In the Obsidian world, there's a whole sub-industry of "influencers" whose sole business revolves around making videos and content on how to use the tool, how to organize your files, how to get...
In the Obsidian world, there's a whole sub-industry of "influencers" whose sole business revolves around making videos and content on how to use the tool, how to organize your files, how to get things done, how to boost your productivity, what are the best plugins, etc.
These influencers are effectively influencing users in believing that note taking apps like Obsidian are terrifying beasts you need to tame to get your life in order, and you can't use them without following a 3-hours guide to setup your perfect environment. That's bullshit. At most, all you need is a cheat sheet for things like org-mode.
What I mean is, you don't need backlinks, tags, tables of content, or that useless pretty graph. You just need to open the tool and write stuff you can retrieve. Organization will naturally and organically come later from you, and if you ever need a more solid method to do it, you'll know it.
Plenty of people just use a single huge .txt file they ctrl+f in notepad.exe
Are they? I've watched dozens of hours of this content but have not been influenced. Some probably have. How do we know how many? I started with vanilla Obsidian and set up new features as I went,...
These influencers are effectively influencing users in believing that note taking apps like Obsidian are terrifying beasts you need to tame to get your life in order, and you can't use them without following a 3-hours guide to setup your perfect environment.
Are they? I've watched dozens of hours of this content but have not been influenced. Some probably have. How do we know how many?
I started with vanilla Obsidian and set up new features as I went, on a per-need basis. I am very grateful for all the available content that lets me quickly evaluate whether or not some plugin or tool is what I need to build the thing I'm aiming for.
What do you mean? You absolutely can "use Obsidian without following a 3-hour guide", and I have done so. But you cannot build a custom life/task/project management solution that comprises of...
What do you mean?
You absolutely can "use Obsidian without following a 3-hour guide", and I have done so.
But you cannot build a custom life/task/project management solution that comprises of three separate vaults, a host of plugins and a bunch of custom code, without first learning about the capabilities and their extendability. YouTube content is one way to get acquainted enough to start building.
I feel like you're bashing the people who make video tutorials because some part of the audience will just go and replicate them, without considering what features they actually need or want and why. It seems an unnecessarily salty point of view.
I think that the point being made is that this sort of thing for many people is simply overkill. Most people do not need any of that in order to get started with simply taking notes.
But you cannot build a custom life/task/project management solution that comprises of three separate vaults, a host of plugins and a bunch of custom code, without first learning about the capabilities and their extendability
I think that the point being made is that this sort of thing for many people is simply overkill. Most people do not need any of that in order to get started with simply taking notes.
I'm just being critical of the way some people equate "myself" with "most people" without giving it any further thought. If I personally only use Obsidian for note taking, I automatically believe...
I think that the point being made is that this sort of thing for many people is simply overkill. Most people do not need any of that in order to get started with simply taking notes.
I'm just being critical of the way some people equate "myself" with "most people" without giving it any further thought.
If I personally only use Obsidian for note taking, I automatically believe the same applies to most other people too. I do see many people install plugins and watch tutorials, but rather than question my base assumption, I say these people must be misguided as those are not necessary for note taking. I get aggravated by how many people must be misguided because all these tutorials are getting so many views. I then become critical of those who make tutorials, believing they're leading people astray.
I could equally well say: 'Obsidian is influencing people in believing you need a dedicated note taking app when all you need is a .txt file'. But what's the value in that statement?
It would be more honest to say: 'I don't need a dedicated note taking app, a .txt file does the job fine', or: 'I became bedazzled with YouTube content without realising I didn't need the bells and whistles for my note taking'.
While fairly benign in this context, intellectual laziness combined with negativity can and does cause real harm, so I try to call it out when I see it.
I honestly think you are taking this too personal. What was said is that there is an entire industry of influencers creating the impression you need to invest a lot of time of effort to...
I honestly think you are taking this too personal. What was said is that there is an entire industry of influencers creating the impression you need to invest a lot of time of effort to effectively use these tools.
Which isn't the case at all. Sure, you can invest a lot of extra time and effort and that's absolutely okay to do so. But to simply get started with note taking it isn't a base requirement, that's all.
You are right that the thought pattern I described above hurts me personally. I have ADHD and I've been hurt by the othering that results from it all my life. Therefore I'm probably exceptionally...
