topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Wednesday November 12, 2025, 12:09 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 ... 79next
401
Back in the day valuations made sense
Valuations have never made sense, they're simply transactional. The point at which buyers and sellers are prepared to meet.
Tesla is worth 360 billion $ and it only made its first profit this year.

Madness.
Hmm. This is tougher.  The volatility in Tesla's price (up and down), plus the relatively low level of free stock implies that it would be more accurate to calculate a valuation range.

There's huge disagreement about it as a business. I know a number of investors who were heavily shorting the stock when the price was a fraction of the present price. Most got out on one of the dips (therefore with some profit) or when they realised they might never be proved right (loss) or some facts changed (manufacturing targets met - also a loss).
As Keynes said, the market can remain irrational for longer than you can remain solvent.
402
I'd dispute that figure above, which is why I don't really count it as already there currently
Why would you dispute it?

It ought to be a simple calculation. Investors paying $9m for ? = $200m valuation means ?  = 4.5% of the enterprise, post investment. Always possible it was actually $9m for 5% of the business as it was, in which case the calculation ought to have been (9x20)+9 = 189 which is still pretty close.
Not seen anything about other conditions, options etc though I'd expect there are some. But it's hard cash he's already spending.

You can't get a better test of value than people paying hard cash for something.
403
I've added a new room - Chapter House
For 'business' related notes and documents: todo lists, etc. Anything that requires an action. When documents are no longer current they will be filed away in the library.

(Not work related stuff; that goes in a separate building, Canary Wharf. In practice most real work related stuff is confidential,  and goes into a separate secure location.)

The Chapter House in a monastery was a very large room where they had daily meetings, allocated jobs etc. All the tedious stuff. The one in my local Cathedral is a pretty spectacular space.
404
It might come in somewhere at the 100s of millions
Already there.
Notion is at $2bn.
Trello was sold to Atlassian for $425m over 3 years ago. Tech valuations have rocketed since then.
Evernote reached $1bn in 2011 before it took its eye off the ball.

Conor's vision is a big one. It will either reach over $1bn or crash. The odds being on crashing which is why the current valuation is only $200m. I'm certain all the investors believe it has a reasonable chance of reaching the billions, because the reward would not balance the risks otherwise.
405
I don't know.
For my money, now that it has its foot in the door, I think it will get to being a $ billion company.

Conor has a vision, he's good at convincing people. I think the vision centres on collaborative and shared development of human knowledge. But he (wisely) keeps detailed ideas to himself.

The thing they are investing in is the feature users want the least, at least users like us.
I don't think he has any significant interest in users who are interested in files. Or markdown. He's interested in knowledge and believes it is built better by people sharing (and I'd have to say there's any number of Obsidian users who just want to put their vaults on the web). I think he's aiming at being the primary host for that endeavour.

And, shorter term, teams are good for revenue - corporates will pay a lot more than individuals who are mostly good for creating the buzz. Look at the Trello and Notion business models. And their valuations.

At this point, I'd be more interested in investing in Roam than using it myself. I have concerns about some of things Conor says and does - but that's never held Elon back.
406
the standard valuation of a company is 4 times revenue, and they aren't making $50m a year.
That very much depends on the company and prospects (and a host of other things).
Look at the current value of Snowflake
407
WHOA
You have to remember that no-one actually thinks it's worth $200m.
You have a group of investors placing a $9m bet that it will actually be worth a lot more. With Roam's owners trying to give away as little as possible in exchange for circa $10 m.

The key to the price was the success of the believers scheme and $15 a month subscription.

What happens next will depend on how successfully Roam deploy the money.
First steps seem to be teams (collaborations) and an API.
408
It's  not his first podcast advocating Roam.

Strange thing is that you could achieve the same thing in Obsidian just as easily. There are things that work easier in Roam but he didn't hit on one of them this time.

There's a tendency for people trying to switch from Roam (usually because of cost, sometimes irritation) to try to carry their workflow with them. Most frequently blocks, but it includes a rigid concept of a page. Most of them have little concern about having their life's work in an online database that is specifically targeting collaboration and sharing ideas - so the genuine advantages of Obsidian etc pass them by.
409
And this is a big reason Conor does not impress me as a founder. He's petty, vain, impulsive, and egotistical.
Gates
Jobs
Ellison
Zuckerberg
They don't do badly for ticks, and could add a few of their own.
You don't need to remind people of who they are, and nor have they been replaced.
410
May be enough to stop some users switching to Roam.

