Intriguingly Occam had a beard.
8 Likes
I do use a similar mechanism, and to be fair it works better than I expected. But the plus is that you can also use these type of synced cloud repositories with DEVONthink or Obsidian --which I do. Thatās the beauty of āeverything is a fileā. Even note links can be made to be compatible across DT and Obsidian, so itās pretty convenient. Of course one cannot share the specific metadata capabilities between DT and Obsidian but in my case most of the time I only need search, specially on mobile.
It looks like possibly the new Spotlight may eliminate the need for Alfred (although Iām finding the first beta VERY buggy) and it has absorbed LaunchPad as well. It may also be that the newest Shortcuts may eliminate at least the less sophisticated uses of Hazel.
And, based on the demos shown at this yearās WWDC, Spotlight is going to be even more powerful once they work out the bugs in the beta.
1 Like
It looks really good. I switched from Alfred back to spotlight on the beta to test it a bit. I just wish they had implemented some of the same spotlight features in iPadOS.
2 Likes
He was keeping it simple 
1 Like
Interesting thread. DevonThink is pretty much the core around which my Mac life revolves. Itās the reason I have refused my employerās offers for a work machine (=it wouldnāt have my DT databases on it) and any time I need to do something new my first question is usually ācan DT do this for me?ā.
Alfred is a very close second, itās the mantle around my core (not going to apologise for that terrible joke, as an ex-geologist it made me laugh ). The new Spotlight looks really good, but it remains to be seen if itās an Alfred replacer. Four things that Iād want to see robustly working in Spotlight before Iād even consider it an Alfred replacement:
- Interface for designing custom keywords (e.g. I have key reference docs I need regularly, and in Alfred I have keywords to open them directly)
- Interface for setting hotkeys (nearly every custom hotkey I have for triggering apps is programmed in Alfred)
- Text snippets
- Custom web searches (I want to be able to set the search engine at the beginning of my search, which I can do in Alfred, as Iām now running a paid search engine and pick the search engine depending on what Iām looking for)
I donāt consider myself an Alfred power user, I doubt Iāve even skimmed the top of what it can do, but for me the combo of Alfred and DT basically run my working life.
3 Likes
Iām on the same trend as you currently, but came to the other conclusion. Specifically I donāt really use desktop DT much and DTTG is just aweful for notes (I actually like obsidian on mobile), but I have all my data on my synology as sync store. Itās been so reliable and quick to sync and I get no issues with version errors like obsidian and local copy that I continue using DTTG despite how much I hate the editor. Most of my interaction is now via shortcut to append daily notes/meeting notes etc.
Also I am playing with paperless-ngx to use for backing up family documents to make easier for wife to use it, but I think DT is worth the $100 a year to me. (I also agree the AI component is not worth it in DT).
1 Like
I think this article (via Jeremy Friesen) regarding āhard modeā captures well the perils of complexity.
Westenbergās article, and the following quote in particular, resonated with me and my misguided attraction to novelty and cleverness.
We have to learn to see cleverness not as a virtue but as a temptation. The simplest tool that solves the problem is the best tool. Anything else is vanity.
For example, Iāve been building a daily logging system in Tinderbox. Admittedly, itās fun to tinker with Tinderbox, but a simple paper journal would probably serve me just as well.
Iāll leave you all with this quote from Westenbergās essay:
Stop trying to impress your peers with the complexity of your systems. Impress them with the clarity of your thinking and the speed of your execution. The baroque dashboard is a crutch. Simplicity is a tool.
8 Likes
Love that last quote!
1 Like
I just finished reading the Westenberg essay. Itās how Iāve been thinking all along and I didnāt even know I was right! Itās just that everyone elseās processes seemed too complicated and wrong (for me) and I just couldnāt wrap my mind around them.
Iāve seen this through my clients. They are usually a generation older than me (65m) and paper and pencil was natural for them. Iām in the middle between them and millennials, who grew up on computer technology.
On the one hand, I can see myself through them and I have been wanting to simplify my life as much as possible so I could be productive as I get older. On the other hand, I can see that AI, for example, as almost a bridge too far for myself, as Facebook is. (reddit, I can understand clearly.) I keep waffling on turning it on or off.
Oh, and that list I gave earlier? The only change was UpNote back to Bear. Bearās database is more secure than UpNoteās is, being CloudKit with the possibility of ADP activation.
1 Like
It is a good article. It affirms my decisions to minimize apps and to use defaults where possible.
Use an index card. Use a spreadsheet. Use a notepad. Use the default unless you have a very specific, non-theoretical, non-theatrical reason not to. Avoid tools that require onboarding videos. Avoid ones that have communities.
