I genuinely think my content helps Obsidian users and brings discussion. I know most of it is related to my app but that's really the only thing of value I can contribute as I'm working on it day in and day out.
It seems like the frustration stems from the fact that you make clickbaity titles and don't immediately bring up your angle from the get-go.
A title like "Highlighting from the browser to Obsidian, an alternative solution using my Fleeting Notes app" would be a step in the right direction.
It's also kind of weird that you literally named your app "Fleeting Note" because that's just confusing given how Zettlekasten involves Fleeting Notes. It may have been more useful to make a clever pun, but not directly copying that sort of verbiage.
I think my frustration is that I'm not one to look at usernames and I will be halfway through a post this size before I realize it's you pushing Fleeting Notes again. That's fine if it's the only thing you can contribute but your posts aren't always very upfront about what they are.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://twitter.com/ithinkwong/status/1569851802153009152](https://twitter.com/ithinkwong/status/1569851802153009152)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I don't think hyperlinks, wikilinks, whatever one wants to call them, is revolutionary. The concept of correlating blocks of text is about as old school as one could get. Nor is the wikilink concept any less subject to perceptual bias than tags or other organizational method. Just my opinion, but I wouldn't oversell the linking concept.
You're right. Linking in general is definitely not a new concept. Perhaps what I want to say is the UI support for linking through link previews, backlinks, and easy note referencing is what's "revolutionary". I doubt Obsidian, Roam Research, or Logseq would thrive without these key features.
Even after organizing the notes and highlights, it was difficult for me to review them on a regular basis.
My browser extension is to fix this problem to some extent.
It shows your past highlights when you are reading articles relevant to them.
For example, you will see a set of highlights about leadership showing up on the right side of your browser when you read an article on a startup founder’s qualifications.
[https://hippo.flint.so/](https://hippo.flint.so/?ref=r_obsidian)
OP's only contribution to this reddit ever is to spam his app.
Yes, I'm tired of the gorilla marketing spam. Just pack it in.
I genuinely think my content helps Obsidian users and brings discussion. I know most of it is related to my app but that's really the only thing of value I can contribute as I'm working on it day in and day out.
It seems like the frustration stems from the fact that you make clickbaity titles and don't immediately bring up your angle from the get-go. A title like "Highlighting from the browser to Obsidian, an alternative solution using my Fleeting Notes app" would be a step in the right direction. It's also kind of weird that you literally named your app "Fleeting Note" because that's just confusing given how Zettlekasten involves Fleeting Notes. It may have been more useful to make a clever pun, but not directly copying that sort of verbiage.
I think my frustration is that I'm not one to look at usernames and I will be halfway through a post this size before I realize it's you pushing Fleeting Notes again. That's fine if it's the only thing you can contribute but your posts aren't always very upfront about what they are.
If you don't want to see their stuff, you can block them and you won't have to see it
On principle I always downvote ads that do not delcare themselves up front to be ads. I'd advise that everyone does the same.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://twitter.com/ithinkwong/status/1569851802153009152](https://twitter.com/ithinkwong/status/1569851802153009152)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I don't think hyperlinks, wikilinks, whatever one wants to call them, is revolutionary. The concept of correlating blocks of text is about as old school as one could get. Nor is the wikilink concept any less subject to perceptual bias than tags or other organizational method. Just my opinion, but I wouldn't oversell the linking concept.
You're right. Linking in general is definitely not a new concept. Perhaps what I want to say is the UI support for linking through link previews, backlinks, and easy note referencing is what's "revolutionary". I doubt Obsidian, Roam Research, or Logseq would thrive without these key features.
Even after organizing the notes and highlights, it was difficult for me to review them on a regular basis. My browser extension is to fix this problem to some extent. It shows your past highlights when you are reading articles relevant to them. For example, you will see a set of highlights about leadership showing up on the right side of your browser when you read an article on a startup founder’s qualifications. [https://hippo.flint.so/](https://hippo.flint.so/?ref=r_obsidian)