https://www.dropbox.com/s/5f4aimdsn1a3y1p/miller%20-%201996%20-%20Modal%20Jazz%20Composition%20%26%20Harmony%20Vol.%201.pdf?dl=0

MODAL JAZZ COMPOSlTlON & HARMONY Miller, R 1996

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

https://www.3x5life.com/

Compare with other products in this category: - Analog (Jeff Sheldon productivity system) - Memindex - Bullet Journal - Frictionless Capture Cards - Pile of Index Cards

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

How To Use The ACE Framework This Week

ACE Framework - Add - Connect - Express

yet another acronym

hmmm... because... as a tool for building/developing thoughts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitner_system

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/24/business/tucker-carlson-fox-news

Following the settlement with Dominion Voting Systems last week, Tucker Carlson is out at Fox News.

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Fox settles Dominion defamation lawsuit for $787.5 million, avoiding trial

Will there be an apology?

This news has broken in the last two hours and many outlets are reporting it. It doesn't appear on the Fox News homepage.

Ah, but we do have the grander visions of enclosure. "The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around." That's Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson, from a few decades ago. But similar sentiments come from countless other sources, from Lakota "all our relations" to Amish sentiments toward technology, etc. Point is there are many, even just in the USA (which drives so much of this), peoples to ally with and sources to draw on in crafting a broader collective story (and thus practices and institutions) which place life's (including humans') needs at the center and economic "needs" in service to them, rather than the other way around.

Bei der Tagung von Weltbank und Internationalem Währungsfonds wurden nur winzige Reformschritte unternommen. Nach der Ansicht der Fachleute von NGOs werden sie nicht ausreichen um ärmeren Ländern den Kampf gegen die globale Erhitzung zur erleichtern. Nach wie vor stellt die Weltbank hohe Summen für die Finanzierung fossiler Energien zur Verfügung.

https://taz.de/Fruehjahrstagung-von-Weltbank-und-IWF/!5927897/

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Wigent, William David, Burton David William Housel, and Edward Harry Gilman. Modern Filing and How to File: A Textbook on Office System. Rochester, N.Y.: Yawman & Erbe Mfg. Co., 1916. http://archive.org/details/modernfilingate02compgoog.

Original .pdf converted with docdrop.org for OCR annotation on 2023-03-24.

annotation target: urn:x-pdf:3c1f14d64c91cf4b513efa16df4ed90d

Annotations: https://hypothes.is/users/chrisaldrich?q=url%3Aurn%3Ax-pdf%3A3c1f14d64c91cf4b513efa16df4ed90d

Wigent, William David, Burton David William Housel, and Edward Harry Gilman. Modern Filing and How to File: A Textbook on Office System. Rochester, N.Y.: Yawman & Erbe Mfg. Co., 1916. http://archive.org/details/modernfilingate02compgoog.

9/8b2 "Multiple storage" as a necessity of<br /> storage of complex (complex<br /> evaluating) information.

Fascinating to see the English phrase "multiple storage" pop up in Luhmann's ZKII section on Zettelkasten.

This note is undated, though being in ZKII likely occurred more than a decade after he'd started his practice. One must wonder where he pulled the source for the English phrase rather than using a German one? Does the idea appear in Heyde? It certainly would have been an emerging question within systems theory and potentially computer science ideas which Luhmann would have had access to.

• Link to https://hypothes.is/a/WtB2AqmlEe2wvCsB5ZyL5A on multiple storage affordances

According to the Niklas Luhmann-Archiv, Luhmann began his first zettelkasten in 1952 likely when he was working as a legal trainee in Lüneburg or as a government councilor in the Ministry of Education in Lower Saxony.

This timeframe would have been just after Johannes Erich Heyde had published the 8th edition of Technik des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens in 1951.

Link to: - https://hypothes.is/a/Jn9elsk5Ee2hsLP5WWBEBw on dates of NL ZK - https://hypothes.is/a/CqGhGvchEey6heekrEJ9WA aktenzeichen - https://hypothes.is/a/4wxHdDqeEe2OKGMHXDKezA Clemens Luhmann link

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

The problem here is equating the "top level" number with category in the first place. It's just an idea and the number is a location. Start by separating the two.

