Keep a large network and cut out as needed

Long-term intellectual production policy - I think keeping a Large Network and as necessary start a fire (with flint, by rubbing sticks together, etc.) is intellectually productive in the long run. - First, create a knowledge network with [integrity - I'm going to add a little more and accumulate a little more. - Image of water falling and pooling from stalactites - It is important to maintain consistency rather than accumulate random information - Grounded in consistency - After Specific Needs are identified, take out Just where you need it. for that need. - It's easier to decide whether to cut the edge of the network or not if you can see a specific need. - We can decide if we need it or not." - If Objective is clear, then you can use [Is it useful for the purpose? - Clarification of objectives - pragmatism

from /villagepump/2022/11/21#637b73dc5e90c0000054586a

• There was a "potentially useful concept" that was very exciting and overgrowth in one project.
• The members of that project had a desire to organize things in a clean way, not in a messy way.
  • But no one could do it.
• After a need arose to mention it in another project, a smooth restructuring took place
  • The concept was Rooted. "The birthplace" was separated from and organized at the time of transplantation to another location.

from [/villagepump/how about notation](https://scrapbox.io/villagepump/how about notation).

• One person brought up the topic and a lot of people thought it was interesting and got excited.
• To compare it to a plant, if you plant a seed, it grew.
• The seeds are.
  • Instead of growing up "neatly behaved and ready to ship."
    • Branches grow from here and there, overgrowing into a mess.
      • Branches grow from here and there. / soppy / grow thickly
• I find this overgrowth beneficial. - [You can do the harvesting and clean and polish later. - harvest or clean and polish we can do it later.

from [/villagepump/how about notation "enables the description of knowledge that can be easily reused"?](https://scrapbox.io/villagepump/how about notation "enables the description of knowledge that can be easily reused"?)

• It was argued that "removing context from knowledge makes it more reusable."
• Seems to me there are two opinions on what knowledge reuse is
  • A
    • To cut out what is written here and take it elsewhere.
      • There is a sense that "First timer" is close to being read as it is placed here.
        • scene (of a play, movie, etc.) and context are close in meaning; for the first time, "[People who don't know the context.
  • B
    • That what is written here, here, is developed by others who mention it and so on.
    • To be a material for a developing future.
  • The act of trying to do A in this situation seems to me to be interfering from B's point of view.
    • To use a plant analogy, Cutting and arranging the roots of the growing flowers to make them distributable as a commodity goes against the grain of maintaining a place where miscellaneous plants can thrive.
      • To take root of a growing flower and put it in Tradable form as a commodity goes against the grain of maintaining [A place where miscellaneous plants grow.
      • Information [package
        • Books are already a product of abstraction

Thoughts divorced from concrete context

• It tends to be this. - Taking the top of the pyramid is not what I expected.
• It's Rootless Knowledge.

ref

• https://scrapbox.io/villagepump/search/page?q=あちこちから枝が生えてぐっちゃぐちゃに生い茂る
• https://scrapbox.io/villagepump/search/page?q=収穫したり%E3%80%81綺麗に磨いたりするのは後でやればいい
• https://scrapbox.io/villagepump/search/page?q=生えている花の根を切って整えて商品として流通可能な形にすることは%E3%80%81雑多な植物が生い茂る場を維持することには逆行する

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/大きなネットワークを保ち必要に応じて切り出す using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.