Brilliant work Scott, I plan to watch again in closer detail. It's good to have confirmation that the order of numbering I currently have in my head is correct. I've been following your Antinet journey since last Friday (5 days total) when I stumbled across it, and I'm already hooked. May even say I've had 2 nights in a row with dreams featuring the Antinet! I have produced some cards, but have held off numbering them thus far as I felt I didn't have a tight enough grasp on the concept. However, I feel after looking deeper into this video; I should be able to make a good start. So, thank you Sir!

“All rights not not reserved”. That’s enough to get me on board by itself! Humor is like wine, the drier the better. It’s also really nice to see someone who agrees that the real world, with it’s physical interactions, is superior to the metaverse.

@scottscheper

2 жыл бұрын

The metaverse is a scam. 🙂

This video is pite GOLD. Thanks, Scott!!

Another class video. Really looking forward to the book 👍

This is a great follow-on to your "How Numbering Works in Zettelkasten (Antinet) Pt 2.

By combing this video with the latest one on numbering (kzread.info/dash/bejne/n31325NxhtOngbA.html), it seems that 1) Appending a slashed number to a card (~/1) is to continue (See 9:50, 11:47) on the same line of thought. 2) Appending a slashed letter (~/1A) as in 11:16 is to jump "laterally" (Out of the box) to another context (Cat as an animal -> Copycat as a person). 3) Increament of number w/o branching or appending (E.g. 10:22, 10:54) indicates another closely-related idea, but not continuation from the previous card. 4) Cards belong to the same slashed letter (~/1A) would always be filed AFTER those belonging to a slashed number (~/1) of the same level, as in 12:51. Thus, a long long idea written in one go would be sth. like 10 cards that are each branched out by appending extra (~/1)s.

I would love to see a Table of differences, advantages and disadvantages between the Digital Zettelkasten ala Obsidian and the ANTINET. I think a table would GREATLY help in seeing it all in a very visual way. Kind of like when you wanna compare iPhone 10, vs iPhone 10X, iPhone PRO and iPhone ULTRA To see what's in each and what's not !!! Thanks, Scott!!!

@jsunproter1940

Жыл бұрын

I've been mulling that exact same thing over.

Priorities for me seem to be 1.) insuring that I'll be able to find the note in the drawer when I want it; 2.) having the notes relate to each other in a logical way, where a new card "follows" the card most relevant to the train of thought it is part of; 3.) relating to a top-level "domain" of knowledge like the academic codes. Seems like there will be some arbitrariness in my box, based on WHEN I add new ideas chronologically. But that seems like it will be okay, as long as I use indexes to help me return to that idea when I need to.

The order placing child branches before the depth of the variant is what the programmers would call a "breadth first" rather than a "depth first" tree traversal.

@scottscheper

Ай бұрын

Fascinating. Thanks for sharing. Now I shall go down a rabbit hole thanks to Googling the term :) (www.geeksforgeeks.org/dfs-traversal-of-a-tree-using-recursion/)

Still confused. Even looked it up in your book and confused. Re bib notes. Let's say I read a book and took bib notes. Are these filed in separate a-z cards? Is that group of notes file in the next system under the alphabet of the author's last name? Or keynote of the topic in the next system under their letter, such as "C" and changed as you illustrated in your book and all 5 index cards of the bib notes file there? Then I pull what items will be main notes, write those on their individual cards with their source (with a numbering system?

@ceafva

Жыл бұрын

Wow, no answer, just a heart.

Not totally agree your indexing method, but it work for you👍. Things can be consider. Cards are add to existing branches, not branch out. There are two kind of branches, supplemental and complemental. Supplemental, let say 11/1,2,3,4, all four cards are notes add to the same topic, can be out of order. Complemental, 11/a,b,c,d, all four cards are variants link to a existing card. I don’t use cards, so my indexing isn’t refined, hope you get what I mean😅

thanks for making these explainers. This one is very helpful. Quick question: @8:17 you have the card 4214/17 on "Commonplace books, etc." It looks like that's the start of a "branch" (with no other real info) and that that specific card acts as an entry point that (a) you'll put on the register/index under C (Commonplace books) and maybe F (Florilesia) and (b) put the main and/or bib notes *behind*. Is that right? If so might you also put latter ExRefs on here or just on a new card latter in the # sequence?

