I don’t want to say too many words about the terrible things that are going on in Ukraine right now. This is the wrong place for that. But the war there prompted me to inform myself very thoroughly about various topics, such as the history of the war, the situation in Crimea or the Donbass, or military-strategic considerations, so that I can better assess the situation there. As a political scientist, I also have a professional interest in this regard. Twitter has become an enormously important source for me.
You can say whatever you want about Twitter, but there are also a lot of very smart people there that I would never meet otherwise. On Twitter, they write easily accessible long threads about their expertise, and for me, these are enormously helpful entry points. Now, Twitter is not designed for the consumption of long texts. Long threads are not particularly comfortable to read, let alone process.
Readwise and Obsidian in concert
To solve this problem, I use the Twitter bot from Readwise, which I wrote about before. I just have to write the comment @Readwiseio save thread below a tweet, and the bot captures the thread. Since I have my Twitter account put into my Readwise account, that’s where the thread goes.
So much for the import. But it gets really exciting with the export function of Readwise. Here, I have installed the official Readwise plugin in Obsidian, so that new highlights are imported directly to Obsidian. There I also read the thread, because I can use parts of it directly for my own notes or compare and relate sources. In connection with my Obsidian Set-Up this works flawlessly and automated, so exactly the way you want it. Twitter is an important source of information for me, and in combination with Readwise and Obsidian I can also work with it productively.
If you want to try Readwise, feel free to use this link for that. We will both get a free month.
Ich will gar nicht viele Worte über die schrecklichen Dinge verlieren, die gerade in der Ukraine vor sich gehen. Dafür ist das hier der falsche Ort. Der Krieg dort war aber Anlass für mich, mich sehr intensiv über verschiedene Themen wie die Vorgeschichte des Krieges, die Situation auf der Krim oder im Donbass oder auch militärisch-strategische Erwägungen zu informieren, damit ich die Lage dort besser einschätzen kann. Als Politikwissenschaftler habe ich ja auch ein fachliches Interesse in dieser Hinsicht. Twitter ist dabei zu einer enorm wichtigen Quelle für mich geworden.
Man kann über Twitter ja sagen, was man will, aber es tummeln sich eben auch viele sehr kluge Menschen dort, mit denen ich sonst nie zusammentreffen würde. Auf Twitter schreiben sie leicht zugänglich lange Threads über ihre Expertise und für mich sind das enorm hilfreiche Einstiegspunkte. Nun ist Twitter nicht für den Konsum von längeren Texten konstruiert. Lange Threads lassen sich nicht sonderlich komfortabel lesen und schon gar nicht weiterverarbeiten.
Readwise und Obsidian im Zusammenspiel
Um dieses Problem zu lösen, nutze ich den Twitter Bot von Readwise, über die ich an dieser Stelle schon mal geschrieben hatte. Ich muss einfach nur einen Kommentar @Readwiseio save thread unter einen Tweet schreiben und der Bot erfasst den Thread. Da ich in meinem Readwise-Account meinen Twitter-Account hinterlegt habe, gelangt der Thread dorthin.
So viel zum Import. Richtig spannend wird es aber erst mit der Export-Funktion von Readwise. Hier habe ich das offizielle Readwise-Plugin in Obsidian installiert, sodass neue Highlights direkt nach Obsidian importiert werden. Dort lese ich den Thread dann auch, weil ich so auch direkt Teile davon für eigene Notizen nutzen kann bzw. Quellen miteinander vergleichen und in Bezug setzen kann. In Verbindung mit meinem Obsidian Set-Up funktioniert das tadellos und automatisiert, also genau so, wie man es sich wünscht. Twitter ist für mich eine wichtige Informationsquelle und in Verbindung mit Readwise und Obsidian kann ich auch produktiv damit arbeiten.
Falls du Readwise mal testen möchtest, kannst du gern diesen Link dafür nutzen. Wir bekommen dann beide einen Gratismonat.
If you search for something on the Internet, you do it through Google. But aren’t there perhaps privacy-friendly alternatives? Yes! DuckDuckGo.