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

I'm not the only one to think of zettelkasten as "living"...

Bullet journaling works well in a noisy world because it forces people to confront what they're eventually not going to do anyway and gets them to drop it rather than leaving it on an ever-growing list.

Carrying forward to do lists manually encourages one to quit things that aren't going to get done.

Note for historical purposes.

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

= stuck systems - comments - co-dependent systems which are stuck - are similar to computer programs that execute in parallel but reach a condition called "lock" - when circular feedback loops between subroutines - keep them stuck in a perpetual, non-computing loop - require co-evolutionary work across all the dependent systems to shift out of stuck

Is this a data (or privacy) literacy problem? A lack of regulation by experts in this field?

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'>Peter Smith</span> in Zettelkasten (<time class='dt-published'>01/17/2023 16:52:31</time>)</cite></small>

Curious if he means can run on different devices or an installation spans multiple devices. I'm interested in considering the operating system as a control plane for many devices. Additionally multi-user support for sharing hardware.

A term recommended by Eve regarding an interdisciplinary approach that accounts for multiple feedback loops within complex systems. Need to confer complex systems science to see if ADHD is already addressed in that domain.

Look into plugin "Spaced Repetition" for Obsidian

I suspect that artificial memory systems, particularly those that make some sort of logical sense, will indeed be long lasting ones.

Given the long, unchanging history of the Acheulean hand axe, as an example, these sorts of ideas and practices were handed down from generation to generation.

Given their ties to human survival, they're even more likely to persist.

Indigenous memory systems in Aboriginal settings date to 65,000 years and also provide an example of long-lived systems.

Abstract marks have appeared on rock walls and engraved into robust bones as artificial memory systems (AMS) and external memory systems (EMS).

https://forum.artofmemory.com/t/new-anthropology-archaeology-research-on-some-of-the-earliest-potential-writing-systems-with-relation-to-artificial-memory-systems-ams-external-memory-systems-ems/79786

Those interested in archaeology and anthropology with respect to art and memory may appreciate this new paper which could push the date of our earliest writing systems back several thousands of years. (cc @LynneKelly)

Upper Palaeolithic Proto-writing System and Phenological Calendar<br /> https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-archaeological-journal/article/an-upper-palaeolithic-protowriting-system-and-phenological-calendar/6F2AD8A705888F2226FE857840B4FE19

Excellent article on the complex nature of rape. The key point for me is that too many people think it's always a black-and-white matter. In fact, the boundary between rape and not-rape is not that crisp. There is a boundary layer here. I think that if more people realized every boundary is really a boundary layer, there would be fewer conflicts about such matters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp818Ml3C2w&list=PLuJbg6eLC7Y2nU_KhrWZX8zGg-yl_L-_T

At the opening of the video he describes his numbering system: 7.106.1 is shorthand for 7th year, 106th day, video number 1. This is a chronological numbering for tracking things and not a relational sort of numbering often seen in zettelkasten contexts.

Veneer of Objectivity

Quote by Hannah Bloch-Wehba, TAMU law professor

Examples of methods for evaluating systems change

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

This is a good example of how undesirable social facts (i.e., that some people will homeless) can undermine the overall health of the society. I added a comment to the article to explain in more detail the systems-level effects.

https://untools.co/

Tools for better thinking Collection of thinking tools and frameworks to help you solve problems, make decisions and understand systems.

<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'>Howard Rheingold</span> in Howard Rheingold: "Y'all know about "Tools for …" - Mastodon (<time class='dt-published'>11/13/2022 17:33:07</time>)</cite></small>

Looks similar to Project Zero https://pz.harvard.edu/thinking-routines

https://forum.eastgate.com/

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Transparent Peer Review

Download the complete Review Process [PDF] including:

• reviews
• authors' reply
• editorial decisions

</br>

Does this still exist?

Is this list still accurate?

https://theinformed.life/

Hosted by Jorge Arango (https://jarango.com/)

A Systems Thinking approach to understand culture.

From Wikipedia page on Icarus Paradox. Example of architectural design/technical debt leading to an "interest rate" that eventually collapsed the organization. How can one "pay down the principle" and not just the "compound interest"? What does that look like for this scenario? More invest in workforce retraining?

