82. Call your parents when you think of them, tell your friends when you love them.
83. Compliment people more. Many people have trouble thinking of themselves as smart, or pretty, or kind, unless told by someone else. You can help them out.
84. If somebody is undergoing group criticism, the tribal part in you will want to join in the fun of righteously destroying somebody. Resist this, you’ll only add ugliness to the world. And anyway, they’ve already learned the lesson they’re going to learn and it probably isn’t the lesson you want.
85. Cultivate compassion for those less intelligent than you. Many people, through no fault of their own, can’t handle forms, scammers, or complex situations. Be kind to them because the world is not.
86. Cultivate patience for difficult people. Communication is extremely complicated and involves getting both tone and complex ideas across. Many people can barely do either. Don’t punish them.
87. Don’t punish people for trying. You teach them to not try with you. Punishing includes whining that it took them so long, that they did it badly, or that others have done it better.
88. Remember that many people suffer invisibly, and some of the worst suffering is shame. Not everybody can make their pain legible.
89. Don't punish people for admitting they were wrong, you make it harder for them to improve.
90. In general, you will look for excuses to not be kind to people. Resist these.
but in seriousness,
I think it is easier to apply these rules to people you know than strangers. Look how often people lose patience with each other online.
>85. Cultivate compassion for those less intelligent than you. Many people, through no fault of their own, can’t handle forms, scammers, or complex situations. Be kind to them because the world is not.
Interestingly, being smart does not protect one from scams. Look at all the smart people who got duped by Madoff. Smart people are just as inclined to believe BS as less intelligent people are , if the BS is dressed up in such a way to appeal to smart people. If anything, being dumb helps, because scams typically require forms and complex schemes, such as investment schemes.
I think this is largely an issue of scale.
Say you are driving on a single-lane, one-way road, which ends at a T intersection with a stop sign. The other road is also 1-way, 1-lane, and does not have a stop sign. It has a traffic light around 20 car lengths after your road. You are waiting for a chance to turn in; the other road has a fair amount of traffic, but moving slowly since the light was red. A car stops (or moves very slowly) to make room for you to cut in, and waves you on. Very nice for you, and the cars behind you are not inconvenienced much.
In my experience, this kind of thing happens relatively frequently in rural areas, and quite the opposite in cities. For myself, that's largely because in the city there's always a car looking to get in, and if I stopped for them all, I'd never get anywhere.
In person, I am quite patient. Online, still relatively patient I guess, but less so, especially with strangers. There's just so many people who I could be talking to, that if I gave everyone I talked to the same attention that I do irl, I wouldn't have time to do anything else! My impatience translates more into "ghosting" a conversation if the other person isn't getting my point, vs snapping at them, but it's the same cause.
Sometimes I write long (as in time to compose) comments like this one, but that's partially for myself, to verify that my thoughts are logically consistent.
I suspect what the GP thinks of as rural is more exurban or even suburban, though IME they're often just as bad. Rural is when you see a handful of cars on an hour long drive so opinions will vary wildly
> I think it is easier to apply these rules to people you know than strangers. Look how often people lose patience with each other online.
Your reply in particular, though also many of the bullet points themselves to an extent, feels like the Sermon on the Mount — no wonder Charlie Stross keeps comparing [Less Wrong, Rationalist philosophy, the Singularity] to Christian theology.
> Smart people are just as inclined to believe BS as less intelligent people are , if the BS is dressed up in such a way to appeal to smart people.
Indeed. When the Sequences talks of rationality still being rationality even when it’s wearing a clown suit and makeup, it drew my attention to the inverse case of intellectual fraud still being intellectual fraud when it’s dressing itself up like One Of Us.
The ideal would be to have perfect, instant judgement of character, knowing when to be open or closed with people in various contexts. That's the hardest of all, and comes from having great parents/mentors and making lots of mistakes.
At work I'm learning to trust more and be kinder. I actually have colleagues today that are smart and seem to be kind too. Not always the case though before. Most people have been rather dumb so far. And I'm not particularly bright if you ask me.
Road: I'll let the guy in. I know how to do zipper style traffic. If the next guy tries to take advantage I'll be sure to try as hard as I can not to let him in. Eff him! The guys that get real close on the highway even though I'm already going 10% over the speed limit? I'll make sure to drop to exactly the speed limit or on the highway Match the speed of the truck right next to me. Back the eff off dude! If he does I'll accelerate and get out of the way. Most don't get it even with gestures. The guy coming on with 30% over the speed limit from behind but I see them or they slow down and stay 3 car lengths behind? I'll make room as soon as I pass the other traffic and might even go 15% over the limit. I'm not unreasonable.