If you’re looking for something on the Internet, you do it – of course – through Google. But aren’t there perhaps alternatives that don’t create a complete profile of my life and still deliver useful results? I think so: DuckDuckGo.
For the past few weeks, I’ve been seeing them everywhere: billboards advertising DuckDuckGo. DuckDuckGo is a search engine, and now you might directly ask yourself why you still have to write articles about search engines in 2021? Google has monopolized the market, and you can get anything you want there. And at this point, you can’t fool yourself either: Google has the best results. And it’s no wonder, after all, they are a multi-billion dollar company that pulls together data from all sorts of sources and creates personal profiles. So for an alternative, it can’t be about delivering better results. Instead, it must stand out in other ways. Moreover, the results must not be too bad, of course. I can accept a little worse results if the added value is greater overall. Too bad results won’t do, of course. So what is the state of DuckDuckGo? And why should I use DuckDuckGo instead of Google at all?
One business model, two approaches
The answer is simple: privacy. Google is not a search engine. Google is a data vendor. The business model is straightforward. We as users are not the customers, companies are. Google collects data from users through its unbeatable free offer, sells it to companies that want to advertise and makes money that way.
DuckDuckGo stands out here. Yes, DuckDuckGo also places advertisements and earns a large part of its money this way. However, the advertising is not based on the user’s profile, as is the case with Google, but simply on what is searched for. If I search for „vacation at the Baltic Sea“ I will get ads for hotels at the Baltic Sea. However, no profile of mine is created, with which it would be possible to trace what I searched for five minutes ago, yesterday or two weeks ago and what else I am interested in. Google, on the other hand, knows where I go (Google Maps), who I write emails to (GMail) and what I watch in my free time (YouTube).
The crucial question concerning search results
Of course, it is difficult to quantify the quality of search results. One would have to conduct a long series of tests with different searches and user profiles to arrive at a reasonably comparable conclusion. So all that remains is good old anecdotal evidence. And here I can say that my usage experience has clearly improved over the years. When I tried to use DuckDuckGo a few years ago, it was simply not possible. I simply didn’t find anything.
In the meantime, things look quite different. I use DuckDuckGo on all my devices and I no longer have the impression that it hinders me in my work. On the contrary. More often than not, I am very satisfied with the results. I can’t express that in percentages, but as a rule I am satisfied.
Important here are the regional settings, which are located under the search box. If I search for something in German, I activate the switch and set the regional context to Germany. This also works with a variety of other countries and improves the results dramatically. It is the same when I search for things in English or simply an international context. In this case, I switch off the region-specific context and get significantly different results than if I were still searching in the German context. So if you are not satisfied with the results, you should first set your own country context.
Right next to it, there are also settings for the family filter and the time period to which the search should refer: Sometime, Yesterday, Last Week, Last Month or Last Year. If you are looking for news or other time-sensitive information, this is of course very practical.
Country context, family filter and time limit can significantly change the search results.
And of course, DuckDuckGo also has various special searches, as known from Google for either everything, pictures, videos, news or maps. This helps not only with the specific search, but also to protect your privacy. You can watch Youtube videos directly in DuckDuckGo without Youtube and therefore Google noticing who is watching.
!Bangs for a meta search engine
And then there’s the trick with Bangs and that’s where DuckDuckGo really stands out. Bangs are short commands that convert DuckDuckGo to a meta search engine. They always work according to the scheme !shortcut and then search on the respective service without sharing your own data. DuckDuckGo acts as an intermediary. For example, I can search with !g on Google, with !a on Amazon or with !yt on YouTube. DuckDuckGo then leads me directly to the respective page and presents me the results. These are also just three examples, there are many more. In total, it is currently the almost ridiculously large number of 13,505 bangs, all to look up on a separate page of DuckDuckGo.