You are right that the thought pattern I described above hurts me personally. I have ADHD and I've been hurt by the othering that results from it all my life. Therefore I'm probably exceptionally sensitive to detecting that pattern and pointing it out.
In addition, Obsidian has improved my productivity so much that I'm still having to occasionally pinch myself to believe it. I hate seeing content creators discouraged just because some part of people (and we really can't know if it actually is most people) get carried away consuming the content.
Sorry, my intent wasn't to personally attack anyone, @creesh nicely summed up and reiterated my point with their responses. It just seems that you and I may be both outliers at opposite ends of...
Sorry, my intent wasn't to personally attack anyone, @creesh nicely summed up and reiterated my point with their responses. It just seems that you and I may be both outliers at opposite ends of the "Obsidian user" spectrum.
For the context, I used to be fairly involved in the Obsidian community, so I've seen many newcomers being completely lost because they were drowning in a see of content that they were seeing as necessary to absorb and understand, and afraid to use the tool wrong.
NBD. YouTube absolutely has content creators who aim to generate addiction and confusion in order to drive engagement, which is obviously not okay. If there are some in the Obsidian community,...
NBD. YouTube absolutely has content creators who aim to generate addiction and confusion in order to drive engagement, which is obviously not okay. If there are some in the Obsidian community, they get a thumbs down from me as soon as I see one. I just don't think I've seen any so far (and yes, I am also an outlier).
When you implied that having consumed a substantial amount of Obsidian tutorials proves your point, I got the impression that you believe people shouldn't create involved tutorials or vault tours at all. As in: there's no healthy way to be exposed to them. How else would you be able to determine that my exposure wasn't healthy?
I really like the idea of infinite outliner in orgmode, workflowy etc. but I don't know emacs so I just use an outliner plugin in obsidian. Even in obsidian I just use it as flexible tabbed notes...
I really like the idea of infinite outliner in orgmode, workflowy etc. but I don't know emacs so I just use an outliner plugin in obsidian. Even in obsidian I just use it as flexible tabbed notes without backlinks at all. Still haven't found a proper use for backlinks.
Plain text is cool and all but one thing I want to build/not yet seen is a planner text editor that can create google calendar events, or one that can take in deadlines as you go, and make reminder displays etc. (in3days). Right now I just have a daily note in obsidian that has 2 bullet points every 3 hours, 6am-9pm, 10 items total. Better than daily plan, more flexible than time blocking Cal Newport style.
For research I just dedicate a computer folder + index.txt file to write in and just throw links/documents etc in there.
If you have time to waste on setup and would consider something with a lighter footprint than Obsidian there’s always vimwiki + taskwarrior + something like this that allegedly syncs tw and...
If you have time to waste on setup and would
consider something with a lighter footprint than Obsidian there’s always vimwiki + taskwarrior + something like this that allegedly syncs tw and caldev/gcal/etc…
Interesting factoid: the developers of Obsidian actually started out with a infinite outliner, Dynalist (a cheap way to validate this, see the publisher of the Obsidian Android app). It's...
Interesting factoid: the developers of Obsidian actually started out with a infinite outliner, Dynalist (a cheap way to validate this, see the publisher of the Obsidian Android app). It's basicially on infinite hiatius from what I can see, so probably not worth investigating.
I use org-roam. I was never truly sold on the zettlekasten or second brain concepts of notes as that seems like way too much overhead to maintain unless you have very specific (and usually...
I use org-roam. I was never truly sold on the zettlekasten or second brain concepts of notes as that seems like way too much overhead to maintain unless you have very specific (and usually academic) goals. I began using org-roam just because it removed a barrier of placing information within the correct hierarchy in more monolithic notes. I never really heavily link notes nor look at backlinks as suggested. For me it was incredibly liberating to not worry about where a note should live in relation to other info but just make a new node. Some things that make org-roam more useful for me:
Making notes that prevent me from having to "reinvent the wheel" so to speak. For example, I have a node for SSH that contains all the things I need to know about SSH. So whenever I need to include info about SSH in a note (say for a server setup) I just link that node instead of having to rewrite the basics or copy and paste.
