My first example, I was asked to give one more talk on how one needs to shuffle seven times. There were four people, and a blackboard smaller than my kitchen window. I went for it like I was in office hours, which I've always enjoyed more than teaching. A few weeks later a phone call "I liked your talk." "Thank you." "Could you come to Switzerland to give it again? We can only offer a week's full expenses..."

Then I was asked to write a review of the off-broadway play "Proof" for the American Mathematical Society Notices. I didn't read it much, but I was told people do. I worked a very hard week on my review; my Swarthmore College classmate Ben Brantley's Broadway reviews were life or death for productions at the time, and I didn't want to embarrass myself. Ron Howard read my review, went to see "Proof" twice and loved it, and hired me to be the math consultant for "A Beautiful Mind". That was a transformative experience.

Every audience is indeed an audience of one.

https://www.ams.org/notices/200009/rev-bayer.pdf

I wrote an article that never fails to put a smile on my face every time I read it. I felt like I had finally found my own voice. Ran it through Claude and it told me to tone it down a bit, but I ignored the advice and published it anyway.

The article caused people on HN to say I had issues. They weren't exactly wrong, but still. Be careful with what you publish out there. Warm reception is never guaranteed. My one consolation is the fact Bob Nystrom apparently liked it.

I can make How-to's that can assume they had gone through at least one of the tutorials, but even then I put links to the appropriate tutorials so they could refresh or learn if they needed it.

But lately it seems like people are getting more computer illiterate. So how low do you go? I am getting tempted to add a link to some basic computer literacy.

It's kinda like people complaining about Space Launch System, why aren't we using Saturn V or an improved version of it. We have the blueprints and schematics and everything but it appears there's a gap between what's written down there and what's in the textbooks. A lot of in-between experience has evaporated because shop classes and manufacturing were shut down.

I am realizing that a lot of experience was never written down and turned into institutional knowledge that could be used later. The AI companies would love this but it's gone because it was more cost-effective not to.

- Writing for a specific child (think telling a story to someone specific)

- Writing because you have something to say and a story is how you want to say it

- Writing generally what you think a group of people want (e.g. "children like food so I'm writing a story about food")

I think the essay is available online, he is much more eloquent than I

  - Kurt Vonnegut

Oh.

Journaling or diarying is writing for myself, and often in a form that will never leave the disk inside the the computer. But I also want to write more complicated things than just what I thought about today, how I solved some problem, or a reminder for three months from now. Why? Because writing as a solitary pursuit is similarily rewarding like reading for pleasure. We can read without growing an audience. We can read without have any extrinsic motivation. We can just do it and leave it at that. But writing is a bit too much associated with communicating (small) and broadcasting (large).

I could probably write a book on the most idiosyncratic topics, something that not even my mother would like to skim the foreword of. Because imagine if that process would help me know myself? How valuable would that be? The writing artifact might be useless, even. But the process could be enriching.

I would never hope to read a book by someone I don't know and be able to absorb their wisdom, not even 10%. Some things cannot be transmitted like that. The printing press probably has not helped us know ourselves more than just, you know modestly more. Some things have to be worked on by you and you alone.

This also translates to more practical subjects than knowing yourself. But that's what I felt like spending the word count here on.

But in terms of public writing. I am currently working on an article-length piece for a niche "publishing". And I find that process to be rewarding.

> In [Structured Query Language (SQL)](https://example.com/sql/), you can solve Unusual Complicated Problem with Super Advanced Thing.

That said, one time I had in mind a reader archetype, for whom I added an appendix of one basic concept, which ideally they'd already know, but likely didn't.

<https://docs.racket-lang.org/roomba/index.html#%28part._.Ass...>

I could've linked the some mentions of "association list" to a chapter of some textbook they'd never seen before-- and maybe they would read it, and maybe they would come back.

But instead, I decided to give a quick overview, in terms of an example relevant to what I was documenting, and leave them with a code pattern they could use, to get on with programming a robot like they came to my document to do.

(Though I wish I'd put an accessible showing-off demo example near the beginning of the document. After the intro, it reads a little too much like the glorified inline API docs that it is.)

But you have to decide whether you alienate the beginners by assuming people know what CRDs and memory errors are — or the advanced practitioners by explaining pods, clusters, and other jargon from scratch.

You can't make everyone happy.

Lately I've decided to write for ME. What do I want to write about? That has made it a lot easier to get unstuck. That and not looking at the views, likes, etc.

https://bufferbuffer.com/using-personas-in-technical-writing...

>In user experience (UX) design, personas are fictional characters representing the different types of users who might use a product or service. These personas are based on user research and are designed to help designers and other stakeholders understand the needs, goals, and behaviors of the different types of users.

Then, I have a few products that have maybe 10 users.

Too niche is an issue.