Am I in a minority that has been looking for a tool like this ("2nd brain"), but just never knew the concept is called that way? This is what my current, best second brain, looks like :\
Haha I kinda do what you do (text editor + files). It works fine for me, and I keep it synced with Syncthing. I just repurposed my old installation of Sublime Text 3 and keep stuff separated by [topic].md.
Ha, this is what mine looks like too, but all in one tab and split up via line breaks. Sometimes I come back to it and realize I've completely lost the plot and clear it and start over. It's like having too many tabs open in a web browser.
"Notes", "personal knowledge base" and "(personal) knowledge graph" are terms I'd call both more informative and more popular than "second brain", but they all have history.
For about the same amount of years, I have thought of my life as playing multiple Tetris games at the same time. Some games moving at different speeds, depending on what's happening at the time on each. I'd focus my priority on the fastest moving games, without discarding the other (slower) games, since accumulation is non-stop.
...and yes, in my spare time (at times), I play multiple tetris games, but since I haven't found one that runs multiple games, I have to run many different windows--so I don't do it very often.
Anybody know of a Tetris game that allows you to add multiple games at the same time? That'd be awesome!
I think the scale of the 'Exposure' does matter here (please don't just downvote, hear me out).
Exposure = Advertisement, right? Wouldn't you pay for advertisement?
Now, if you invest very little for advertisement, you might get very little in return.
Say, your investment is doing a free 'exposure' gig for a return of 20-30 potential customers. This might not be equitable to your time/equipment/team/etc.
Now, in the example of doing exposure for a well known show (I don't watch any reality shows, btw), then:
1) Getting exposure to millions of people
2) Gaining the ability to say you worked on 'x' show
3) Your pictures being out there
4) How about other negotiated perks for doing this? (Right to use and ownership of material, being most important).
5 days of this investment does sound like a lot of money, but I believe the real question is: "Does my investment have the potential to yield to not only cover initial costs, but turn a profit?"
If the answer is 'yes', go for it. If it is 'no', then decline. I truly believe this is a business decision.
I am not saying people should be working for free. I truly think your time and resources are highly valuable. What I'm saying is that 'free' might not always mean 'no return on investment'.
Some great musicians busk for spare change or the odd youtube subscription for years, while others (arguably less talented or creative) have been arbitrarily 'discovered' and delivered into financial success.
Exposure from the club downtown is one thing. But, telling a busker they shouldn't take a free opportunity for genuine national exposure because it 'devalues gigs' feels a bit like a cruel joke-- game theory notwithstanding.
I'm willing to bet money precisely nobody is going to seek out those photographers because they found them in the fineprint of some probably cringeworthy netflix show.
The best they can hope for is having additional munition to convince a potential but hesitant customer.
Also, some people need money this month, not maybe-money 2 years down the line.
So no one would value the experience and prestige of being involved in a successful program that has an audience of 30 million.
No one? That’s a pretty bold assumption.
As for the money this month vs later - this is the gig for them. Again, just because it’s not a an appropriate gig for all photographers doesn’t mean that it’s a gig that might not be exactly what a different photographer could benefit from.
You don't have to be sought out to be able to proclaim "as seen on Season 2 of Love is Blind" and have an air of credibility in a competitive world absolutely packed with people of moderate ability attempting to establish themselves as pay-worthy.
I hear you... and for #1 "Getting exposure to millions of people", this is more related #2, as it wouldn't be applicable if people don't know anything about the cringefesty show.
> Some people need money this month, not maybe--money 2 years down the line.
I agree, but I stand by the statement that this is a business decision.
I have to believe this is a rare opportunity too, and doesn't compare to the common 'exposure opportunity' from various producers/promoters out there. I did music for a while, and have seen my good share of this, and was always surprised how many people fall into it. Even when it clearly meant it was a very bad business decision--and most of the time, not even fun.
Point is that justifying and evaluating this is hard. Like really hard. It is especially hurtful to younger / less experienced people because if you have not been in the business for long, you don't know enough dynamics and factors and costs etc and you just might make the wrong decision.
It's all speculation (much like advertisement, I agree). But as much as we hate advertising industry because of their data collection practices and stuff, they do provide you a metric in return while this doesn't.
Exposure doesn't work when you realize you've signed a contract saying you can't advertise that you worked on this TV show. The only exposure you'll get is that the production now knows you're a sucker to call again.
Do people really think the show will let the photographer blast their pictures with "Joes photography did this" all over the internet? Best you'll be able to do is tell your friends verbally.
Is this opinion only, or actual knowledge or experience?
You might be right, in which case I'd agree with you (I have no experience with those details on contract provisions), but again it goes back to being a business decision :).
I should have clarified that its in my own experience, based on some of the non-disclosure stuff I've had to sign. Everything depends on the employer though; they most likely could list it on their resume, but probably not much more than that.
My point was more that the show is offering an illusion of exposure, when they'll be lucky if they are even mentioned in the credits.
My relative who was in the video game industry wasn't even allowed to list their most recent jobs actual employment to their next employer, as another example of strong contract
> My relative who was in the video game industry wasn't even allowed to list their most recent jobs actual employment to their next employer, as another example of strong contract
Where's the case of this being a true Zoom competitor without some type of comparison, or any other info that pertains to the specific solution it is supposed to be the answer to?
I appreciate this effort, and in a way paints a picture of why it has taken this long to come up with this type of data points: Consolidation of knowledge and technologies.