Humans are complex, adaptive systems. Machines have a long history of being complicated, efficient (but not robust) systems. Is there a way to bridge this gap? What does an antifragile system of machines look like? Supervised learning? How do we ensure we don't fall prey to the oracle problem?

Baskerville, R.L.; Land, F. (2004). "Socially Self-destructing Systems". The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology: Innovation, actors, contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 263–285

Seems related to the paradox of information systems. Add to Anki deck

Commonplacing is a personal practice.

A note taking practice is almost always an evolving process with a variety of different pressures and variables in how it takes form.

List out these variables and pressures.

This is almost pitched as a product with the brand name "The Notecard System".

Fascinating to see Ashby pop up in Luhmann's section on zettelkasten in part because Ashby had a similar note taking practice, though part notebook/part index card based, and was highly interested in systems theory.

Thoughts on Zettelkasten numbering systems

I've seen variations of the beginner Zettelkasten question:

"What happens when you want to add a new note between notes 1/1 and 1/1a?"

asked at least a dozen times in the Reddit fora related to note taking and zettelkasten, on zettelkasten.de, or in other places across the web.

Dense Sets

From a mathematical perspective, these numbering or alpha-numeric systems are, by both intent and design, underpinned by the mathematical idea of dense sets. In the areas of topology and real analysis, one considers a set dense when one can choose a point as close as one likes to any other point. For both library cataloging systems and numbering schemes for ideas in Zettelkasten this means that you can always juxtapose one topic or idea in between any other two.

Part of the beauty of Melvil Dewey's original Dewey Decimal System is that regardless of how many new topics and subtopics one wants to add to their system, one can always fit another new topic between existing ones ad infinitum.

Going back to the motivating question above, the equivalent question mathematically is "what number is between 0.11 and 0.111?" (Here we've converted the artificial "number" "a" to a 1 and removed the punctuation, which doesn't create any issues and may help clarify the orderings a bit.) The answer is that there is an infinite number of numbers between these!

This is much more explicit by writing these numbers as:<br /> 0.110<br /> 0.111

Naturally 0.1101 is between them (along with an infinity of others), so one could start here as a means of inserting ideas this way if they liked. One either needs to count up sequentially (0, 1, 2, 3, ...) or add additional place values.

Decimal numbering systems in practice

The problem most people face is that they're not thinking of these numbers as decimals, but as natural numbers or integers (or broadly numbers without any decimal portions). Though of course in the realm of real numbers, numbers above 0 are dense as well, but require the use of their decimal portions to remain so.

The tough question is: what sorts of semantic meanings one might attach to their adding of additional place values or their alphabetical characters? This meaning can vary from person to person and system to system, so I won't delve into it here.

One may find it useful to logically chunk these numbers into groups of three as is often done using commas, periods, slashes, dashes, spaces, or other punctuation. This doesn't need to mean anything in particular, but may help to make one's numbers more easily readable as well as usable for filing new ideas. Sometimes these indicators can be confusing in discussion, so if ever in doubt, simply remove them and the general principles mentioned here should still hold.

Depending on one's note taking system, however, when putting cards into some semblance of a logical sort-able order (perhaps within a folder for example), the system may choke on additional characters beyond the standard period to designate a decimal number. For example: within Obsidian, if you have a "zettelkasten" folder with lots of numbered and named files within it, you'll want to give each number the maximum number of decimal places so that when doing an alphabetic sort within the folder, all of the numbered ideas are properly sorted. As an example if you give one file the name "0.510 Mathematics", another "0.514 Topology" and a third "0.5141 Dense Sets" they may not sort properly unless you give the first two decimal expansions to the ten-thousands place at a minimum. If you changed them to "0.5100 Mathematics" and "0.5140 Topology, then you're in good shape and the folder will alphabetically sort as you'd expect. Similarly some systems may or may not do well with including alphabetic characters mixed in with numbers.

If using chunked groups of three numbers, one might consider using the number 0.110.001 as the next level of idea between them and then continuing from there. This may help to spread some of the ideas out as surely one may have yet another idea to wedge in between 0.110.000 and 0.110.001?

