I used to work (tangently, as a prosector) at one of the USA's "body farms" — it was really cool, but extremely off-puting/stinky.
When I first read about donated bodies being exploded, I thought "wow that's really fucking noble of the deceased," cause I knew how many intelligent researchers (and society!) benefitted from this "abhorrent stuff." I still believe it's beneficial (and not disrespectful), however horrid.
My only real gripe is that third-party hackers make all the money off the cadaver parts, and not the begrieved family..." people should also IMHO be paid for their blood donations.
Given that their motivation for this is to find more sites and pages to index, it seems like it should improve the quality (or at least quantity) of results thanks to a larger index.
Agree, I thought I was paying for search so they could focus on building search. Anything that feels like a money-raising or God-forbid acquisition play is concerning.
Agreed. Seems like web search implementation (both from Kagi and all its competitors!) could be almost endlessly improved upon, and any non-search feature is at odds with that.
Maybe there’s an argument that people who might use this, might also be people with sites that’d be valuable to index, and thus it’d both be nice for them and improve search for all users? :)
> I would think this would make your writing more "boring“
As a fellow iA Writer enthusiast – it makes your writing less boring because it nudges you to get rid of filler.
for example: “Usually you can just remove some words that iA Writer suggests are filler and your sentence improves so much” —> “You can remove words that iA Writer suggests are filler and your sentence improves”
First of all, why not give that blog a go, and share your opinions of it here or via e-mail, if you prefer?
Now, on to your question.
I don't believe words have to be strong or provocative or divisive to be true. Life is not black and white, neither my choice of words. Also, I practice zen in my daily life, so my writing is both a reflection of my inner state and the state I aspire to be in, at the same time.
Yes, as a human being, I want my blog to be read, and get some feedback occasionally, but at the end, it's a blog for myself. An instrument for taking note of my life and my journey on this pale blue dot.
I have no disagreement on the truthiness of words, my comment was really only about the enjoyment of your readers. Regardless, it sounds like you have a vision for what you want your writing to be, and so far as I know, it's working well for you.
As for feedback, since you asked, I'll be honest and say that it does read pretty boring... Very monotone with too many idioms. Feels like what you read from schoolchildren writing about a topic they're not really interested in.
I'll also say, there's no _you_ in this writing. Reviewing the latest entry, "Practice and Experience" - no stories, metaphors, or even examples of real events to impress your point. People understand a lot through storytelling, often the only takeaway we will have will be a story or metaphor. More importantly though, they are an opportunity to identify with the reader and share something about you and your life.
Thanks for your honest feedback. I greatly appreciate and value that, and there are no hard feelings, and no, it wasn't harsh.
> I'll also say, there's no _you_ in this writing.
It's intentional to remove myself from my writing, because it's not about me. I'm not trying to put myself out there, and say "look at me". These are distilled mind notes. A way of sharing what I learnt about life, without me.
The writings I publish are intended to make readers to reflect themselves upon and see themselves, or get some personal insight about themselves or life. Maybe they also fascinated by this, or they never observed that angle about the life. If they think 5 seconds about the subject itself, that's nice. If they say it's boring, that's fine.
On the other hand, what I'm sharing there is highly personal. It's just devoid of bells, whistles and blinkenlights. Much like a Dieter Rams or Bauhaus design, in a sense.
> Feels like what you read from schoolchildren writing about a topic they're not really interested in.
That's an interesting take. It's true that I'm not aiming for a literary tour de force there, but it's not true that I'm not interested in the subject, it's actually the contrary. The language is simplified to that point to make it straightforward and direct.
Making indirect statements, and slowly approaching points while not quite touching them is very easily accomplished by constructing freight-train long sentences by chaining seldomly used vocabulary end to end with small punctuation marks, as if they were small fragile cotton strings knotted meticulously, and with care, if one decides to write in that way.
However, writing with no fillers have a feel of density and directness, which makes things appear with no fanfare. It's up to the reader to process this "thing" they just encountered.
> no stories, metaphors, or even examples of real events to impress your point.
"Practice and Experience" is a distillation of at least two decades of observation and self-reflection. If I decided to add the stories and examples paved the way to the realizations made in that piece, it'd be a novella. Not that I remember every detail of it, either.
That blog lives true to its tag line "tail -f /dev/brain0". When I understand something, I draft an entry. It sits and simmers for some time, refined occasionally, and when it reaches a density and purity I like, I publish.
However, thanks again for your honest feedback. I'll be saving this.
“Vegetation within a few hundred yards of the launch pad was singed. A little more than a quarter mile south of the launch pad, a fire burned about three acres, charring a quail’s nest.”
> The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) documented that the debris cloud deposited material as far as six-and-a-half miles north of the launch pad. The agency said in a statement that the debris cloud was made of pulverized concrete.
> Broken concrete — some pieces the size of golf balls, others the size of car engine blocks or larger — was spread out over nearly three-quarters of a mile in some directions.
> Craters from large pieces of concrete were as large as six feet across and a few feet deep. Some pieces hit the ground so hard they were submerged in the sand, leaving only an empty crater with rebar jutting from it.
> If SpaceX starts launching routinely — as it plans to — wildlife may leave the area around the launch site.
> "If these major disturbances, in addition to actual damage to the habitat, happen consistently every month, every week, birds and other other wildlife are not likely to use that habitat," LeClaire said.
> "It sure seemed like the decision to not do these very basic channels or flame protection or systems that you see everywhere else was a matter of convenience," Roesch said.
> SpaceX initially had plans to extend its launch pad facility another 17 acres into the wetlands surrounding Boca Chica Beach. But after the company gave conflicting and insufficient information, the Army Corps of Engineers pulled its permit application for the project.
