Comment by canvascritic
18 hours ago
Not surprised to see this. Whats interesting to me in all this is the misplaced faith in emergent structure.
Roam bet on the idea that if you link enough atomic notes, structure will self-organize.
Which is such a weird fantasy if you spend a few minutes thinking about it. Try writing code like that or building a company or just about anything else! Why should notetaking and archive development be any different
It's clear you need some sort of editorial hand to create something maintainable and future proof. Like zettelkasten had Luhmann’s obsessive discipline behind it. Evidently roam had um. enthusiasm and javascript?
and yeah, it’s telling that the comparison is to IDEs. Imagine an IDE that dumped every snippet you typed into a graph database and expected you to recompile coherence out of it by browsing links. thats what roam felt like after the honeymoon.
In general most of Roam's target should want to lean harder into opinionated workflows. there’s a reason tools like linear or notion are winning. they’re structured enough to relieve cognitive load, flexible enough to adapt. Roam tried to be emacs, but turns out most users don’t want to configure their own productivity dialect.
also, lol at the idea of "automated taxonomy". The entire knowledge management industry keeps rediscovering ontologies like they’re new. We are probably going to reinvent OWL at some point and give it a name like "neuroschema" or something
Aren't you describing (and Roam using) what is essentially brain mapping, which is a well-established technology based on how our memories actually work?
I'm not a fan of neurophysiology analogies because it veer into pseudoscience, but I'll play along.
Roam implemented static bidirectional links and called it associative memory. in reality, it's closer to mind-mapping software with backlinks. So without mechanisms for reinforcement (surfacing old notes intelligently), pruning (forgetting irrelevant junk), or plasticity (reorganizing in response to use), the system becomes a junkyard of half-formed thoughts.
Brains forget for a reason, roam doesn't
> Brains forget for a reason, roam doesn't
I think this is the key mistake in Roam's design (and in many ways, obsidian and friends). They appeal to a dream some people have that maybe if you never forget anything, you'll get smarter forever. (Or something like that).
The problem is that there's many benefits to having a mind which forgets things. That property lets us grow and change over time - and move on from old ideas or old ways of thinking. Not necessarily because they're bad; but because we become a different person from the person who had that thought.
Trauma is an extreme case of this. Its essentially a disorder of memory; where we etch some old memory in stone. Because we don't let ourselves forget it, we inevitably build structure / thought patterns around that memory. "This one time __" - "As a result, deep down I believe that I am fundamentally ___ (unsafe / unworthy / stupid / unlovable / ...)". Trauma work is in many ways a slow process of learning to unclench your mind from those past experiences, to allow yourself to "move on" from them. (Ie, forget the emotional impact they have today.)
Its also kind of obvious in software or architecture. You can't just keep adding to an old structure forever. Software gets harder to build the bigger it gets. Same with buildings, books, teams and more. If everything new needs to fit with everything that has come before, its an O(n^2) job. Of course roam suffers from this too. The default "remember everything forever" default is naive and silly. Our brains don't work best like that.
8 replies →
You can't delete things?
Really, I think the user in that case needs to be much more choosy about what they put in the database. It will save them time and greatly improve the signal-to-noise ration.
2 replies →