Massive Screencasting Video Series Released - Check the front page!

[Joseph Buchignani]

As the reverend said, I am excited. 

I got a good Windows laptop which finally allowed me to do some quality screencasting. Sorry Linux but... your screencasting and video editing are medieval. 

The result? About 50 minutes of screencasting covering every single step from installation to a case study demo using real-world problems for the basic Cyborganize Execution Loop. 

Just go to the front page for the workflow demo, and when you're done watching, click the link at the bottom of the page to see the installation and config tutorials. 

Sorry I still have a lot of work to do fixing internal links and redoing content, but all the links on the "pages" pane on the right will always work. 

PS I can't wait to hear what you guys think... the reception on the previous "execution loop" video was very good and it had barely ANY screencasting. This is ALL screencasting. I'm HOPING this will end the "incomprehensibility" stigma. Too optimistic??? You tell me! cyborganize.org

[Simon]

lol, I thought I was beginning to get a handle on Cyborganize, then
you release those videos and it reframes everything again. Well done,
mate, I mean it.

On Sep 9, 6:58 pm, Joseph Buchignani <joseph.buchign...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> As the reverend said, I am excited.
>
> I got a good Windows laptop which finally allowed me to do some quality
> screencasting. Sorry Linux but... your screencasting and video editing are
> medieval.
>
> The result? About 50 minutes of screencasting covering every single step
> from installation to a case study demo using real-world problems for the
> basic Cyborganize Execution Loop.
>

> Just go to the front page <http://cyborganize.org> for the workflow demo,

[Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu)]

First of all, congratulations!

Going through the videos: number 1 stops abruptly at 5' 05". Some issue in the upload?

Expect actual comments on the videos during and after the week-end.

[Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu)]

Tried them (not actually followed them) all; the first five are interrupted between 5' and 6' after start. Can't be a coincidence. Video 6, the shortest, with a bit more than 6' duration, plays to the end.

[Joseph Buchignani]

it's intentional - i put up a big red note explaining it. i split the videos into 5 minute sections and then there was some blank time accidentally added onto the ends of them

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu) <a...@sympraxis.eu> wrote:

Tried them (not actually followed them) all; the first five are interrupted between 5' and 6' after start. Can't be a coincidence. Video 6, the shortest, with a bit more than 6' duration, plays to the end.

--
Ignore the following. It is a nonsense sentence that disables Google ads from displaying next to my emails by triggering sensitive keywords.

I enjoy the massacre of ads. This sentence will slaughter ads without a messy bloodbath.

[Chris Murtland]

The screencasts are very helpful for actually understanding the system.

I'm experimenting with using Brainstorm as my main control center due to its speed and granularity, although my approach is still very different than yours at this point.

Any comments on the following scenarios?

1. Future task ideas and expansion on existing tasks: I often have ideas or remember details about tasks I am going to do in the future or ones that have previously been started (many of my tasks cannot be completed in one sitting). They are usually technical details I need to remember for the task or an expansion of what first seemed like a single task into quite a few sub-tasks. I like Brainstorm for this since I can simply add any of this detail underneath the original item. Also, these new tasks often represent dependencies, in that I can't complete the parent task until I've completed the children. I currently just find the task in Brainstorm and add the detail as soon as I think of it (which also makes it immediately available when the time comes to do the task), but how would you do this in your system? It seems like you go back out to a scratch file for any expansion of a particular task, but why not just put it directly in Brainstorm?

2. Scratch files and blog posts optional depending on the type of task: Many of my tasks are programming tasks, and I just open up the code and go to it; I don't see how either a scratch file or posting something to a blog would apply in this case. Other examples - writing a song, painting a painting, creating a spreadsheet, etc. It seems the scratch file/blog combo really applies mainly to writing or thinking; other forms of production require different tools.

3. Record of completed tasks: I sometimes have to reconstruct past work (with dates and times) in order to debug an unintended consequence of a code change within a complex system or to communicate with clients about something already done. Do you do anything with actions once completed in actionables.brn?

[Joseph Buchignani]

"1. Future task ideas and expansion on existing tasks: I often have ideas or remember details about tasks I am going to do in the future or ones that have previously been started (many of my tasks cannot be completed in one sitting)." 

I typically add these as actionables with a reference to outside information if required. Then they get sorted in BrainStormSW in the next batch and wind up included with the relevant task if they are important. 