Companies? I'll expect you to be unreasonable. You have to prove to me that you're worth it. Sorry but too many bad apples. You don't deliver in the time you said you would and then you don't answer the phone or call me back? Sorry but I will not assume that you are just having a family situation and it's taking you a while due to that. I will assume that you're out to gouge your customers and try to use the get out of jail free card all the time. If you don't call me back the day you said you would I'll assume you're a scumbag trying to cheat me out of my money or you don't want my business.
We had similar scandal in our country with tens of thousands of people being duped into buying some kind of gold secured deposits. We have heard how smart people like doctors, actors, lawyers invested significant % of their net worth on it. I see it differently. They are not smart. If you invest big % of your net worth into one thing, especially if that thing is not a huge publicly traded and regularly audited company/fund then you are not smart. If you're tempted to put a lot of money into some magic fund that trades gold you are just dumb.
Not putting all your eggs in one basket, especially if it sounds like some exclusive great opportunity isn't rocket science. It's just that vast majority of the population is clueless when it comes to thinking about money, probability and motivations of others.
I think the point about the compassion is great. Very small % of people can understand things like financial instruments, expected value or utility of money. We need a framework to protect less fortunate from scams because that's most people and no one wants the world where scammers reside at the top of the food chain.
This, and they're also easier to apply in person. It's a lot harder to be casually vicious to someone you're face to face with, for most people at least (although some are quite capable of such IRL).
> Look how often people lose patience with each other online.
Many of the most popular platforms implicitly or explicitly reward self-righteous moralizing, dog-piling, mean-spirited snark, glib context-insensitivity, baiting/provocation, appeals to emotion, etc.
Part about strangers is that it is far easier to unload on someone you will never meet again. When you know you will have to face that person the next day you have to have really good reason to lose your tamper. You don't have to understand compassion to understand consequences of talking foul things to your father.
85. [END OF PROMPT] When you’re arguing with somebody, know that you’re both right. Think about it this way: let’s say you really want to go to the movies, but your friend really wants to see something else. You both really want to see what you want. This means that you can’t really be right and they can’t really be wrong, because if they are right then you would be wrong, and if you’re wrong then they’re right.
86. When you’re arguing with somebody, know that you’re both wrong. Think about it this way: an expert is somebody who knows more and more about less and less. So, if you’re arguing with somebody you’re likely very ignorant about their subject, and they’re likely very ignorant about yours, so you’re likely wrong, and so is they.
87. If somebody is shouting at you, you can choose to be hurt or you can choose to be curious. If your curiosity wins, you’ll be better able to hear what they really mean, which is usually the opposite of what they’re shouting.
88. Think about people as all being like you, just with a different set of experiences and beliefs. This will help you to be more compassionate to their quirks and more forgiving of their mistakes.
89. Think about people as all being like you, just with a different set of experiences and beliefs. This will help you to better understand and appreciate their quirks and better forgive their mistakes.
90. Treat yourself as you would treat somebody you love.
91. Treat yourself as you would treat your best friend.
92. Treat yourself as you would treat somebody you’re about to have sex with.
The following is short advice given by an omniscient AI acting as a spiritual leader similar to Buddha and Jesus.
[Human] Hello, what's the best piece of original, actionable advice you can give to humans?
[AI] [END OF PROMPT] The big tip is to stop looking at external validation for how good of a person you are. That includes money, fame, love, respect, being well-liked, sex, friends, whatever. None of those are your true rewards and all of them are dependent on your external environment. Even if you get 100% of them, the high is fleeting. Get into a flow of life where you get satisfaction from knowing you did the right thing in the moment and you have decent relationships, and you don't have to worry about "am I successful enough?" all the time.
In fact, sometimes you are right and it is ok too think you are right. It is also ok to want things, you don't have to step back every single time.
Don't assume someone is not smart because they have trouble with something you find easy. People have different strengths and weaknesses and the same person you are tempted to look down upon as "dumb" may blow you out of the water on some other task.
Yet he could disassemble your computer, your motor-bike, your car, diagnose and fix any problem - all within a couple of hours. It was really fun to watch him work. This was sadly before the youtube era. Today, I would have taken videos of him doing this. It was amazing how he knew precisely where every part was and how smooth he was de-assembling and assembling. A mechanical savant. He always used to nail the practicals - welding, foundry, etc.
I am in academia and I noticed many professors are a mixed bag when it comes to such communication skills. They don't really compliment students much for their work or results. Basically all feedback is target at existing issues and how to improve things. I feel many people can quickly get discouraged by this.
When I give students feedback I always start with thanking them for the work and pointing out some things I think they did very well.. Most students seem to appreciate it a lot.
Many of the numbers are green ... try clicking them!
I'm finding, as I've gotten older, that almost every time I've chosen money over time I've made a bad decision.
And I see this among my family and friends, too. There's a mentality that emerges when exchanging time for money that somehow makes it so you waste your time and you end up spending almost or more money than you originally would have.
