> So it must be that a key ingredient to blogging is simple: have a willingness to state something that seems obvious to you but nobody else is saying it. Or if someone else is saying it, just link to them and say, “Yes!!! This!!!”

As a young mathematician in grade school, I had boundless enthusiasm to prove and present basic theorems in number theory and geometry. Now, as a PhD mathematician who has since pivoted into other fields, when I'm considering new mathematical content, I feel only the stymying influence of a million invisible eyes all around me asking, "Don't you think this been done before, better, by others? Do you really want to waste your and your readers' time with your DIY reinvention? Are you not just noise competing with other noise, drowning out the valuable signals in your domain for your own personal gain?"

All this to say, on a statistical level, it is fair to say no one ever has any original thoughts, and the ones most capable of elucidating existing ideas can be the ones least motivated to do so.

If every blog, op-ed, and social media post in the world were stripped of all informatic redundancy, what would the compression ratio be? Among these resources in particular, I just see the same old arguments and observations trotted out in varying tonal registers.

A couple other versions of this that have always stood out to me:

1) There's always a new cohort of people that don't know the things you know. You assume since you know it, everyone does. But kids coming up, or whoever, aren't you. They don't know this stuff yet. You can easily be the first time they've heard "make something people want" and where that comes from. The Curse of Knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge

2) There's always another tone/anecdote/verse that makes whatever idea more palatable to someone out there. They might not like the PG version, or the Wired version or the Daring Fireball version, whatever. There's probably some version of you in this lesson that someone out there vibes better with.

I never imagined my blogs to be useful to anyone. For me, they're mostly just things I felt like sharing but with no particular audience in mind. Over the years though, I find myself receiving email from people who I helped. I even googled quite a few things in the past years only to find the first answer to be a blog of mine. So I unblocked myself a few times.

Blogging is fun. What's obvious for you isn't for everyone.

In a meta way, this blog post itself is example of that: sounds obvious that blogging can just be stating the obvious, but I still enjoyed reading it, and it served as a good reminder. I guess part of what makes it feel good is confirmation bias, but it can also be nice to read something that confirms your beliefs especially if the other side(s) are very loud online. I would also add that it is just expressing oneself, and therefore it is ok for it to be non-original thought: you are not publishing a scientific article, you are expressing your opinion, adding to the general discourse online, making your voice be heard, and also just capturing your thoughts into something concrete.

People already know a lot of things.

But which "know"?

There's seeing something and recognising it as something you've seen before.

There's being able to recite it without seeing it.

There's being able to explain it.

There's _knowing_ it. Where your life is an active demonstration of having made it _part_ of you.

To the extent we obtain wisdom with life, it's usually a progression of things progressing deeper down the layers, years, perhaps decades after they attained level 1.

There's also a social component to blogging, right? When you post something it tells me about who you are. It helps establish my (probably parasocial) relationship with you.

And when you post something, I might be interested in it, even if I wasn't interested when someone else posted about it, because I'm interested in you and interested in what you have to say.

I think that human communication is about pure relationship socialization as much or more than it is about actually communicating information or ideas.

Thank you for sharing this observation.

I had a post on here this week that was briefly popular. There were numerous folks who posted that the material “wasn’t new.”

I felt like it should be implicit that people who already know what I was writing about are not the target audience. But here they were, commenting.

At the same time, the page got upvoted quite a lot and the comments were filled with folks who had lots of interesting reactions and additions. Despite the fact that this was “old news”, it seemed implicit that for many it was new news.

Sometimes we should trigger conversation. I believe we shouldn’t index on novelty- we should index on impact. Your post is a nice defense of those who discover and share what they discover.

Wrote something like this earlier today [1]. There was something really nice about not thinking too much about the details and letting it be rough.

[1] https://graybeard.ing/llms-are-grep-on-steroids/

I read a lot of beginner/tute FP stuff. A mistake they make is doing 2 sentences of "here's how to conceptualise this new notation and what Int -> Int -> Boolean means"

And then they get bored and just go full bore ¿ conjunctivitis applique to unbound ¤ variable 》》-> is a Mongolian {....} ... forgetting they were in tutorial mode. Or, showing examples which embed syntax which is apparently the same as before but "oh shit, I forgot a : means something else in this context" so having explained syntactically what a : means.. confusing you again.

Or showing REPL prompts without explaining if the # is a prompt or part of the command. The list is frankly endless.

Decades ago, this was C programmers trying to explain basic imperative syntax and then using a "compute prime" with a recursive function call or a ternary operator or bitshift.