"They are usually technical details I need to remember for the task or an expansion of what first seemed like a single task into quite a few sub-tasks. I like Brainstorm for this since I can simply add any of this detail underneath the original item." 

You are doing unnecessary work by finding the actionables within BrainStormSW just to add something underneath it. Just add it to the bottom of your actioanbles file and then sort it later. If you are currently doing the task, add it to that scratch file. 

"Also, these new tasks often represent dependencies, in that I can't complete the parent task until I've completed the children."

This method works fine for dependencies too. It's obviously better if you can keep things in contiguous scratch files from the outset, but if your ideation is fragmented across time you can still reintegrate that stuff by the method I described above. As a last resort you can always do a BrainStormSW sort on your notes.org file if things become too fragmented, but this is rarely necessary. 

"I currently just find the task in Brainstorm and add the detail as soon as I think of it (which also makes it immediately available when the time comes to do the task), but how would you do this in your system? It seems like you go back out to a scratch file for any expansion of a particular task, but why not just put it directly in Brainstorm?"

For fragments I add them directly to the relevant .org chron tapes, bypassing the scratch file system. They don't go in the blog either, which is only for longform stuff. 

"2. Scratch files and blog posts optional depending on the type of task: Many of my tasks are programming tasks, and I just open up the code and go to it; I don't see how either a scratch file or posting something to a blog would apply in this case."

If no organization is required for the task then simply execute it. I find having a scratch file open with at least the task description to be helpful for focus. You may find yourself capturing things there that you would otherwise try to hold in your head, slowing you down and making you dumber. It's a good habit. 

"Other examples - writing a song, painting a painting, creating a spreadsheet, etc. It seems the scratch file/blog combo really applies mainly to writing or thinking; other forms of production require different tools."

Above answer applies to these other tasks as well as programming. 

"3. Record of completed tasks: I sometimes have to reconstruct past work (with dates and times) in order to debug an unintended consequence of a code change within a complex system or to communicate with clients about something already done. Do you do anything with actions once completed in actionables.brn?"

Best way to do this is to track completions in your scratch files. If you have a specific need that can't be met by that method, then perhaps a new chron tape just for datestamped work summaries and completion times might be appropriate. The default system is pretty good for reconstructing past work but won't scale past a certain point. 

I used multiple methods to reconstruct my work when I was interested in that goal: 

1. Take screenshots every two minutes using a script and review them daily/weekly to build work/time summary

2. Use RescueTime and browser history

3. Refer to scrach files and chron tapes with datestamps

4. Refer to daily journal entries. 

Building complete records of your work is time-consuming however and not worthwhile to most people.

[Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu)]

OK; I admit I didn't expect that much blankness... It also seemed strange that the speech is cut off at rather incomplete sentences. Thanks.

[Joseph Buchignani]

I just redid that section, it will be fixed in under an hour

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu) <a...@sympraxis.eu> wrote:

OK; I admit I didn't expect that much blankness... It also seemed strange that the speech is cut off at rather incomplete sentences. Thanks.

[Chris Murtland]

Joseph Buchignani wrote:
> You are doing unnecessary work by finding the actionables within
> BrainStormSW just to add something underneath it. Just add it to
> the bottom of your actioanbles file and then sort it later. If you
> are currently doing the task, add it to that scratch file.

It seems like it's just that the load is located on a different point in the process - I might spend 5 seconds locating the BSW entry to capture new stuff beneath it, but I have obviated the need for later processing of the material.

> I find having a scratch file open with at least the task
> description to be helpful for focus. You may find yourself
> capturing things there that you would otherwise try to hold in your
> head, slowing you down and making you dumber. It's a good habit.

Doesn't promoting the action to a headline in BSW offer the same degree of focus (one line of text with blank space beneath)? I do keep a split screen in BSW, with the current focus on the right and the rest of the model on the left (so I can capture stuff that occurs to me at its proper place in the model if needed, although I am mainly doing that between actions rather than during); arguably, seeing some unrelated part of the model on the left could decrease my focus, but I usually don't feel as if it does, and if it does seem that way I can switch to a single screen with only the task at hand promoted.

> Building complete records of your work is time-consuming however
> and not worthwhile to most people.

Currently I use Macro Express for keyboard shortcuts, so if I type "`cn" it prepends "Completed 9/10/2011 5:23 PM | " to the action entry. So, the logging happens as fast as I can type. However, it does mean my model is filling up with completed tasks - useful at times, but not as "clean" as how you have only possible actions in your actionables.brn file.

