1. Those who kind of semi-obsessively write down every little thought, semi-obsessively catalogue everything, etc.
2. Those who use the idea of "writing helps you think", where the second brain functions in support of this
Personally I find 2 quite valuable, and although I could "think about programming all the time" (or one of my other interests), I find it helpful to have f.ex. exact quotes from some book at hand (and various other Obsidian-related things)
I keep obsidian vaults mostly to augment recall, and often all it takes is a small cue to reveal that thing I couldn’t remember. I’ve found LLMs helpful for translating my question into search criteria - “agentic search” is magic.
One, it forces you to do a crude approximation of critical thinking. It allows you to examine and organize your thoughts, either physically or digitally. It isn't the same as being able to sit and break something down in your mind, but for those who struggle with that, a "second brain" allows them to reap some of those benefits.
Two, it allows you to turnover things quickly in your head. By training yourself to immediately dump out an idea into an organizational system, you don't have to hold so many things in your head. Furthermore, words are immutable and the thoughts in your head aren't.
But for me, the good thoughts usually rise to the top. And there are a lot of things I'm thinking about that are so vague, it's just a feeling. And trying to write those down robs those thoughts of the long term, "on the backburner" mental processing they need to become actual ideas. They're thoughts that are still in the embryonic phase. I can't write down the qualia of them, and when I try to I move them into a "second brain" I lose it.
I think organizational systems are work dependent. Running a business lends itself well to an organizational system. Where it's good to try a lot of shallow things. But something like physics, for example, requires playing with ideas in your mind over a long period of time until they become solid enough to chase more seriously.
I think programming probably straddles that line and it depends on what you're doing at any given time.
How do you take notes, generally speaking ?
Reverse engineering can take several forms for me: it started with writing parts of systems from scratch, and now (due to academic training) it oftens looks like "thinking about how to explain the system to a group of colleagues", which is one degree of separation from writing the system from scratch, but is much faster - and seems to work well when working with LM agents on code (because you have to confront your ignorance)
part of the training in academia is how to know when you don't understood the thing, so this ends up working well for me now.
One trick: you can force yourself to understand something better by making a presentation and imagining you're going to be grilled by someone smarter than you. This is kind of the feeling of pressure that academic paper reviews give (in an ideal world) and it translates when you think about explaining something to someone else.
I have a lot of interesting notes and I can also plug them to AI to get some reminders, insights etc.
But I agree with your general message - thinking is still superior
Where it works better is as a place to store more careful thoughts, and as a place to force you to express those thoughts in writing.
That is, it works best if you don't try to use it as a literal second brain, don't rely on it doing any thinking for you.
All that being said, confession time: using obsidian for 6 months as second brain among other things, i don't believe it has really helped me think other than as being a place where I also create more polished notes where I must crystallize ideas.
What it has done is enable my idea hoarding/belief there's gold in them there old thoughts, so I spend too much time checking if I already had a thought rather than just thinking. So the verdict is still out for me.
Note taking app, personal wiki, etc, broadly any central thing you store information in solely for yourself that's searchable. It's an artsy term that doesn't seem to add much of anything but confusion.
While it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with AI, the trend of glue AI onto everything certainly didn't help.
For you guys' 5 min of entertainment: https://youtu.be/6NukGtwJb7Y?t=256
Eventually I’m looking at a whole page of good ideas, and some pattern jumps out at me. I attribute many of my best ideas to this process. Writing lets you work beyond the limits of your own brain, especially the constraints of working memory.
I think that is the primary value in a “second brain” - externalizing your thoughts and reasoning makes them stronger - though the productivity community may use the term to mean some other thing.
Yes, but writing also helps you lens your thoughts in a completely different way. This is why so many people journal, or blog, or vlog, even though only a handful of people might actually audit their output. Obsidian sort of abdicates a lot of the value of journaling, but I think there's still some (although much less, perhaps 5% as much) value in the actual act of directing the journaling, even if the rest of the thinking is outsourced to the clanker.
I started practicing this for the stuff I'm interested in ... and the result is that I generate a lot of ideas. 99% of them are garbage.
Before AI, a conversation with colleagues would help me weed out the garbage, and possibly give me a new perspective ("here's something surprising about what you just said!")
Now, AI plays a helpful role in helping me weed out the garbage for the subset of ideas that I can test empirically -- and sometimes it does give me a new perspective, but with significantly more noise than my colleagues, who would take me right to the point that would be useful for me to see.
I've never felt like I needed a second brain ... because if I had such a thing, I think I would be keeping the 99% garbage around -- instead I just let biology GC it.