me My takeaway thoughts triggered by this, not directly said in the article*: When using physical technologies, there is a certain amount of creative freedom in choosing the best medium to communicate a message or send an idea. When using "sophisticated technologies" - interface-based technologies, where some designer or developer has given you tools, and you mostly use them as they intended - that takes away some of your creative freedom.

• And when they only design to tap into certain qualities, or intelligences, or mediums of communication, that limits you
• That's why mediums like Roam Research are interesting - they take for granted that they haven't thought of everything, but there's some core idea that they've successfully challenged. For Roam Research, it's the two ideas that 1) everything we think of is linked to other thoughts, that that's how the human brain works, we work with associative patterns, and that 2) the atomic thought is not at the page level, but at the bullet level.
• * (Thought mostly triggered while reading description of Figure 2)
  • Although there is a lot there that I don't know I agree with, that for physical technologies (past) there is a lot of potential for misuse, less for sophisticated technologies (present), and less for symbiotic (future). But that seems to see misuse as a purely negative thing - when that can be a good thing, when used creatively and intentionally. That can be innovative.