One can naturally choose almost any any (decimal) number, so long as it it somewhat "near" the original behind which one places it. By going out further in the decimal expansion, one can always place any idea between two others and know that there will be a number that it can be given that will "work".

Generally within numbers as we use them for mathematics, 0.100000001 is technically "closer" by distance measurement to 0.1 than 0.11, (and by quite a bit!) but somehow when using numbers for zettelkasten purposes, we tend to want to not consider them as decimals, as the Dewey Decimal System does. We also have the tendency to want to keep our numbers as short as possible when writing, so it seems more "natural" to follow 0.11 with 0.111, as it seems like we're "counting up" rather than "counting down".

Another subtlety that one sees in numbering systems is the proper or improper use of the whole numbers in front of the decimal portions. For example, in Niklas Luhmann's system, he has a section of cards that start with 3.XXXX which are close to a section numbered 35.YYYY. This may seem a bit confusing, but he's doing a bit of mental gymnastics to artificially keep his numbers smaller. What he really means is 3000.XXX and 3500.YYY respectively, he's just truncating the extra zeros. Alternately in a fully "decimal system" one would write these as 0.3000.XXXX and 0.3500.YYYY, where we've added additional periods to the numbers to make them easier to read. Using our original example in an analog system, the user may have been using foreshortened indicators for their system and by writing 1/1a, they may have really meant something of the form 001.001/00a, but were making the number shorter in a logical manner (at least to them).

The close observer may have seen Scott Scheper adopt the slightly longer numbers in the thousands (like 3500.YYYY) as a means of remedying some of the numbering confusion many have when looking at Luhmann's system.

Those who build their systems on top of existing ones like the Dewey Decimal Classification, or the Universal Decimal Classification may wish to keep those broad categories with three to four decimal places at the start and then add their own idea number underneath those levels.

As an example, we can use the numbering for Finsler geometry from the Dewey Decimal Classification wikipedia page shown as:

``` 500 Natural sciences and mathematics

510 Mathematics

    516 Geometry

        516.3 Analytic geometries

            516.37 Metric differential geometries

                516.375 Finsler geometry

```

So in our zettelkasten, we might add our first card on the topic of Finsler geometry as "516.375.001 Definition of Finsler geometry" and continue from there with some interesting theorems and proofs on those topics.

Of course, while this is something one can do doesn't mean that one should do it. Going too far down the rabbit holes of "official" forms of classification this way can be a massive time wasting exercise as in most private systems, you're never going to be comparing your individual ideas with the private zettelkasten of others and in practice the sort of standardizing work for classification this way is utterly useless. Beyond this, most personal zettelkasten are unique and idiosyncratic to the user, so for example, my math section labeled 510 may have a lot more overlap with history, anthropology, and sociology hiding within it compared with others who may have all of their mathematics hiding amidst their social sciences section starting with the number 300. One of the benefits of Luhmann's numbering scheme, at least for him, is that it allowed his system to be much more interdisciplinary than using a more complicated Dewey Decimal oriented system which may have dictated moving some of his systems theory work out of his politics area where it may have made more sense to him in addition to being more productive on a personal level.

Of course if you're using the older sort of commonplacing zettelkasten system that was widely in use before Luhmann's variation, then perhaps using a Dewey-based system may be helpful to you?

A Touch of History

As both a mathematician working in the early days of real analysis and a librarian, some of these loose ideas may have occurred tangentially to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 - 1716), though I'm currently unaware of any specific instances within his work. One must note, however, that some of the earliest work within library card catalogs as we know and use them today stemmed from 1770s Austria where governmental conscription needs overlapped with card cataloging systems (Krajewski, 2011). It's here that the beginnings of these sorts of numbering systems begin to come into use well before Melvil Dewey's later work which became much more broadly adopted.

