I wish Figma would allow people to charge for plugins on the community page.
I wonder how many interesting / advanced plugins haven't been built because there's a norm around not compensating the creators.
I’m all for people giving away stuff for free or for non-monetary value. I think it’s unethical to expect people to do so.
I’m not sure if I would generalize these claims to all apps with a plugin ecosystem
But I do think it is a bit of a power play to say, “we want our app to be an extensible platform that our users can make money or even a living on.”
It’s logical that the platform receives a cut
The expectation that everything is free leads to a world where developers make stuff out of altruism, a drive for reputation, or to scratch their own itch.
The ability to make money can more directly align incentives with non-programming end users.
Funding just the initial development or patronage through something like GitHub sponsors is generally going to be chump change as compared to the money making potential of creating a product.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm trying to use Obsidian as an alternative to Roam for my projects the next month or so. Been doing so for the last two weeks or so, and I've been very happy with how its working. Thread on why I'm attempting a switch 🧵️👇
While there are a lot of reasons one might switch, the main reason I'm trying is because Roam is too slow. The design is incredibly innovative and the UX is incredible for networked thought, but that doesn't really matter if I can't get work done in it.
Any time I have a couple queries or sets of backlinks open in the sidebar, the slowdown is painful. I'll wait a few seconds to create a new bullet and indent, or have janky scroll. These are core features, and they're barely useable. I've been complaining for at least 6 months.
The UX of @obsdmd is sort of like if Emacs were built specifically for writers. org-mode is cool, but very few people want to learn Emacs/elisp just for that purpose.
With the plugin ecosystem and some of its power features, it really feels like an IDE for writers.
Everything @jaydixit demonstrates in this video are trivially accomplished in Obsidian with either base features or plugins that are trivial to install. Not saying he should switch away from Emacs, just saying that this sort of power is way more accessible to writers these days!
Being able to color groups based on a graph view search in @obsdmd is brilliant. Here I'm narrowing my website's contents down to "onboarding" and coloring the results.
However, some of these nodes certainly overlap. If only it showed that somehow? Perhaps split colors?
Given that I can hover preview over any node, this might be preferable to viewing search results in a linear format... ideally with a way to see nodes with split colors, and would require me to have really good titles for notes.
On that note... why can't I color code linear search results in the same way I can color code graph search results? Wouldn't that also provide me with similarly helpful utility?
AFAICT the fact that open source builds on open source is one of its greatest strengths (the practice is cumulative) and its greatest weakness (there’s a ton of baggage that gets kept, especially on projects that value backwards compatibility)
Before working in learnable programming, I had no prior coding background. I’m approaching this with no coding related tacit knowledge, just applying my own design sensibilities.
Emacs is a great example. The core concept is strong, and 40+ years of dev means there’s an amazing ecosystem of prebuilt extensions around it. Backwards compatibility is a value though, so there’s 40+ years of baggage. But what if you could start fresh with lessons vs code?
IMO, Roam is a better interface for Twitter than Twitter. A lot of my knowledge management is in my tweets and their replies. @ollybot_redux and I were were working on Twitter import... who wants to pick up where we left off? Olly put it on GitHub github.com/oliverb123/roa…
The light pen was immediately intuitive, while the mouse wasn't. Engelbart put two people against each other on the same task, and mouse users were initially slower, but quickly they outpace those with the light pen. We live in a world of light pens.
"That's the reason why people are bragging that infants can use iPads as if this was a point of pride rather than something horrifying." We infantilize people with apps that are built to be intuitive from the start but can't do anything serious.
"This is why we live in a world where most things are easy to learn, but hard to use. By hard to use, I don't mean that we feel they are difficult, but that we never reach our capacity to meld with these systems because we've chosen this path."