• I had a great time yesterday working on [[social coop]] [[tech working group]] things until early in the morning :)
• Today I plan to dedicate more to the [[Agora]] and to its [[Open Letters]].
  • [[open letters to the Agora]] <- [[open letter to Avalokiteshvara]]
• I'm writing this from [[logseq]] -- after very long :)
  • Happy to be back!
  • I missed:
    • Being able to insert images (I think that was working? will test)
    • Having more solid outliner mode (w.r.t. [[wiki vim]], which is great but a bit basic in this sense as far as I know how to use it)
  • I am very happy to note that it seems much speedier than when I left. I can [[wikilink]] or [[inline link]] or [[internal link]] (we discussed names for this with [[vera]] today) and I get autocompletion within a reasonable timeframe. Earlier autocomplete had gotten slow enough I couldn't really link anymore.
  • The graph view completely crashes it though, it's just unable to deal with my garden for some reason. I didn't think I was an outlier, maybe I link more than average?

2023-03-12

• I am interested in [[turning an old laptop keyboard into a portable usb keyboard]]. I don't know if it's possible but am going to have a bit of a look.

• Sunday, 03/12/2023 ** 19:25 if you're given another day, make the best of it ** 19:36 Coasters are cope. So are sunglasses cases. So are screen protectors, card sleeves, locked cabinets, special dishes. Fragile cutlery. Thin, fragile clothing. Why would you build or buy something that's not designed to be used? a home shouldn't feel restrictive, and someone occupying the home shouldn't have to feel like they're walking on eggshells throughout the house. Spaces are built to play in, to live in, and to use. Respect isn't babying every surface, leaving things in a particular position, or organizing in a certain way; to me, the job of the home is to make items used for everyday living look beautiful, pretty much however they are. Sufficiently fragile things shouldn't be owned. (maybe drinking glasses are an exception).

Design items to be played with, to be worn, to be beaten up and torn up and get lost in a pocket and thrown in the washer and thrown in the mud and tossed to a friend down a flight of stairs or thrown to a desk across the room. Asking someone to baby your design is to demand that they sacrifice their way of living for yours, to yield a bit of their time to you instead of going on with their day. Design shouldn't center the creators of the work; it should center the users.

8:07 PM tommyy Phone case with phone is most robust setup desig tho Like replaceable shell very good strat for worn object, even nature agrees

8:25 PM jakeisnt true, i guess the ideal would be like framework laptop where i can remove the casing and just see the guts, then put electronics in another case, but that might be hard good point thank u 👍 i was watching this youtuber who makes awesome tables and he went on a rant about how his dinner guests never use coasters or make sure they don't spill anything because he didn't want his tables to be damaged

and that really pissed me off because the point is to spend time with and enjoy a meal with friends, not to admire and care for this table in his house that he made (even tho it is cool)

also im working on selling lots of clothing and realizing that i gravitate away from clothes i own that i have to care for when wearing, adjust, etc because i don't want my clothes to ever disrupt living my life ** 19:55 Proportion in design I just saw a photo of a basic shelf under a windowsill - just four holes for cubes, really - and found it beautiful. Identifying what made it beautiful took a second for something with no ordament - but examination of the associated books made it clear that the proportions of an object are the most beautiful piece.

It's easy to focus on the flashy parts of design when collecting images on the internet and such - look at this flair, this choice of palette, that ornament, etc - figments of internet-ification - miss the focus on human-centered design. Outlier makes clothes that are boring but fit perfectly. Lego makes a system and pieces for it that have stayed consistent and interoperable - with consistent measurements - for their entire tenure as a company, and their toys are still so beautiful because of it. Respect for this self-consistency - built from human proportions and respecting descriptive, standardized sizing of the environment - makes beautiful things that last. Design can't decide to opt out of its environment; to operate in the real world, it must operate within its existing context and respect standards, no matter what those are.

Bluetooth is bad but respected everywhere. Lego sticks to its guns. Software uses Linux because it's the happiest functional medium for freedom; the web and javascript stick for similar reasons. When you can't agree to standards, you describe your environment and adhere to it, picking your innovations within these standards. I'm off a mint milkshake right now. I don't know what I'm saying. Just stick to as many measurements and standards and principles as possible, and make the standards that you do not adhere to very explicit. Acknowledge them and have a well-reasoned defense for breaking from the norm.