The German "file number" (aktenzeichen) is a unique identification of a file, commonly used in their court system and predecessors as well as file numbers in public administration since at least 1934. We know Niklas Luhmann studied law at the University of Freiburg from 1946 to 1949, when he obtained a law degree, before beginning a career in Lüneburg's public administration where he stayed in civil service until 1962. Given this fact, it's very likely that Luhmann had in-depth experience with these sorts of file numbers as location identifiers for files and documents. As a result it's reasonably likely that a simplified version of these were at least part of the inspiration for his own numbering system. † ‡

Your own practice

At the end of the day, the numbering system you choose needs to work for you within the system you're using (analog, digital, other). I would generally recommend against using someone else's numbering system unless it completely makes sense to you and you're able to quickly and simply add cards to your system with out the extra work and cognitive dissonance about what number you should give it. The more you simplify these small things, the easier and happier you'll be with your set up in the end.

References

Krajewski, Markus. Paper Machines: About Cards & Catalogs, 1548-1929. Translated by Peter Krapp. History and Foundations of Information Science. MIT Press, 2011. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/paper-machines.

Munkres, James R. Topology. 2nd ed. 1975. Reprint, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1999.

https://ead.nb.admin.ch/html/comment_0.html

The layout and format of this online archive is highly reminiscent of a digital zettelkasten and could even be used as a user interface for implementing one. It has a nice alpha-numeric form.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanus_pagination

Stephanus pagination is a system of reference numbers used in editions of Plato based on the three volume 1578 edition of Plato's complete works published by Henricus Stephanus (Henri Estienne) and translated by Joannes Serranus (Jean de Serres).

See also: - Bekker numbering (for Aristotle) - Diels-Kranz numbering (for early pre-Socratics)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708133632/http://unclutterer.com/2014/06/17/the-pile-of-index-cards-poic-system/

Brief explanation of the Pile of Index Cards system, but without significant depth.

As is apparently often in describing new organizing systems (commonplace books, zettelkasten, PoIC, etc.), not everyone is going to understand it the first time, or even understand what is going on or why one would want to use it.

This post by Susan is such an example.

Susan does almost immediately grasp that this might be something one could transfer into a digital system however, particularly for the search functionality.

https://youtu.be/ILuSxUYYjMs

Luhmann zettelkasten origin myth at 165 second mark

A short outline of several numbering schemes (essentially all decimal in nature) for zettelkasten including: - Luhmann's numbering - Bob Doto - Scott Scheper - Dan Allosso - Forrest Perry

A little light on the "why", though it does get location as a primary focus. Misses the idea of density and branching. Touches on but broadly misses the arbitrariness of using the comma, period, or slash which functions primarily for readability.

Tinderbox really is a fantastic name for a note taking / personal knowledge management system. Just the idea makes me want to paint flames on the sides of my physical card index. https://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/

syndication link

A great example of the lag that large, complex systems exhibit when responding to significant input changes.

Lag is something that humans are woefully weak at recognizing and understanding. This, and other systems concepts are what we need to add to the curriculum at all levels of education, to change this very significant shortcoming of "common knowledge".

While Heyde spends a significant amount of time on encouraging one to index and file their ideas under one or more subject headings, he address the objection:

“Doesn’t this neglect the importance of sequentiality, context and development, i.e. doesn’t this completely make away with the well-thought out unity of thoughts that the original author created, when ideas are put on individual sheets, particularly when creating excerpts of longer scientific works?"

He suggests that one file such ideas under the same heading and then numbers them sequentially to keep the original author's intention. This might be useful advice for a classroom setting, but perhaps isn't as useful in other contexts.

But for Luhmann's use case for writing and academic research, this advice may actually be counter productive. While one might occasionally care about another author's train of thought, one is generally focusing on generating their own train of thought. So why not take this advice to advance their own work instead of simply repeating the ideas of another? Take the ideas of others along with your own and chain them together using sequential numbers for your own purposes (publishing)!!

So while taking Heyde's advice and expand upon it for his own uses and purposes, Luhmann is encouraged to chain ideas together and number them. Again he does this numbering in a way such that new ideas can be interspersed as necessary.

Heyde indicates how "valuable notes and chains of thought are" but also points out "how uncontrollable and irretrievable" they are.

This statement is strong evidence along with others in this chapter which may have inspired Niklas Luhmann to invent his iteration of the zettelkasten method of excerpting and making notes.

(link to: Clemens /Heyde and Luhmann timeline: https://hypothes.is/a/4wxHdDqeEe2OKGMHXDKezA)

Presumably he may have either heard or seen others talking about or using these general methods either during his undergraduate or law school experiences. Even with some scant experience, this line may have struck him significantly as an organization barrier of earlier methods.

