Representing search spaces

...we're still in the earliest generations of search space representation. We're still bound to 2D digital interfaces constrained by rectangular glass planes; alternatives are difficult to conceive, prototype, bring to market, and scale to consumer-level adoption. A sustainable shift forward from ou

Start with a log

In essence, a log reflects the unfolding of a reality. Because of this simplicity, it demands minimal changes to existing behaviour. Change is hard, and a log requires just a bit of extra attention at the time of the event, plus a small effort to capture context afterward. Its marginal cost is not m

Tristability

...creation is not the peak of existence; nor is consumption the pit. Both are appropriate for different people at different points in time and for varying instrumental and appreciative ends. Unfortunately, there's no mechanism for gentle transitions between the two. The intermediate state is neithe

Traces of engagement

We interact with these items and that interaction exceeds a threshold. There's a concept from forensic science called Locard's exchange principle. It states that every contact leaves a trace. We are connected to these things in proportion to the trace they leave upon us, and that trace is a function

UBB agents

In the protocol world, however, citizens are platform-agnostic and have burglar agents acting as extensions of their intentions. "Here is a thing; get it to my friend; they're somewhere, somehow, online." The courier then engages McClane mode in order to make the delivery...

Great search

A great search outcome is decoupled from an instrumental objective—finding or not finding the thing. Instead, it results in a better question. A great search yields a sharper domain map, improved terrain traversal, and clearer connections to other domains. It makes it easier to form and express high

Penalised by platforms

Why do platforms penalise user and content migration? What have they got against custom information couriers and the promiscuous, protocolised distribution of interesting things? The non-answer is that it's value generating for end users. The real answer: platforms have an explicit mandate to protec

Courier armies

In effect, Matt and Miki have access to an army of custom information couriers that can distribute saved things to high relevance targets in a trustworthy, autonomous, and performant way. Right now, the primary channel is email; soon, channels will evolve and become little more than constraints that

A digital means to an analog end

Most interesting, though, is that the time-to-share of protocolised, platform-agnostic distribution amortises to zero over time for the sharer. We're habitual creatures, and once a pattern of sharing is instantiated we tend to replicate it. We share the same things via the same channels. Traditional

Curator's choice

Curators, in contrast, cannot so easily curate. They must expend unnecessarily high effort to configure and sustain curation activities, flip-flopping between a creator-orientated tool stack and consumer-optimised channels, chaining together unwieldy inputs and outputs from not-fit-for-purpose tools