I guess my main hurdle is why I need separate text files when BSW is essentially a text editor (with some unique abilities).

[Joseph Buchignani]

Chris, you're asking good questions, which makes me happy not worried because I have good answers. 

Seriously, it is seriously pleasant to have this level of questioning, rather than still dealing with questions like "what is Cyborganize?" Thank God maybe I'm past that stage now. 

Joseph Buchignani wrote:

> You are doing unnecessary work by finding the actionables within

> BrainStormSW just to add something underneath it. Just add it to

> the bottom of your actioanbles file and then sort it later. If you

> are currently doing the task, add it to that scratch file.

"It seems like it's just that the load is located on a different point in the process - I might spend 5 seconds locating the BSW entry to capture new stuff beneath it, but I have obviated the need for later processing of the material."

You're ignoring the task switching cost. Task switching might be the largest productivity drain on knowledge workers. If you interrupt yourself to navigate the BrainStormSW outline every time you want to capture an actionable, you will inhibit actionable capture in order to avoid that work, and that navigation process will slow down your focused work session. Particularly as models get larger. That's why I batch my BrainStormSW processing. Sorting your outline is cognitively intensive because you tend to load up a map of outline to do a really good job. 

Try capturing the actionables in a chronological tape for later batch processing and see if your actionable capture volume goes up and your focus and endurance increases. 

> I find having a scratch file open with at least the task

> description to be helpful for focus. You may find yourself

> capturing things there that you would otherwise try to hold in your

> head, slowing you down and making you dumber. It's a good habit.

"Doesn't promoting the action to a headline in BSW offer the same degree of focus (one line of text with blank space beneath)? I do keep a split screen in BSW, with the current focus on the right and the rest of the model on the left (so I can capture stuff that occurs to me at its proper place in the model if needed, although I am mainly doing that between actions rather than during); arguably, seeing some unrelated part of the model on the left could decrease my focus, but I usually don't feel as if it does, and if it does seem that way I can switch to a single screen with only the task at hand promoted."

Yes it provides the same degree of focus, however not the same degree of flexibility. A text editor is better at capturing and editing text on the fly than BrainStormSW is. Emacs in particular offers a lot of flexible and powerful hotkeys. Using BrainStormSW in the way you describe is fine for really simple list-oriented stuff, but for richer paragraphs or more structured thought sequences a scratch text file is better.

And of course fighting the inflexibility of the interface as you're trying to write down your thoughts and execute the task will reduce your focus.  

> Building complete records of your work is time-consuming however

> and not worthwhile to most people.

"Currently I use Macro Express for keyboard shortcuts, so if I type "`cn" it prepends "Completed 9/10/2011 5:23 PM | " to the action entry. So, the logging happens as fast as I can type. However, it does mean my model is filling up with completed tasks - useful at times, but not as "clean" as how you have only possible actions in your actionables.brn file."

Exactly. Your model is filling up with completed tasks. These present all kinds of sorting problems. They greatly constrain the flexibility with which you can restructure your outline to better reflect your current task queue, because you have to maintain a structure that gives the completed tasks meaningful positions. This is terrible for rapidly pivoting. (I use "pivot" in the startup sense.) Plus you're constantly rereading those completed tasks, which are irrelevant. Cleaner = better focus = better cognitive performance.

Also, the time costs of detailed work logging and reconstruction depend on how fine-grained you want your tracking to be, and how much task switching and ambiguity in task/category assignment you have. It sounds like your needs and behavior aren't generating a burdensome workload. 

"I guess my main hurdle is why I need separate text files when BSW is essentially a text editor (with some unique abilities)."

BSW is not essentially a text editor, it is essentially a rapid hyper-focused outliner. As a text editor, it is severely lacking. I can write high volumes of readable, well-structured text much better in Emacs Org-Mode than in BrainStormSW. I can also do focused work sessions with serial tasks better in Org-Mode, because I'm more free to use white space to mark transitions in thought, etc. On the other hand, I can organize concepts and tasks much faster in BSW. 

Also, having separate text files allows you to freely delete stuff from your BSW model without worrying about data loss. That kind of freedom is invaluable during cognitively-intensive sorting. The more constraints you impose the more exponentially difficult it becomes. 