Why have notes strewn about in a box or notebook as Heyde says? Why spend the time indexing everything and then needing to search for it later? Why not take the time to actively place new ideas into one's box as close as possibly to ideas they directly relate to?

But how do we manage this in a findable way? Since we can't index ideas based on tabs in a notebook or even notebook page numbers, we need to have some sort of handle on where ideas are in slips within our box. The development of European card catalog systems had started in the late 1700s, and further refinements of Melvil Dewey as well as standardization had come about by the early to mid 1900s. One could have used the Dewey Decimal System to index their notes using smaller decimals to infinitely intersperse cards on a growing basis.

But Niklas Luhmann had gone to law school and spent time in civil administration. He would have been aware of aktenzeichen file numbers used in German law/court settings and public administration. He seems to have used a simplified version of this sort of filing system as the base of his numbering system. And why not? He would have likely been intimately familiar with its use and application, so why not adopt it or a simplified version of it for his use? Because it's extensible in a a branching tree fashion, one can add an infinite number of cards or files into the midst of a preexisting collection. And isn't this just the function aktenzeichen file numbers served within the German court system? Incidentally these file numbers began use around 1932, but were likely heavily influenced by the Austrian conscription numbers and house numbers of the late 1770s which also influenced library card cataloging numbers, so the whole system comes right back around. (Ref Krajewski here).

(Cross reference/ see: https://hypothes.is/a/CqGhGvchEey6heekrEJ9WA

Other pieces he may have been attempting to get around include the excessive work of additional copying involved in this piece as well as a lot of the additional work of indexing.

One will note that Luhmann's index was much more sparse than without his methods. Often in books, a reader will find a reference or two in an index and then go right to the spot they need and read around it. Luhmann did exactly this in his sequence of cards. An index entry or two would send him to the general local and sifting through a handful of cards would place him in the correct vicinity. This results in a slight increase in time for some searches, but it pays off in massive savings of time of not needing to cross index everything onto cards as one goes, and it also dramatically increases the probability that one will serendipitously review over related cards and potentially generate new insights and links for new ideas going into one's slip box.

The issue here seems to be the transitivity issue. If method A calls B which in turn calls C, then if C adds a new checked exception B needs to add it even if it is just proxying it and A is already handling it via "finally". This seems like an issue of inference to me. If method B could dynamically infer its checked exceptions this wouldn't be as big of an issue.

You also probably want effect polymorphism for the exceptions so you can handle it for higher order functions.

What affordances were they given in exchange for the formalisms?

Avoid requiring canonical naming

What I'm getting so far is that the formalization is what gives the users affordances to certain features. I'd imagine sophisticated data mining techniques (such as text-search, classification, etc) can alleviate this partially but is always going to be useful. It would be beneficial to opt into the formalism explicitly for the affordances and maintain bidirectional linking between non-formalized representations. In other words, you want the ability to create a formalized view.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2HegcwDRnU

Makes the argument that note taking is an information system, and if it is, then we can use the research from the corpus of information system (IS) theory to examine how to take better notes.

He looks at the Wang and Wang 2006 research and applies their framework of "complete, meaningful, unambiguous, and correct" dimensions of data quality to example note areas of study notes, project management notes (or to do lists) and recipes.

Looks at dimensions of data quality from Mahanti, 2019.

What is the difference between notes and annotations?

all this, AND...

some comes down to the explanations given and the reasons. In this case, they're scant and the original is in middling English and large chunks of Japanese without any of the "why".

The Noguhchi Filing System is a method developed by Noguchi Yukio, a Japanese economist, that organizes one's projects using envelopes and sorts them based on the frequency upon which you work on them.

Lesser known by whose estimation? Certainly lesser known in America in 2014 (and even now in 2022), but how popular was/is it in Japan or other locations?

• Claim
• Evidence
• Reasoning
• Implications
• Context

Mario Bunge indicated that he was directly influenced by American Sociologist Robert Merton.

What particular areas did this include? Serendipity? Note taking practices? Creativity? Systems theory?