This is a valid concern, I think. However I'd point out that extraneous detail and world building are not the same. If information serves the purpose of explaining the world then by definition it isn't extraneous. Though adding information certainly reaches a point of diminishing returns at some point.
I think the point of Chekhov's gun is more that unless you can justify the inclusion of the info, then it is extraneous and extraneous info should be removed.
I posted on Mastodon today about how helpful tools like this are for building mathematical intuition. Animations are no substitute, but they can also do what lecture never could.
Since my current project has pretty much devolved to putting a UI on various trigonometric functions and allowing the user to program them, I'd be very glad of other resources in this space (currently working through Hilbert's _Geometry and the Imagination_ and the book which matches https://projectivegeometricalgebra.org/ and just finished the _Make:Geometry/Trigonometry/Calculus_ series, and have had recommended Curves and Surfaces for CAGD: A Practical Guide by Gerald Farin)
Desmos also produces curriculum for K-12 (Desmos Classroom) that takes advantage of the computer’s ability to give real-time feedback for student answers beyond just giving them a binary correct/incorrect. It shows them what their wrong answers really would mean in the little animated scenario. Good stuff!
I’m left-handed too, and I’ve always felt that I struggled with handwriting partly because of that.
Though after smearing my hands with ink for the past 12 months, I can say that with some practice cursive has turned out to be fine. These days even the dip pen I’m using dries faster than I’m writing.
I've solved this in several ways that depend on the need.
1. Multiple small notebooks. I love ~50pg, 5"x7" lined notebooks. They're cheap, and portable. Just get one for each project.
2. I usually allow myself 1-2 extra pages for longer thoughts or things that will require follow-up. That almost always works.
3. Indexes. Set aside 20pgs at the front (or back) for a table of contents. I do this with my longer notebooks (~200pgs) and I never have trouble finding things. If you need to continue a section later on call it "Project X (cont.)"
I feel like #3 is something that generations before us knew implicitly that we've forgotten.
Hey, thanks for the input. About the references ("Project X (cont.)"): Coming from a digital context this feels super awkward, naturally. But I come to believe that this might actually be supportive when it comes to navigating physical sheets. It might help to shape your spatial model.
For my daily-driver, I use a Schneider Fountain. The exact two I have aren't made anymore, but I linked the most similar one I could find.
The dip pen is actually just one of those almost-novelty quill-looking ones. I cut off the ornamentation and just use it as a regular dip pen. Works great. It came with a set of nibs including one that is basically just a traditional fountain pen. That nib is the one I use the most.
Importantly, dip nibs often splotch ink because they're coated with oils by the manufacturer. I found out much later that you need to prep the nibs before you use them (either by wiping the oils off or lightly burning it off, which is what I did). That fixed the splotchy-ness for good.
Lately I've been considering some nice wooden dip pens.
Cursive felt slower to me at first, but now writing those print samples in the post felt slower than the cursive sample. It's really important to just practice the strokes. I spent an hour a day for almost two weeks just writing "the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" over an over to get the strokes right.
I was already somewhat familiar with cursive, and I knew it was a ~more proper~ way to write in that cursive is designed to lessen strains on the hand and be easier to write at speed. Also I wanted to. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What's fairly clear to me is that it's not designed to be read. At least my own, it's just too easy to end up with an almost doctor's hand writing. I refuse that on principle.
I had a similar click as you describe in starting to gain enjoyment out of handwriting, but for me was simply to get a pen that felt fluid and smooth.
Don't be too harsh on the code. It was thrown together in an hour.
I used the method from the paper (linked on HN earlier this week) but had to tweak the code as it was both unclear what the input types should be and had a few bugs. Hopefully I didn't break it during the process.
The classifier seems to work fine and gave me seemingly reasonable results from my admittedly limited testing.
Mostly this was an exercise to teach myself about this method, though I do have a possible use case for it in the future.
Very cool to see such a classic CS problem applied to new domains. Feels like a programmer's version of pharmaceutical drug repurposing.
This is a valid concern, I think. However I'd point out that extraneous detail and world building are not the same. If information serves the purpose of explaining the world then by definition it isn't extraneous. Though adding information certainly reaches a point of diminishing returns at some point.
I think the point of Chekhov's gun is more that unless you can justify the inclusion of the info, then it is extraneous and extraneous info should be removed.