@scottscheper

2 жыл бұрын

Yes that's right on (a). However on (b): I would not put bib notes behind it (bib notes are the bullet point notes written on bibcards). I put bibcards in the bibliography box. Re: ExRefs, yes exactly I might put ExRefs there on a new card dedicated to Commonplace Books/Florilegia ExRefs

@markpiotrowski3829

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottscheper Thanks... so that "start of a branch" (and therefore index marker) is the card's only role right? If i'm following your video you might put 4214/17/1 for the exrefs?

OMG I finally get it! ah! tah

This was a great video and it confirmed to me what I was seeing on the Luhmann website as to how the branching system works. What is still very confusing to me is how in the world are these ideas linked. I know Luhmann used an index card of keywords which acted as a door to his 90k notes. But I don't understand the linking part. I mean the value of an Atomic idea is based on how many other Atomic ideas are linking to it right, So the mind understands the concept. but how do you do that and keep track of all this stuff in your cards. Are these the numbers that appear in the bottom of each card? Other question I had, you know the 90k notes Luhmann made. When you look at the cards in consecutive order, is each atomic idea related to the next one after another or it can jump to a completely different topic.And the links to these Atomic ideas can come from other notes. When you showed ur cards in this video that 'did not branch off', were they related?

@scottscheper

2 жыл бұрын

Man I just wrote a good reply but KZread's crappy commenting closed the window without warning. Anyway, try watching this video: kzread.info/dash/bejne/c2F1w8SYo9y0ps4.html Also this guide may help: scottscheper.com/letter/1/ Everything is linked in the Antinet because every card is linked to the next card. "4214/20", "4214/20/1", "4214/20/2", "4214/20/2A". The entire Antinet is one big chain-linked system. Each card is linked and closely associated with its nearest neighboring card. Of course, in the beginning, this is less so, but over time it becomes more similar

Hello! Thank you for your content! I get the idea of branching when slashes are involved. You slash - you branch. But what about the first four numbers? Imagine I have a note number 3100. It is a name of the topic. I want to write smth on this topic. Should I make a card 3110, 3150 or 3100/1? Thank you beforehand!

@scottscheper

Жыл бұрын

Get my free guide or book for that question

I think I understand this filing order, but to make sense of it it seems we must violate another filing standard. What I mean is: I've seen it said in many places that when you're deciding where to file a card, use the standard that says to file it "directly closest to the card to which it is related." However, this vid says to file the "1A" and "1A/1" cards three cards away from the closest idea which spurred them on (4214/17/1). Thus, this seems to violate that standard because you're not filing the "1A" and "1A/1" cards directly after the 4214/17/1. So, is it true that the standard of filing cards directly closest to their related ideas doesn't always hold?

Luhmann's numbering scheme seems even less structured compared to your "antinet." Of course, Lehmann obviously didn't have the benefit of a Wikipedia article to lay out a sort of tree of knowledge like we do today. I see the benefits of having this high-level scheme in place like the antinet (e.g., 1000 for Arts and Humanities, 5000 for Applied Sciences, etc.) but I would also be curious to hear what the downfalls are. What are the disadvantages to creating broad categories and structure first?

What I don´t get it´s the use of letters. Is it used to insert cards in the middle of a preexisting sequence?

@scottscheper

Жыл бұрын

Yes; and also, think of them as "Variations" (i.e., variations of the idea expressed on the prior card).

@AndersonSilva-vb3fy

Жыл бұрын

@@scottscheper Ok, but the definition of "variations" is really thought for me. Instead of 4000/1/1a why not 4000/1/1/1? I think the book will cover this. Can´t wait to dig in. Thank you for all the sharing you´ve been doing.

Obviously, bullshit-productivity-guys exist, but it's not necessarily to despise digital systems, the real criterion is result of your work, I have 2 years of digital system, works brilliant, knowledge grows, thinking evolves, made my MA that way, preparing other materials etc. I understand anger that the name of a valuable method has passed into circulation, used as something similar but quite different, but don't be upset too much, postmen do not make noise because email is called mail. Anyway, nice to see interesting analog system, keep my fingers crossed for good results:))

@marekkrzysztofiak2583

2 жыл бұрын

Sometimes I was curious, what some productivity gurus do with their productivity apart from selling productivity stuff and making yt channels, lol

It would be much easier to process if you began with the beginning numbers. Begin with the easy then work towards the complex.

aug/2022 1:30 reference number oct/21/2023