Also, text files preserve the chronological order of your thoughts. 

Also, text files scale above 4 mb while BSW tends to choke there, at least on Linux. And text files never crash or get corrupted or accidentally lose data through user error. And they're open-standard whereas BSW files aren't. Etc.

The Cyborganize process should minimize the penalties stemming from data duplication across BSW and your text files. 

[Chris Murtland]

Some good points. I guess the main thing would be for me to actually try it out for at least a week or so instead of trying to conceptually internalize it beforehand or spend too much time comparing it to how I currently do things.

Joseph Buchignani wrote:
> Also, the time costs of detailed work logging and reconstruction
> depend on how fine-grained you want your tracking to be, and how
> much task switching and ambiguity in task/category assignment you
> have. It sounds like your needs and behavior aren't generating a
> burdensome workload.

Well, it feels burdensome to me. ;-) I have a large number of tasks, but the time cost of logging is necessary since I bill by the hour. Every minute unaccounted for equates to lost income. But I already have a separate system for that logging that adds everything up for billing, so my need to stamp things as completed in the outline or even leave them there really makes no sense, except in regard to personal stuff which could be "remembered" in some other way (longform writing, for example).

The redundancy of your system does appeal to me - I have a strange abhorrence of deleting anything, so the ability to do so in certain contexts would probably be liberating. When creating traditional databases for people, having the same info in multiple places is a recipe for disaster, so I'm probably just erroneously extending too many years of that into a realm where it need not apply.

Anyway, I'll stop theorizing and just try it.

[Joseph Buchignani]

Nice, glad to have you on board. 

By the way, your abhorrence is anything but strange. It's called "fear of loss" and it's one of the most powerful human emotions. It will spike anxiety through the roof which greatly impedes efficient work. In fact BSW sorting itself is inherently destructive, so we avoid this source of anxiety by duplicating to text files. 

If the time tracking issue is of sufficient interest maybe I'll do a series on that as well. The screenshotting is the key but I also pull together multiple other sources of data in a multi-step process. I quit doing that a while ago though.

[Alexander Deliyannis - SYMPRAXIS Team (eu)]

Sorry for barging in; this may be a minor point but I think it is worth noting.

On Sunday, September 11, 2011 1:13:51 AM UTC+3, Joseph Buchignani wrote:

> You are doing unnecessary work by finding the actionables within

> BrainStormSW just to add something underneath it. Just add it to

> the bottom of your actioanbles file and then sort it later. If you

> are currently doing the task, add it to that scratch file.

"It seems like it's just that the load is located on a different point in the process - I might spend 5 seconds locating the BSW entry to capture new stuff beneath it, but I have obviated the need for later processing of the material."

You're ignoring the task switching cost. Task switching might be the largest productivity drain on knowledge workers.

Most definitely. What I write below doesn't contradict this, it's more of a technical issue.
 

If you interrupt yourself to navigate the BrainStormSW outline every time you want to capture an actionable, you will inhibit actionable capture in order to avoid that work, and that navigation process will slow down your focused work session.

I think there is an issue here of familiarity with the software. BrainstormSW (I hope the name has finally been sorted out by the way) has a few decades of history behind it and, as a result, offers several smart ways to do things that may not be so obvious at first.

For example, if I wanted to note something under a particular project, I wouldn't need to navigate anywhere. As long as I were located in the right Brainstorm model (and one single model would be more than enough to use as a universal scratch file) all I would do is:

• Type the standard title for my project; I use naming conventions such as [CUSTOMER-PROJECT]. Immediately, a namesake would be created which would include any subsidiary entries already there
• Promote the title to heading (press Home)
• Press Ctrl+PgDn to navigate to the end of the subsidiary info
• Type what I had in mind
• Demote the heading (press End)
• Delete the namesake; the info I entered is safely stored in the original location
  
• Carry on with my work; again, I haven't changed location, so the interruption hasn't really been longer than finding my actionables file and noting my info there.

What's more, I can use this approach for anything, not just actionables. I could also place a word like <action> or <note> just before the snippet, which would help in later retrieval.

As I said earlier on, there's an issue of familiarity with the tools at hand, so that their use becomes transparent to the workflow. I would not try to learn a new tool in order to implement the methodology, if I can easily do the same things in my environment of choice.


P.S. Is there any way to 'promote' this branch of the conversation to a separate thread?