Figma totally just leapfrogged Whimsical for me. I see no reason to use Whimsical ever again.
This is true. I was mainly using it for quick flowcharts. But once you set up a few components for yourself, spend an hour learning the basics, and install Autoflow, the flowcharts become about as quick to make as in Whimsical
So the way I see it, I can spend that hour learning and do a little setup and get access to a tool that does everything and more, allowing me to increase my skill level over time in something that rewards that growth. Whimsical has a lower floor but also a way lower ceiling
Since people were asking, here's a quick tutorial on how I make flowcharts in Figma with frames, components, and Autoflow.
Imo ABA therapy isn’t effective because of the power of behaviorism, but rather because you have a therapist paying very close attention to what makes an individual kid tick. Of course that will work, but you don’t have to do verbal gymnastics to avoid attributing internal states
This is an unnuanced take about an intellectual gripe I have that doesn’t really matter
Right, it’s individualized care and close attention/analysis. Behaviorism as a philosophy isn’t really necessary here 🤷♂️
This right here is a huge area of exploration for me since working on GuidedTrack, realizing that @worrydream had already written about live programming environments in the context of learnable programming, and even contemplating things I could build myself
Big open questions: what broken glass to get started could be offloaded to design choices? How can languages and IDEs be designed to be approachable and understandable, providing strong feedback on the impact of your actions, and encouraging you to engage feedback loops?
Part of what’s appealing about learnable programming is just how hard it is. I’ve worked on 6 onboardings so far, and working on a programming language/IDE (GuidedTrack) was by far the most challenging.
Multiplayer in @RoamResearch can be really powerful, but it's too process-oriented to work if users don't share some common language about its fundamentals. People ~need to already understand Roam in order to collaborate in it, for the whole range of small to massive projects
Onboarding was offloaded to a decentralized community, leading to a lot of divergence in understanding the core bits. People are learning from social norms set by influencers, who often communicate suboptimal messages. Roam has little in-app influence over the narrative.
Even the best community content explainers only hit a chunk of Roam users. Everybody needs to speak the language of indentation, filters, etc. so there's a solid foundation to layer multiplayer processes on top of. We won't disrupt Wikipedia-like projects w/o shared language!
Hey @RoamResearch if I could query by unlinked references, I'd be able to query by "2020" or specific months so please, querying by string would go a long way
Late entry: I'm gonna start a @threadapalooza now on the intersection of behavioral science, product strategy, UX, and game design. I'm shooting for 100 tweets w/ as many individual opinions as I can before the end of the year. This is a product of a lot of thought over years
1. Every app is designed for behavior change, intentionally or unintentionally. People have agency, but their default behavior is swayed by their context. The design, functionality, etc. all influence user behavior, positively or negatively, predictably or unpredictably.
2. User behavior is a major input for the success of an app. If people use an app in suboptimal ways, then they are more likely to churn than people who are able to achieve their goals as a result of their behavior.
Coming soon: follow-up tour with @JoelChan86, where he showed me his tested workflow for using Roam for synthesis. Highly impactful on my own workflow.
The purpose of his workflow is clear, it works in @RoamResearch or other PKM apps, & has room for stylistic differences
Basically: organize around your questions. Read sources (context) in support of those questions, note down your observations, combine observations into claims, and combine claims to work through your answers to the questions. Everything is connected logically to its precedents.
So it's actually quite simple to implement. Connect your questions to your answers. Connect your answers to how you came to those answers. It's not rocket science, and requires only knowledge of linked page and block references.