So my next blog maybe will be "seven cardinal sins of blogs about basics" which will have only one sin: forgetting the job, the only one job you had (or apparently set yourself)

The fact that someone makes a simple observation is probably suggestive that despite its simplicity, it doesn't stick fully, maybe it's even anti-memetic.

Perhaps repeating such simple truths is like a spaced repetition system for society

Commenting on Hacker News is often just stating the obvious, but people still upvote! ;)

Stating the obvious (or maybe not). A bit of internet history, the word blog comes from web log, and shorten to take just the last 4 letters.

I like actually taking the full form weblog and nudging the space we get also 'we blog'.

This is obvious? Am I stating the obvious?

It's why I follow Scott Manly or PBS Space Time specifically. There's lots of the same content on other channels/mediums. But I like them specifically, so why not?

Continuing to state the obvious, this is why you specifically should write if you have opinions you'd like to get out.

Something obvious to others may not be obvious to you - and to be fair it was a key ingredient in blogging.

I find it extremely sad that blogging shifted from personal writing to a performative act - we can feel ashamed stating something obvious because the expectation is to get approvals and shares, rather than us writing something we find intriguing, interesting or worth writing down.

https://sive.rs/obvious "Obvious to you. Amazing to others."

I was never a prolific blogger. I do write a LOT internally at work and I write very long messages in group chats.

With the advent of LLMs, I've felt even less need to publish publicly. It's as if an LLM can either produce something higher-quality and more tailored to the reader's context in a shorter period of time. Or the topic I write would be so niche that it should just be in a group chat.

If I wanted to write something completely new, I'd write a paper, not a blog post. After all, blogging is ultimately about organizing my thoughts on topics that are already known.

In that sense, my personal problem is that no one visits my homepage (www.makonea.com). Ultimately, I think conveying thoughts on such topics also depends to some extent on reputation.

I also see this when people present studies online which say something like "Eating fast food causes obesity" and you get people replying "well obviously".

On the face of it things might sound obvious, but the study or in the case of blogging the discussion actually attempts to get the to the bottom of why that might be the case.

This is often, but not always, also what stand up comedy is.

Problem with getting old is that you’ve seen it all. A bright eyed 25 year old blogging about this thing called a “Unix pipe operator” gets boring the 200th time it shows up on the front page of HN.

I have a simple blog if anyone is interested: https://landenlove.com/

Isn’t it similar to “Just be yourself”? But first you need all the hard work to get to that level so that you can just be yourself. What is obvious to me may have come as a lot of experience and focus in the past.

I avoid substack because of this. It's totally fine to email people about new posts, but at least let me read your post first. Make me interested. I'll follow you not because one good post (maybe if it's really good) but because several good ones. If your post is good I'll go look at others before leaving. If it looks good, then, and ONLY then will I subscribe.

But I can tell you there's a strong correlation between why you're writing a post and why I'll subscribe. If you're trying to hustle I don't give a shit. You're most likely another pseudo intellectual chasing whatever is hot. What I, personally, want is the experts. I want to see that depth of knowledge. I want to see how you think. I want to read a blog post where I get to know you, not some facade. Not everything needs to be a hustle. Find your niche and your niche will stick with you. If you try to write to everybody you'll end up writing to nobody. Concentrate on making me want to subscribe, not pestering me into it. You're not a used car salesman

Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1053/

There's ten thousand people new people each day, and someone has to be the first time they run into something :)

Yes!!! This!!!

Disclaimer; have not read the article.

My current feeling about blogging is, that it more then anything else is we’re certian knowledge of AI came from. The arguments for blogging being the thing again also started at the same time AI got traction.

Just identify the bloggers that know their craft, weight them height. And you got yourself a step change in LLM competency.

Paying no one.

My father, who worked as a market research analyst, said that the trick to the job was "point out the obvious before anyone else does".

Web sites and web content are trending towards being enshittified until it just barely becomes worth wading through all of the shit to get to what you actually wanted to consume.

Of course, there’s a whole microblogging platform called Twitter where people do it.

Finally someone’s saying it! Also I love how meta this is.

Yes!!! This!!!

Blogging is a form of improving your writing and communication if you so choose.

Improving articulations is a helpful skill for use with AI too.

[flagged]

The most useful blogs I read aren't the ones with novel ideas. They're the ones where someone took something I vaguely understood and wrote it down clearly enough that I could explain it to someone else. That's surprisingly rare and valuable.

Most knowledge lives in this awkward middle ground where everyone sort of knows it but nobody has written a clean version. The person willing to write the obvious version usually ends up being the reference.

AI can do a good job of this. Summarize content and then searching the internet to see if anyone has commented a summary like that before.

But I suspect such a blog would not be popular.