Item — HN Reader

> Nobody can create a transparent "tool for thought" that doesn't impose hidden values on the operator

> That computers might bring that same culture of constraint and approval to the very act of thought, a kind of thinking-on-rails, is depressing.

Well, these are exactly the kind of problems the "tft community" need to engage in more.

For others, the naming (tool for thought) should not obscure the real implication of this domain : there will be 300 million college educated people by 2030, and a lot of them will be staring right at these kind of tools for hours every day.

1 comments

> the "tft community" need to engage in

If there's a way I can help them please tell me more (PM me) via Digital Vegan.

One thing I stress a great deal in my lectures is the difference between AI and IA.

Intelligence Amplification, to me, is the original purpose of computing, and while AI can aid IA, most current thinking goes the opposite way, toward usurping or minimising human intelligence. I often point to the existence of a UIX culture in which book titles like "Don't make me think" have become a tagline for an entire industry.

the "tft community" is a nebulous (like thought itself) thing centred mostly around twitter as a space, and around (again, mostly) note-taking tools as a subject. I'm not part of it.

This HN article is a nice summary. If you want a deep hyperdive into their "ways of thinking and linking" (IA is actually not that far), you can follow some rabbit holes on are.ena like this one https://www.are.na/krish/tools-for-thought-lnujvshtshi

Thanks for the pointers and the exchange Cryptic respex