It’s also nice that I can use DuckDuckGo anywhere. On desktop computers or laptops this has never been much of a problem: just open the browser settings to set the search engine of your choice. On a smartphone, it’s a bit more complicated, but fortunately it works. For Android, it is described here, for iPhones and iPads I go to the Settings app and open the Safari settings. There I find the entry Search Engines and I can choose between Google, Yahoo, Bing and DuckDuckGo. I can now search on the go with DuckDuckGo.
Less convenience, better overall package
Of course, you shouldn’t fool yourself. DuckDuckGo is not as good or convenient as Google. You will have to do without many integrations, such as seeing opening hours, directions and the busiest hours of the day directly on Google when you search for a store or restaurant. Or the handy answer cards that Google provides for some questions, giving you the answer without having to go to the actual page. Here, Google simply has the edge.
But if you can do without such niceties, you should definitely try DuckDuckGo. It is not a multi-tool like Google, but simply a search engine. However, this search engine works quite well and can be extended by bangs in almost any direction. For that alone, you could use DuckDuckGo. But the most important thing is privacy. I don’t want Google to record everything I do day in and day out, and therefore I accept worse search results from time to time. In a pinch, I search with !g on Google – but anonymously!
Digital texts can be floating around in all kinds of apps. Getting interesting passages out of there to write notes with them, for example, can be quite annoying and fragmented. Readwise wants to be the missing piece in the middle here, bundling highlights from Kindle or Apple books, PDF, articles on websites or even podcasts in one place. I took a look at it.
The problem with digital texts
I read digital texts in many different ways. One is RSS feeds, which I use instead of social media to read exciting articles. Often, though, I don’t have time to read an article at that moment and save it to Instapaper to read it later. Then, of course, there are eBooks. Sure, I read a lot of „real“ books, too. Still, over the last ten years, eBooks have become an integral part of my reading process. And I buy them wherever I can get them at the best price. Usually that’s Amazon, the Apple Books store, or – in the case of indie authors – simply the person’s website. So I read things on all possible corners of the internet and of course I want to do something with it. If I just read a text, it might be nice for the moment, but it’s not very helpful in the long run. Often, even after months, I still have a feeling for a text and a rough idea of what was in it, but I certainly don’t get the argumentation or details straight. So I have to make sure that I not only read texts, but also process them.
The first step for me is always to mark interesting parts of the text. Especially with digital texts this works very well. There’s just one problem when you read content in many different places: every service, every app has its own system for exporting highlights. And usually nothing is automated. So I’d have to keep digging around in apps or web interfaces if I wanted to get to my highlights. Not exactly a workflow that you would call intuitive and uncomplicated. And that, of course, reduces the chance that you’ll do it at all.
This is where Readwise comes in. Readwise is a web service that aims to solve the problem I just described. You can connect Readwise to other services and then grant Readwise access to the service in question. Readwise then takes care of importing highlights. A simple example is Instapaper. Almost all articles that I find interesting first end up in Instapaper. I then read them there and highlight sections. Readwise then imports them automatically, so I don’t have to do it myself. In the same way I’ve connected my Apple Books and Kindle library, so Readwise can import highlights from books I have there. So instead of exporting highlights for three services and each article or book myself, Readwise does it for me automatically.
Import possibilities as far as the eye can see
So far, so good. But what if I don’t use any of these three providers? Then there is at least a pretty good chance that Readwise can still help. If there’s one thing that impresses me about Readwise, it’s how many implementations they’re working on, or are already on board, respectively. In addition to Apple Books, Kindle and Instapaper, they currently have Pocket, Twitter, Medium, Feedly and Hypothes.is, Google Play Books and O’Reilly Learning, as well as the Command browser, which specializes in intensive text work.
But these are only the websites from which highlights are imported directly. In addition, there are a myriad of other ways to import readings into Readwise. For example, you can connect your Kindle via USB to have the file with all the highlights directly read and imported. Or have it emailed to Readwise. Another way is to upload a CSV file (i.e. from Excel). There is also a workaround for the (audio) book flatrate Scribd to be able to import highlights despite the lack of an API.