I'll make a Map of Content (MOC) for things that are interrelated for my thought processes. For example, I keep a node for each self-hosted service I run (or ran in the past). I interrelate them with MOC that is basically a table of contents for my stack of info on self-hosted services.
Tools with full text search, such as consult-ripgrep, allow me to not even worry about linking nodes. I just search for something and the nodes with matching info will be found most of the time. I just rely on following my own instincts on how I would have stored and written the info and I almost always find what I'm looking for right away. This only fails when, I assume I saved some info that doesn't exist and I waste time trying different queries for a thing that doesn't exist.
I don't constrain myself to using org-roam. If it makes more sense to use a monolithic note or to keep it out of roam I do that. For instance my todo lists and inbox files don't live in roam since its not info I intend to store long term.
The things I don't like:
There is no easy way to export org-roam notes (with working links) to something like an HTML format. I know something like that could be written but I'm not a programmer so it is currently beyond me.
There are no mobile apps on iOS that handle org-roam setups well.
I never use the org-roam buffer, but I might actually look at backlinks if they were included in the note in some fashion. So I have been eyeballing org-node for this functionality, but haven't made the effort to give it a try yet.
Ditto for me, but with Obsidian (although I migrated from org-roam). The Zettlekasten stuff effectively provides a useful framework, but I don't subscribe to it. And search works great with...
Ditto for me, but with Obsidian (although I migrated from org-roam). The Zettlekasten stuff effectively provides a useful framework, but I don't subscribe to it. And search works great with Obsidian's native tooling, and if I needed something more powerful, it's just text at the end of the day.
That might be, like, the Platonic ideal of how Org Roam "wants" things to work, but I really don't see any reason why you have to do things like this. It's totally reasonable to use Org Roam as...
Most of the time, the only reason I link stuff is that it feels like this is how you Roam. Linking in Roam does not feel human because you have to do it in the opposite direction from how you normally would.
I can't just make a list of things, no, no no! That is too simple. My grandma would understand that. Come on! In Org-roam, the correct way is to add a file or a node for every single item in that list and then link from the item to its category --- and when I am in the node for the category, I can toggle the backlinks sidebar and BOOM! There's my list!
That might be, like, the Platonic ideal of how Org Roam "wants" things to work, but I really don't see any reason why you have to do things like this. It's totally reasonable to use Org Roam as merely a set of convenient Org Mode features.
Here's how I've landed on using Org Roam, at least for now. Most of my notes are hierarchical, just like in regular Org Mode usage. When I need to take a new note, I jump to the parent in the hierarchy and add a new headline. You can make any headline into a node via org-id-get-create, which I guess I should bind to something considering how often I use it. (C-c i c?) I'm usually able to remember the hierarchical structure well enough that it's not a problem determining where I should put a note. One-off notes that don't have anywhere sensible to go get their own files.
I haven't fully implemented this concept, but one could imagine customizing the default org-roam-node-find function to automatically narrow the buffer to the targeted node. This would let one retain the "feel" of the "one file per node" approach while offering the ability to view things hierarchically when convenient. One could also imagine advising or overriding some low-level function like org-roam-backlinks-get to make Org Roam "think" that every child node references its parent node. org-roam-ui sort of behaves like this.
I do have my own gripes about Org Roam and Org Mode in general, but in a way that anyone who uses an imperfect tool will have gripes.
Although Org Roam mostly works with non-file-level nodes, it's annoyingly opinionated in a few areas. As far as I can tell, Org Roam's custom capture system basically assumes that every node is going to get its own file, so you really can't use it if you aren't going to conform to that paradigm---you have to hack the standard Org capture system instead. Also, org-roam-ui simply won't display a node if the file it belongs to isn't itself a node. (I think this is a bug, but the project hasn't received any commits in years, and I'm not familiar enough with web stuff to fix the issue efficiently.) Really, the fact that Org Roam considers files to be the "primary" information unit is at odds with Org Mode, which mostly considers files to be fairly unimportant in comparison to headlines.
I have had trouble getting utility out of the backlinks buffer. This is partially due to the fact that Emacs is notoriously impolite when it comes to respecting your window layout, and partially because I use LaTeX heavily, and I haven't put in the work to make it automatically render in the backlinks buffer.