But I don't think it will be many. Roam is quite expensive (money, learning, curve, need for regular use) for someone to use as well. And Notion does many things Roam doesn't, so not a good replacement for those who use those things. Roam has a clear idea of what it's trying to do and I doubt Notion can duplicate its ability to do that which leaves people wanting that switching anyway.

What it does do, is free its users from backlink envy.
411
Roam Research valued at $200m in a fund raise where it took $9m outside investment.
412
localization. Does Obsidian have that yet?
Yes, and increasing. Doesn't have the same level of need as some of the others, since they are just documents, so no relevance for quantities etc.
413
I don't know how/why but despite being very new, it seems to be further along in some key areas I care about vs. others (even vs. Obsidian in some respects).
It's features seem to be a better fit for you. A code exchange with Athens is apparently being discussed.
Not for me,  being database not files.
414
Logseq may be the Roam alternative I've been looking for! They've already solved block *and* page embeds as well as syncing/backup (Github). In that sense they're ahead of Obsidian. Very interesting indeed.
As an intended Roam equivalent (database outliner; self described as Roam + github) blocks are straightforward. I thought Obsidian now does page embeds, though its not something I've tried to use.
Foam has introduced block references using UIDs.

I've only had a cursory look. Imports the Roam .json but Obsidian markdown files are less straightforward because of syntax differences.

Intends to switch the database to HTML in future, to reduce the amount of processing involved in markdown conversion:
Yes, the html version of Logseq will store user's notes using a datascript db instead of markdown or org. There're a lot overheads to sync the plain text with the internal db. Also, we'd like the html version to be used for real-time collaborations in the future.

Any more info regarding what that html fs-sync would imply?
What I'm thinking about now is that user can save the serialized db to the native file system and load it next time when they open the computer, so there's no need to login, no need to sync using Github or Dropbox.

(Imo, would be so cool if logseq would be a org/markdown browser/editor interface ontop of the raw files its built on atm, that also would allow for graph querying of the filesystem org/markdown files.)

Yes, we'll have a desktop app version which will work directly with the native file system.

415
eventually i can end up scirbbling diagrams and saving the images, and those images are my zettel.
I do that!
A bit. Sometimes just drawing on paper or a board and saving a photo. Sometimes just hand writing. OCR is remarkable now. But mostly on my tablet.
And gets processed in exactly the way anything typed.
I find it much more productive to rough some things out by hand.
416
another strange application from back in the day called....liquid story builder
Nothing comes close to the strangeness of Liquid Story Binder. It worked, if you could learn the techniques, but it was always in the way of any creative flow. It was strangely antiquated even when it first launched.

Scrivener also has a steep learning curve, but is a good program. Particularly good for some things, especially if you write in small chunks, but mostly OK and functional. But the Windows version always struggles to keep up. After an extraordinarily long gestation the developer promised the final version would be out around this time last year. Still hasn't made it. But works reasonably well, doesn't lose data and can be used free until it's finished. I've used it from time to time but it has never aided creativity,  just getting the job done.
And not really designed around screenwriting.

I like Scapple,  but I like using a pen and Android tablet more.
417
"Scapple"? Only some are way more mature than it sounds like it is currently
Scapple is actually an old program. Designed as an adjunct to Scrivener. The simplicity is deliberate.
418
"database vs. text" is a false dichotomy
Clearly we disagree.

It is a dichotomy  - the programs either work using a database or they use files. (Or potentially both in the case of WriteMonkey 3).

"data ownership" (not a given with a DB, e.g. if it's using an open DB format and/or all content is markdown and it has a robust exporter).
Here you are introducing caveats specifying things to be watched for in a database.
Such watching is unnecessary with files.
In practice, databases don't use pure markdown (although they may attempt to export it ). The file based programs aren't pure either as they all prefer wikilinks. Not that any markdown is really pure.
And exports from programs like Roam need a lot of work to convert to useful files - and that is likely to increase as Roam continues to add features.

