I’m not sure how “global level” organisations are, but mostly you just can’t convince a typical layman CEO that something looks easy, is really not easy.
Then when you serve the “small request”, next he’s in doubt why adding a small feature could increase the complexity of your work by a few order of magnitude.
I think this is a way that google kind of _forcing_ you to participate in contributing to their AI development.
By _improving_ their system, it creates some difference, if no one cares or no one can justify the necessity, then google doesn’t need to care.
The constant increasing amount of information on the web nowadays is certainly a burden to Google. And if such AI can handle 99.99% of what’s matter to user, this AI is already a brilliant one.
After all I don’t think google ever wanted to be an archive searcher.
Apparently this is the development of Artificial Intelligence. From a corporate point of view, one big fix cost is obviously better than ever growing (now rather small) variable cost.
Also, google is leading in this AI sector. Your feedback will help them to improve. The more hassle they introduce, the more you react upon it, the faster it can learn.
Perhaps that’s also depends on your expertise or stage you’re at. I’d say if I continuously do this for five years, all the positive points described by OP probably not as useful anymore.
Your dedication of doing it for ten years amazed me.
It confuses me to understand if this is advocating org-mode or "an org-mode aiding tool".
But think again, if it's a good plaintext markup language, why would we concern about an editor anyway?
TBH the time it's being useful is when I am writing in _any_ plaintext editor. Not a great example but if I'm already used to pressing Ctrl + B for the past twenty years, why would Shift + _ suddenly make things better?
> if it's a good plaintext markup language, why would we concern about an editor anyway?
I work with a colleague who edits Org mode files in Vim just fine. But if you use Emacs to edit the same file, you get the benefits of subtree folding, syntax highlighting, etc.
You can get the same in Vim too, but someone has to develop a plugin for that.
So talking about my colleague editing Org mode in Vim, once he is done editing, he runs a Makefile that runs emacs in batch mode to run the Org exporter.
> TBH the time it's being useful is when I am writing in _any_ plaintext editor.
You still can, as I mentioned above.
The benefit of plain text is that it can be easily edited in any editor. Now emacs just adds features related to viewing (folding, syntax highlighting) and navigating on top of that. Given time and enough interest, any editor can support those features for Org mode files.
I’m not sure how “global level” organisations are, but mostly you just can’t convince a typical layman CEO that something looks easy, is really not easy.
Then when you serve the “small request”, next he’s in doubt why adding a small feature could increase the complexity of your work by a few order of magnitude.