Org Mode doesn't have a file management solution that does what I want it to. The closest thing is org-attach, which, uh, attaches a file to a node (or a file). But I don't necessarily want a file to be "owned" by a node. Instead, I'd like some sort of "semantic filesystem" in which files and nodes have a many-to-many relationship.
Org Roam and Org Mode in general are missing a bunch of features that Obsidian users take for granted. I really, really miss the ability to at least view notes on my phones, and I would actually find it very useful to be able to easily publish my notes online. Also, the lack of any sort of sync feature isn't a problem for me, since I'm a heavy Syncthing user, but I imagine it would be irritating to a version of me who didn't already know how to use Syncthing.
Also worth noting is the existence of org-node, which is a compatible "implementation" of Org Roam that addresses some of the author's issues (it purports to be faster, and it doesn't use an sqlite database).
Finally: while I'm something of an Emacs loyalist, I really respect the Obsidian team. They've done something that's pretty rare these days: they've built software that makes the world better without tying themselves to VC money.
In the Obsidian world, there's a whole sub-industry of "influencers" whose sole business revolves around making videos and content on how to use the tool, how to organize your files, how to get things done, how to boost your productivity, what are the best plugins, etc.
These influencers are effectively influencing users in believing that note taking apps like Obsidian are terrifying beasts you need to tame to get your life in order, and you can't use them without following a 3-hours guide to setup your perfect environment. That's bullshit. At most, all you need is a cheat sheet for things like org-mode.
What I mean is, you don't need backlinks, tags, tables of content, or that useless pretty graph. You just need to open the tool and write stuff you can retrieve. Organization will naturally and organically come later from you, and if you ever need a more solid method to do it, you'll know it.
Plenty of people just use a single huge .txt file they ctrl+f in notepad.exe
Are they? I've watched dozens of hours of this content but have not been influenced. Some probably have. How do we know how many?
I started with vanilla Obsidian and set up new features as I went, on a per-need basis. I am very grateful for all the available content that lets me quickly evaluate whether or not some plugin or tool is what I need to build the thing I'm aiming for.
Well, if you've watched dozens of hours of content about a markdown editor, it looks like the influencers are doing a great job about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What do you mean?
You absolutely can "use Obsidian without following a 3-hour guide", and I have done so.
But you cannot build a custom life/task/project management solution that comprises of three separate vaults, a host of plugins and a bunch of custom code, without first learning about the capabilities and their extendability. YouTube content is one way to get acquainted enough to start building.
I feel like you're bashing the people who make video tutorials because some part of the audience will just go and replicate them, without considering what features they actually need or want and why. It seems an unnecessarily salty point of view.
I think that the point being made is that this sort of thing for many people is simply overkill. Most people do not need any of that in order to get started with simply taking notes.
I'm just being critical of the way some people equate "myself" with "most people" without giving it any further thought.
If I personally only use Obsidian for note taking, I automatically believe the same applies to most other people too. I do see many people install plugins and watch tutorials, but rather than question my base assumption, I say these people must be misguided as those are not necessary for note taking. I get aggravated by how many people must be misguided because all these tutorials are getting so many views. I then become critical of those who make tutorials, believing they're leading people astray.
I could equally well say: 'Obsidian is influencing people in believing you need a dedicated note taking app when all you need is a .txt file'. But what's the value in that statement?
It would be more honest to say: 'I don't need a dedicated note taking app, a .txt file does the job fine', or: 'I became bedazzled with YouTube content without realising I didn't need the bells and whistles for my note taking'.
While fairly benign in this context, intellectual laziness combined with negativity can and does cause real harm, so I try to call it out when I see it.
I honestly think you are taking this too personal. What was said is that there is an entire industry of influencers creating the impression you need to invest a lot of time of effort to effectively use these tools.
Which isn't the case at all. Sure, you can invest a lot of extra time and effort and that's absolutely okay to do so. But to simply get started with note taking it isn't a base requirement, that's all.
You are right that the thought pattern I described above hurts me personally. I have ADHD and I've been hurt by the othering that results from it all my life. Therefore I'm probably exceptionally sensitive to detecting that pattern and pointing it out.
In addition, Obsidian has improved my productivity so much that I'm still having to occasionally pinch myself to believe it. I hate seeing content creators discouraged just because some part of people (and we really can't know if it actually is most people) get carried away consuming the content.