In theory, a database can provide any feature that a program using files has.
There are additional benefits, such as only having one file to backup. And speed - everything is loaded in a usable format whereas files have to be loaded before any processing.
But also disbenefits - they're rigid, you can only do what the program does; databases corrupt; export may not be as robust as you thought, especially if development is rapid.
The differences make the difference between the approaches a useful dichotomy to consider. For many, maybe even the majority, the benefits tip on the side of the database. Going with either approach means accepting the disadvantages of that choice.
419
I want to know these specific advantages and use cases for external tools operating on text files.
External tools have already been through a competitive process to decide which ones function best for me.
They have their own development trajectory which is entirely independent of a whole database program.
I can add any program at any point to gain a feature. I am not dependent upon the database developers choices and preferences.
420
This program called Scapple.  It's just a brainstorming tool.  You write in bubbles and connect them, that's it.  But I have been using it similar to how a zettel works, which is one scapple file per thought.
I periodically return to Scapple. It's one of those programs I think ought to suit me (because it's visual) but never quite does in practice. It's very good if it's working for you though. Quite a lot of people are major fans.
421
DB component
WriteMonkey 3 operates a hybrid system; JSON database with option for documents to be synced to independent files. That works OK for me.

Obsidian has a settings (workspace) file and, I think,  a JSON file with some saved info. It automatically replaces both if they are deleted, but there's some database functionality at least during a session.

I think they may extend the database functionality. I will be watching carefully what they do with that. They have already reserved YAML front matter for themselves (I believe this is to expedite future plugin functions); I'm definitely not keen on this approach because it starts cluttering the file up with extraneous stuff - I'd prefer plugins were allowed to use a JSON file.
Simple for me to avoid plugins I don't like. If Obsidian itself goes in a direction I dislike,  I'll stop using it or just have updates turned off.
422
I think there are other ways to achieve/solve the feature/functionality desires you have that make you want to work with "files", while still having nothing to do with a files vs. DB distinction.
But the distinction is key to being able to use the other programs.
In theory, their features could be duplicated, but I doubt they will be and my freedom of choice will be reduced.
423
I think this DB or files thing may be a false dichotomy, at least for many people. I've yet to see a compelling real-world example of specific, practical workflows that would necessitate "files" that have no DB component. I think you may feel strongly that your own workflows demonstrate this, so I'd love to hear some examples of how you intend to (or already do) work this way and what significant advantages it brings you (vs. for example an Obsidian plugin that does the same thing as some external tool you use directly on files).
For many I agree the distinction is moot. They want all functions within a program and, in practice, a database works better for them. Because for many things a database can work faster or introduce features that are cumbersome in plain standalone files.

For me the workflow advantage of files is simple: I use other programs with those files. Those programs are standalone and feature rich. If one falls by the wayside, I can use another. I can use them at the same time as I have them open in Obsidian. I am not limited to whatever is available in Obsidian. I can simultaneously use Obsidian competitors such as Foam or Dendron. Because I can do this at the same time there is no switching disadvantage compared to an Obsidian plugin; in fact there's an advantage because I can use multiple windows where Obsidian is limited to one window per vault (apparently a limitation of Electron).

I don't care about when the Obsidian editor becomes wysiwyg because I can just use Typora. In practice I do most of my writing in WriteMonkey. I often have ProWritingAid open on the files.

424
a very clear and important distinction between cloud/SaaS (Roam, Notion) and desktop/offline, perhaps with optional cloud sync (Obsidian, Anytype).
I agree that this is an important distinction, but most of the database systems have online availability.

A few advertise a local database as a USP, but that brings a heavy price in terms of availability on all devices. My own guess is that these will wither and only the cloud sync (optional or not) will survive. Many programs are happy to advertise the program as free and only charge for sync - they know that's the best combination for hooking new users and making continuing users pay.
425
all of these systems pretty much import and export various flavors of markdown.
One big advantage of files is that there is no export. I have them and I know what they look like. I never have to worry about changes to what is exported or glitches in the system.
Pages: prev1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 ... 79next