience with sensors. And measuring the pulse via the ear definitely works better than with a watch on the wrist, the Fitbit Blaze has often disappointed me here. AI is “the next big thing”, so why not have an assistant like in Her to improve my fitness?

We are still a long way from “Her”, but a “Her” for only one area (domain-specific), in this case sports or even more limited running, is realistic. It is also her-like that LifeBEAM has kept the interface with voice very minimalist, so that your imagination can play with what Vi looks like for YOU.

Great packaging, not so great manual

The fun cost $219 including shipping, plus another 50€ customs, which I think is an impudence, but apparently also not discussable. I was also just too excited. I don’t have an unboxing video, there are enough of them on the net. The packaging is great, it all feels very valuable, only the documentation has been saved. Although there is a small manual, it does not say, for example, which voice commands exist, and other questions can only be found out by rummaging through the forum posts. The support side, on the other hand, is rather poor.

Setting up the LifeBEAM Vi

It’s great that the LifeBEAM Vi doesn’t come with an empty battery, so you can get started right away. It’s a pity, however, that you can’t see anywhere how full the battery is. The supposedly possible charging within 45 minutes does not work either.

The Vi cannot speak German and does not understand German, and the corresponding app only exists in English. But at least you can switch the units to the metric system, so you don’t have to convert miles while running.

The suboptimal thing about the setup is that you have the headphones in to hear “them”, but then you have to pay attention to a blue light, which you can only see if you don’t have the headphones inside. By the way, the sound is great. At least when you’re not running.

The first run

First of all, you don’t feel this stirrup at all. It’s super light anyway. Due to the fact that you get different pins for different ear sizes and also a small hook that is supposed to hold the headphone in the ear, the in-ear headphones hold very well for me, which is rarely the case. You just have to be very careful that the small green light, the heart rate monitor, is not visible, because then it does not measure the pulse.

For the first run, I just wanted to run 5 kilometers, started the app, the connection was found immediately, and off I went. The LifeBEAM Vi talks quite a lot at first, while a Spotify playlist is playing, although I didn’t understand which one it was. Spotify’s running feature didn’t work. The music gets a little quieter when Vi speaks, but it was still too loud at times, so I didn’t always understand Vi.

What I think she said is that she has to spend 2 hours of training with one until she has enough data together to be able to make suggestions. In the forum, some users complain that nothing happened after 2 hours. In this case, however, it was probably because the coaching apparently only works on the iPhone at the moment. By the way, the sound didn’t seem quite as great when running, but this may also be due to the fact that I had replaced the earbuds again shortly before.

First Coaching

What the LifeBEAM Vi says is definitely more personal than what Runkeeper tells me. The voice is more natural, and it’s less predictable. It was also nice that she told me after 2 kilometers that my steps were too big and “put on” a cool beat with which I could try a different stride length. She praised me after 2/3 of the run that I could keep the speed well. That seemed much more individual than Runkeeper.

What I didn’t understand was how to get her to tell me my heart rate. At first I tried it in the classic way with “Vi, what is my Heart Rate?”, but she hadn’t responded. Then I pressed the right headphone, because I thought I dimly remembered that it worked. In fact, all you have to do is say “Heart Rate”, and if there isn’t quite as much wind blowing against the Elbe, then she understands it. It’s just funny that 20 seconds later she explains to me how I can ask her for the heart rate. She didn’t say anything about the fact that my pulse was relatively high. She also didn’t understand the question of “distance”; Sometimes I would have liked to know how much I still have ahead of me.

You’ll never run alone

Shortly before the end of the run, she told me that I had made it right away. It seemed like an eternity to me afterwards, but that may also have been due to the Elbberg, which gets in my way every time (hence the high pulse and low speed in the screenshot).

When it was over, it was nice to have someone to give you feedback, even if it was only a summary. Overall, it was a good experience to have someone to talk to you, because sometimes I’m bored while running. Some people think about problems while running, but I try to clear my head. The LifeBEAM Vi helped a lot with this.

Next steps

So I still have an hour and a half missing until the LifeBEAM can coach Vi; I will report on that then. Until then, I can also report which other voice commands of the Vi work and how fast the battery actually lasts and charges. Overall, the impression is positive for the time being, even if the high expectations raised by the initial videos were not completely fulfilled.

Update: The video I had embedded here was set to private by LifeBeam. The background is probably that a man was shown on a treadmill in the video. But Vi can’t handle that at all

Moleskine: First-class idea cemetery

I’m a fan of the sinfully expensive Moleskine notebooks, even if I sometimes question the meaningfulness. The magazine of the Süddeutsche has also done this. Because the true purpose, according to author Tobias Kniebe in view of the results of a long-term self-experiment study, would be to cultivate the feeling of having recovered one’s aphorisms, bon mots and ideas in a valuable place that corresponds to their unique quality. Once it is full, it goes to the shelf (more aesthetically pleasing than ring blocks with partly loose sheets), where it would never be looked at again (here I can contradict the author, from time to time I look there). Kniebe’s conclusion: The Moleskine protects the world precisely from the profundity with which one would otherwise have to annoy one’s fellow human beings, and it safely locks away just the most embarrassing flashes of inspiration: a small poison cabinet with reverent black lids, a first-class funeral of ideas.

And Mr. Kniebe is definitely right: If you pursue an idea over a longer period of time, it can stretch over several Moleskines, and that doesn’t make it any easier to find and process the idea again…