Live and let live?
Sorry, my intent wasn't to personally attack anyone, @creesh nicely summed up and reiterated my point with their responses. It just seems that you and I may be both outliers at opposite ends of the "Obsidian user" spectrum.
For the context, I used to be fairly involved in the Obsidian community, so I've seen many newcomers being completely lost because they were drowning in a see of content that they were seeing as necessary to absorb and understand, and afraid to use the tool wrong.
NBD. YouTube absolutely has content creators who aim to generate addiction and confusion in order to drive engagement, which is obviously not okay. If there are some in the Obsidian community, they get a thumbs down from me as soon as I see one. I just don't think I've seen any so far (and yes, I am also an outlier).
When you implied that having consumed a substantial amount of Obsidian tutorials proves your point, I got the impression that you believe people shouldn't create involved tutorials or vault tours at all. As in: there's no healthy way to be exposed to them. How else would you be able to determine that my exposure wasn't healthy?
Anyway, thanks for clarifying!
If you have time to waste on setup and would
consider something with a lighter footprint than Obsidian there’s always vimwiki + taskwarrior + something like this that allegedly syncs
twand caldev/gcal/etc…Interesting factoid: the developers of Obsidian actually started out with a infinite outliner, Dynalist (a cheap way to validate this, see the publisher of the Obsidian Android app). It's basicially on infinite hiatius from what I can see, so probably not worth investigating.
I use org-roam. I was never truly sold on the zettlekasten or second brain concepts of notes as that seems like way too much overhead to maintain unless you have very specific (and usually academic) goals. I began using org-roam just because it removed a barrier of placing information within the correct hierarchy in more monolithic notes. I never really heavily link notes nor look at backlinks as suggested. For me it was incredibly liberating to not worry about where a note should live in relation to other info but just make a new node. Some things that make org-roam more useful for me:
The things I don't like:
Ditto for me, but with Obsidian (although I migrated from org-roam). The Zettlekasten stuff effectively provides a useful framework, but I don't subscribe to it. And search works great with Obsidian's native tooling, and if I needed something more powerful, it's just text at the end of the day.
That might be, like, the Platonic ideal of how Org Roam "wants" things to work, but I really don't see any reason why you have to do things like this. It's totally reasonable to use Org Roam as merely a set of convenient Org Mode features.
Here's how I've landed on using Org Roam, at least for now. Most of my notes are hierarchical, just like in regular Org Mode usage. When I need to take a new note, I jump to the parent in the hierarchy and add a new headline. You can make any headline into a node via
org-id-get-create, which I guess I should bind to something considering how often I use it. (C-c i c?) I'm usually able to remember the hierarchical structure well enough that it's not a problem determining where I should put a note. One-off notes that don't have anywhere sensible to go get their own files.I haven't fully implemented this concept, but one could imagine customizing the default
org-roam-node-findfunction to automatically narrow the buffer to the targeted node. This would let one retain the "feel" of the "one file per node" approach while offering the ability to view things hierarchically when convenient. One could also imagine advising or overriding some low-level function likeorg-roam-backlinks-getto make Org Roam "think" that every child node references its parent node. org-roam-ui sort of behaves like this.I do have my own gripes about Org Roam and Org Mode in general, but in a way that anyone who uses an imperfect tool will have gripes.
org-roam-uisimply won't display a node if the file it belongs to isn't itself a node. (I think this is a bug, but the project hasn't received any commits in years, and I'm not familiar enough with web stuff to fix the issue efficiently.) Really, the fact that Org Roam considers files to be the "primary" information unit is at odds with Org Mode, which mostly considers files to be fairly unimportant in comparison to headlines.org-attach, which, uh, attaches a file to a node (or a file). But I don't necessarily want a file to be "owned" by a node. Instead, I'd like some sort of "semantic filesystem" in which files and nodes have a many-to-many relationship.Also worth noting is the existence of org-node, which is a compatible "implementation" of Org Roam that addresses some of the author's issues (it purports to be faster, and it doesn't use an sqlite database).
Finally: while I'm something of an Emacs loyalist, I really respect the Obsidian team. They've done something that's pretty rare these days: they've built software that makes the world better without tying themselves to VC money.