But that’s not all. Currently, a feature is in beta that allows PDFs to be uploaded so that highlights and comments can also be imported from PDFs. Please don’t get me wrong: the services I listed above are great and it’s an impressive range. PDFs, however, would be a real gamechanger. PDF is the backbone of science, all current papers and texts (also) appear as PDF and if I had a service through Readwise to export and bundle my annotations and comments from PDFs, that would be a fantastic help. Currently the way it works is that you have to send the PDF to the address [email protected]. Of course, you have to use the same email address that you use in your account, so that Readwise can assign the PDF to the right account.
Real books on the shelf? No problem
But that’s not the end of the story either. It is also possible to either add text yourself via copy & paste or to take a picture of a section in a printed book and then upload it. In Readwise it is then possible to mark a few sentences, which are then OCR’ed. I have only tried this once so far, but it worked very well, especially because I was able to assign the correct book from a database.
But that’s all now, isn’t it? ISN’T IT?? No. There is also the Goodreads integration, Supplemental Books and Airr. Goodreads is a social network for books. You can create lists of what you’ve read and what you’d like to read, rate books, write reviews and much more (if you want to see what I’m reading, you can do that on my Goodreads profile). But beyond that, Goodreads also offers to show popular highlights for a book. You can then see which parts of a book others found particularly interesting. Now this isn’t necessarily useful if you want to strictly just collect your own thoughts. But it can be very helpful if you’re looking for inspiration or are just curious about what others found noteworthy about a book.
Supplemental Books does something very similar, showing popular highlights from books you’ve read. Where Readwise gets the highlights from is not entirely clear to me. Possibly from its own database, i.e. highlights that other users have imported. One of the most exciting integrations, however, is Airr. Airr is a podcast player that allows you to clip short sections of a podcast. It is also possible to automatically transcribe a podcast and then send parts of the transcript to Readwise. In this way, podcasts can be integrated into a text workflow. Podcasts can become a source like web pages, PDFs or books1.
Organizing highlights with tags
So there is no lack of ways to import content into Readwise. But what about organization and management? It is of little use to me if I have all the content in the world, but can’t work with it in a meaningful way.
My books in cover view
and list view
Readwise relies here primarily on a classification by media type and tags. At the same time, it becomes clear that the focus is not on working directly in Readwise. The organizational options are not elaborate enough for that. As a user, I have no possibility to organize highlights according to my own scheme. The default options are books, supplemental books, articles, podcasts, tags, favorites, discarded highlights, and highlights that you find particularly important and want to learn by using the mastery feature. So the organization options are more for browsing or looking for something now and then, not so much for implementing a complex system.
Learning with Mastery and Spaced Repition
Readwise is not only an intermediate step for the actual work. It can also be used to learn content. For this purpose there is the already mentioned Mastery feature. This makes it possible to learn highlights with the Spaced Repition method. To do this, all you have to do is click on the Mastery button that each Highlights card has and then select the word or words you want to learn, for example because it is a definition. Then the next time, the selected words are not visible. However, I could only ever make a maximum of five words invisible, so it’s not good for hiding a complete definition, for example.
With the Mastery feature, highlights can be converted into index cards
Fortunately, there is a second way to work with text sections. You can also create an index card by writing down any question and then entering the text passage or a part of it as the answer. This is a good way to learn longer sections.
Question and answer cards can also be created
Daily highlights: Gimmick or real added value?
For me, the daily email with highlights falls more under the category „nice gimmick“. The idea is that every day at a set time you can get an email from Readwise containing five highlights (or more, can be adjusted in the settings) from the existing repertoire. In addition, you can get a sixth highlight from a book that you haven’t read, but that Readwise thinks is appropriate based on your library. For each highlight, you can then specify whether you want to keep seeing it or not. You can also add them to the highlights you want to learn and assign tags. In the settings, you can change the frequency with which certain sources are shown. You can also set whether newly added content or older content should be displayed.
