I've been deep in this problem for the past year. I'd highlight a paper, then months later highlight a book that directly contradicted it, and have zero way to surface that connection.
That's why I built Highlyt. But I'm curious: what does your reading-to-thinking workflow actually look like right now?
Color-code ideas by meaning. Link highlights across books and papers. Every reader knows the pain: thousands of highlights across PDFs and books, all orphaned, never connected.
Highlyt makes every highlight a node and every connection a typed edge (supports, contradicts, expands, questions). The result: a knowledge graph of your actual thinking.