I have two quibbles:
-
The statement, āProtestant ethic: a belief in hard work, deferred gratification, and the visible signs of effort as a proxy for salvation.ā To the contrary, historic, orthodox Protestantism says just the opposite: *āFor by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boastā (Ephesians 2:8ā9).
-
I think he too easily assigns less-than-honoring motives to those with complex systems. While the motives he describes may apply to some, he overgeneralizes. Some use complex systems because, in their estimation, such systems are more efficient than simpler ones. Do I think someāand have I been guiltyāof making technology workflows more complex than needed? Yes. But I donāt think we should generalize about others.
Overall, a great read!
2 Likes
That is not the same meaning of works. Work as a plural noun works refers to āMoral or righteous acts or deeds. (AHD s.v. work 12)ā Works in this sense means caring for the poor, the sick, or prayer.
These works refer to charitable or other good deeds, not to generic labor.
Pre Geneva Bible the words acts or deeds were often used in translation. The 1611 canonized works but itās worth remembering that Seventeenth century English is not Modern English.
AS I am sure you know the works vs faith distinction marks the dividing line between Catholocism and Protestantism, largely thanks to Erasmus.
The Protestant work ethic, more specifically and historically the Calvinst work ethic, is the idea that human labor and diligence are virtues, and that success in human endeavor and work are signs of the grace of God. Max Weber popularized the phrase Protestant work ethic and generations of undergradutes taking Sociology classes imbibed it.
7 Likes
Thank you for the, as always, thoughtful response. You are a delight to converse with. 
You are correct that works, in the context you describe, generally refers to acts of charityāparticularly care for the poor. You are also correct that, depending on oneās understanding of soteriology (doctrine of salvation), āworksā may be viewed either as a requirement for salvation or as evidence of it. In orthodox Protestantism, good works are the fruit of salvation, not its basis.
My response was specific to this statement in the article:
The sociologist Max Weber traced the origins of capitalist discipline to the Protestant ethic: a belief in hard work, deferred gratification, and the visible signs of effort as a proxy for salvation [emphasis added].
Though Iām familiar with his work, Iām not a Weber scholar (or any kind of scholar for that matter ). However, I do not believe Weber was claiming that Protestantsāspecifically Calvinistsāequated eternal salvation with work, whether defined as physical or mental labor, or acts of charity. If he was claiming that Calvinists and other Protestants used work as a proxy for salvation, then he was misrepresenting orthodox Christianity.
Orthodox Christianity, and Calvinism in particular, is clear: salvation is the result of Godās gracious work in the soul, which will inevitably manifest in good works. But those works are not the cause of salvation. As James writes, āSo also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is deadā (James 2:17). Works are evidence of the authenticity of saving faith, not its cause.
Regarding the relationship between work and capitalism, there is no doubt that the Reformation recaptured the biblical teaching concerning the sacred nature of all work. God created man, placed him in the garden, and commanded him to steward it and exercise dominion over creation as Godās vice-regent. This responsibility is often associated with the Covenant of Worksāthat is, mankind was created to work and to be productive.
Work gives purpose and reflects the truth of Homo est imago Dei (āMan is the image of Godā). Work also fulfills manās obligations: to provide for his family and to care for the poor. As Paul writes, āLet the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in needā (Ephesians 4:28). Moreover, Scripture clearly teaches that individuals are responsible for working to provide for themselves and their families. Paul states, āIf anyone is not willing to work, let him not eatā (2 Thessalonians 3:10), and exhorts believers āto do their work quietly and to earn their own livingā (2 Thessalonians 3:12). Likewise, he warns that āif anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbelieverā (1 Timothy 5:8). These verses affirm the biblical mandate for diligent labor, personal responsibility, provision for oneās family and the poor as essential expressions of faithful Christian living.
That is the āProtestant work ethic.ā
Essentially, the Reformers articulated a biblical doctrine that had been obscured: all morally upright work is dignified, regardless of social status. There is no sacredāsecular divide. The labor of the trash collector is just as honorable as that of the priest.
In short, I suspect that the author of The Cult of Hard Mode misrepresents Weber. If not, then Weber is wrong. The Reformers did not teach that work or good works are proxies for salvation. Work is a divine calling and inherently dignified. Good works are not the cause of salvationāthey are its evidence.
The Protestant work ethic, more specifically and historically the Calvinst work ethic, is the idea that human labor and diligence are virtues, and that success in human endeavor and work are signs of the grace of God.
I agree completely. In fact, anything we are able to accomplish is the result of Godās gracious providence, even the breath we take.
4 Likes