A highlight card with several options
For me it’s a nice ritual in the morning, but it doesn’t have too much value. I have set the mail to be sent to me every morning at 7, so that I can do the daily run-through over my morning coffee. Every now and then I indeed stumble across interesting passages from books or articles. However, I also have the feeling that Readwise still needs to do a bit of fine-tuning here, since I quite often get the same books or articles, whereas some others from my library have not yet appeared at all. Maybe I have to experiment with the settings again.
Export to Evernote, Roam and Notion.
But if Readwise itself is not so good for organizing text passages, it needs an exit. Readwise is then the intermediary that gathers my highlights from all sorts of sources, but not the place where productive work with that text happens. Readwise has its export function for exactly this purpose. It currently works automatically for Evernote, Notion and Roam Research, three of the biggest players in this field. You can also export CSV and Markdown files manually.
Markdown export is fortunately possible
Is it useful? Do I need it?
How do I rate Readwise? Is it useful or just another subscription that you don’t use enough? First and foremost, I find the idea behind Readwise fascinating, as it addresses a real problem. People who work a lot with digital texts simply often get caught in a trap where they collect a plethora of content but don’t work effectively with it. Marking up is one thing. Generating retrievable knowledge from it or writing useful texts is something else entirely. In addition, the large platforms such as Amazon Kindle or Apple Books often do not make this second step particularly easy or intuitive. Readwise can play a decisive role here. However, you also notice that the service is still in its fledgling stages. The web interface often takes a bit longer to load and the algorithm for highlighting also needs some work. On the other hand, I find the number of integrations already in place quite impressive and I expect more to be added in the future. In addition, if the PDF import emerges from the beta phase as a reliable feature, it would increase the usefulness especially for scientists and students d.
Educational discount and double trial period
Currently, Readwise costs $4.49 per month in the Lite version and $7.99 in the Pro version without the educational discount. I tend to think that the Lite version is not sufficient. Many of the exciting features (Tags and Notes, Export to Evernote and Notion, Mastery) are only included in the Pro version. A complete overview can be found here. The good thing, however, is that Readwise offers a quite generous educational discount of 50%. As I understand the website, you just have to have something to do with a university. Study there, work there, still have a mail address left. A mail to [email protected] seems to be enough.
If you want to have a look for yourself, you can do so via this link. If you register, you will get an extra month of trial period (60 days instead of the normal 30 days) and you will also give me a month to test it. Fair, isn’t it?
Digitale Texte können in allen möglichen Apps rumliegen. Interessante Passagen dort raus zu bekommen, um damit z.B. Notizen zu schreiben, kann ziemlich nervig und kleinteilig sein. Readwise will hier das fehlende Teil in der Mitte sein und Highlights aus Kindle oder Apple Büchern, PDF, Artikeln auf Websites oder sogar Podcasts an einem Ort bündeln. Ich habe mir das mal angeschaut.
Wer etwas im Internet sucht, macht das – natürlich – bei Google. Aber gibt es nicht vielleicht auch Alternativen, die nicht ein komplettes Profil meines Lebens erstellen und dennoch brauchbare Ergebnisse liefern? Ich denke schon: DuckDuckGo.
Plagiate waren in den letzten Jahren immer wieder Thema der medialen Berichterstattung. Parallel wuchs auch die Sensibilisierung im akademischen Kontext. Manche Universitäten prüfen heute schon standardmäßig Abschlussarbeiten auf plagiierte Stellen, andernorts geschieht das nur bei Verdachtsfällen. Auf jeden Fall hat die Wichtigkeit dieser Thematik zugenommen. Ich konnte nun einen Anbieter – Plagscan – testen. Außerdem war es mir möglich, dem CTO von Plagscan, Dr. Johannes Knabe, einige Fragen direkt zu stellen.
Bibliotheken haben sich gewandelt. Sie sind im digitalen Zeitalter angekommen und stellen eine Vielzahl an Büchern und anderen Medien zur Verfügung. Was für eine unterschätze Ressource!
Wer es ernst meint mit dem papierlosen Arbeiten ist genervt von Briefpost. Anbieter wie Caya scannen deine Post, um sie dir digital online zugänglich zu machen. Ich habe den Service getestet.