I used to wonder what it'd be like to be a rich celebrity, and be able to buy literally everything you want immediately. And now that I can do that in a few fields of commerce, it's turned out to be not very exciting at all. It's good to know that if a book looks interesting, I can have it, but it's not nearly as exciting as I would have expected it to be. I'd imagine celebrities knowing that they can own any house or car is kind of underwhelming.
* Having my own house (no random roommates or bad family members)
* Having a computer and cellphone
* Having a bike
* Having house plants
These things cost money, and also make me happy. I think the key though is to buy and own things that will bring you joy. If maintaining house plants is a chore you’re doing to keep up with trendy design, it won’t bring happiness. If having a house full of greenery helps to you to feel more connected with nature it will bring joy. Figure out the things you own that bring happiness, and don’t buy the rest.
What are you thinking of here?
Any kind of air travel or trans-oceanic travel is a great example.
In door plumbing is another good one.
Instant communication is another.
We live in an age of instant gratification. It only keeps on getting better.
I think the one interesting place is w.r.t textbooks. Piracy means that I can efficiently pull up multiple textbooks on any given subject, as well as textbooks on any pre-requisite subjects. The size and cost of most textbooks would make that untenable otherwise.
Though my ratio of books skimmed or read partially to books read from beginning to end has skyrocketed, I've found that with many books just one page or even one sentence carries valuable knowledge.
I can't even begin to compare the knowledge I have access to today to what I had just a decade ago, and a decade ago compared to two decades ago is even wider of a difference.
Even happiness due to marriage returns to it's base level, in time.
So media ?
But ask yourself:
Are you more knowledgeable because of free non-fiction books ?
Have you been exposed to more culture, and dare i say, better culture because of free TV ?
And aren't those things valuable, even if they don't make you happy ?
- Rabbi Hyman Schachtel (1954)
If you don't, someone could report your website to Amazon and get your account banned. (https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+ban+seller+account+ta...)
I looked into it, and it's just one user recommending it over and over: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2100/sardathrion
Maybe, though, there's some hidden validity to the implied idea that assertiveness is a key issue in the RPG community.
For example, it says that on the TeX/LaTeX StackExchange, The TeXbook is mentioned only 6 times (https://bookinsider.gitlab.io/2018/12/01/top-20-books-on-tex...), while in fact it's mentioned closer to 1357 times (https://tex.stackexchange.com/search?q=texbook). What appears to be true is that only 6 times someone bothered to link to Amazon when mentioning the book. Worse, for the English Language & Usage site, the Oxford English Dictionary does not even show up in the results (https://bookinsider.gitlab.io/2018/12/01/top-20-books-on-eng...) while in reality it's mentioned about 7000 times by acronym (https://english.stackexchange.com/search?q=oed) and about 1600 times by full name (https://english.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22oxford%20engli...).
Under what circumstances will someone add a link when mentioning a book? I can think of two:
- The user thinks the book is not sufficiently well-known, so they add a link to Amazon or some other such site, for the readers to learn more.
- The user is trying to make money off affiliate links, or whatever.
For books that are well-known, or for the typical (lazy) user like me, books are going to mentioned and discussed without any link to anywhere being added (and often by acronym or nickname). So in that sense this site is actually likely to miss all the most frequently discussed books — the ones so well-known that no one bothers to link to anything when mentioning them (as in the examples above).
Shows that the hard part of data analysis is usually data cleanup (eliminating false positives and false negatives) and normalization (this one seems to treat links to different editions on Amazon as different books).
All that said, this site is useful nevertheless; thanks for making it!
How do you determine whether someone using the word "mindset" is talking about the book by the same name, or just using the word?
But what you can do is be very up front about the error: you can be explicit about your methods and describe their modes of failure, give examples of some of the things you might miss, try to analyze your error and how bad it is, and so on, and finally leave it to the reader to decide how seriously to take your results. (If you see some recent papers they include a “Threats to Validity” section, e.g. Section 3.4 here: https://people.engr.ncsu.edu/ermurph3/papers/seip18.pdf)
Line 223: \u can only be followed by a Unicode character sequence.
On Safari 12.0.3.
I bet all of them are pretty interesting, however.
Co-author of TPOSANA
While you could answer my above questions directly, I don’t need them answered; I’m just trying to make the point that “nicknames” cannot be easily correlated with a book when you scale up to “the entire word of readers”.
As was common for 80s software textbooks, this was nicknamed for the distinctive image on the cover.
But (and now your edit clarifies that this indeed was your point), perhaps your point is just how difficult it would be to automatically disambiguate nicknames in diverse communities like StackExchange.