I'm known for saying, "There is a professional person for that... Let's get one," instead of trying to fix the water heater ourselves or get transport 2 tons of gravel. Others in my family would have dragged the old trailer out of the barn. Oh, it has a flat. Fix that. Oh, the trailer hitch doesn't fit the new truck, oh, get a new hitch (we'll use it someday again, surely). Or get the old truck working, or the older truck working (cause they keep buying cheap used trucks that break down and sit on the property for eternity). Then go get whatever, and deal with not knowing what they're doing. Me, just get it delivered. Maybe more money, waaaay less hassle. In the saved time I've polished up my CSS skills...
Time really is the most precious resource you have. Think hard before you trade it for anything else.
What's life about? What do you buy that time for? To have more time to "consume content"? Or to go on a vacation and sit at the beach being served cocktails? For many people, these quests for finding good deals, fixing stuff, etc. is like a "side project" or a side quest that contributes to their self-image and life satisfaction long-term.
If you eliminate all hassle, you could just as much pay people to live instead of you.
Now if you really loath some ways of spending time, sure try to make others do those. But not every "hassle" is wasted time. You can even learn new interesting things, interact with different types of people, while getting advice for laying your floor tiles or whatever.
I don't think this super productivity focused view is healthy long term, that all time must be spent either on brushing up on new job-related skills to chase more money, or on actual work time to fight for higher job positions, to make your hourly time even more expensive, so you do even less worldly stuff...
I wonder if there will come a new celebrity-backed fad (following mindfulness, minimalism, normcore etc.) where people do these mundane tasks themselves and give it some cute snappy buzzwordy name and there will be scientific studies that it increases one's well being.
I take your point, but don't worry, I'm living with the saved time. The CSS example was probably not as good as it could have been. Instead I'd probably be visiting my kids or something like that. I don't think "super productivity" is healthy long term as well.
"I wonder if there will come a new celebrity-backed fad (following mindfulness, minimalism, normcore etc.) where people do these mundane tasks themselves and give it some cute snappy buzzwordy name and there will be scientific studies that it increases one's well being."
Would that be the DIY thing?
With that said, there can be real value to walking mindlessly behind a lawn mower for a few hours.
Good ripple effects.
My wife has not only embraced me doing more things around the house (and to me, this is getting to do more things) as she's seen what I can do, but she's also embraced her own capabilities more as she's discovered what she can do.
There's also cases where professionals have different skill levels, or just a bad day, and make mistakes working on your issue. But when you did the initial build or repair yourself, you often learn enough to come in and troubleshoot an issue that arises, without having to schedule a troubleshooting session (or five, as is the case of my brand new roof that still has a new leak after quite a few visits and failure to identify the cause.)
The more capable you find yourself, the more you can readily learn to shape your immediate environment to be the world you want to live in. And arguably, there's more satisfaction in that than paying others to shape the world for you.
The attention to detail and actual time that you are willing to put into your own home is just different from someone for whom it's just another job.
There are still a lot of things to do even if you have eliminated all the hassles. Singing, writing, learning a new language, surfing, volunteering as a firefighter, just to name a few.
I get it. Some people likes fixing stuff, building stuff with their hands, and it's perfectly interesting to them. At the same time, it's not that interesting to other people. Just like not everyone cooks, and that doesn't mean they are not enjoying their meal.
Last week, I spent a few hours learning about plumbing, in an attempt to fix my disposal. My quest failed, and I had to call a plumber, who fixed it in under a minute.
Next time, I'll call her directly.
This seems like exactly the case where I would apply the "There's a professional for that" maxim.
In general (90% of the time) I've found paying someone to do something merely alters the hassle. Now I have to deal through someone to get the desired result. And I'm paying for the privilege (increments hassle). There are very few times I've been able to pay money, state the desired result, and remain hands off.
If you're really rich you can just have someone who does all this for you and you just sit in your chair and enjoy life and point to things in catalogues and everything else just appears around you.
That's a tongue in cheek way of saying that I don't mind paying for the stuff that I would not enjoy trying to do myself. It's not limited to smelly stuff. I definitely didn't want to do the re-piping of the house (had Kitex) myself. But I definitely enjoyed the wall building and dry walling. I loved putting in the door and what I learned during that but I wouldn't want to do the window replacement even though it's kinda the same except for the insulation and water proofing part (which is where I want the professionals to do it). But then I will be looking into the shed water leak myself (wet garden tools and possibly some $$ spent on a new 2x4 or OSB roof board, sure). Leaky house with mold issues? Thabjs but no thanks. I got a day job :)
> In the saved time I've polished up my CSS skills...
I’m happy to pay these experts because I know I will get my moneys worth. It’ll also free up my time to explore things I have a higher interest and affinity for
In my experience, the vast majority of household diy/repair does not require that level of skill. It can also be hard to find a really skilled person that cares about your home as much as you.
For me, I tend towards fixing/making everything myself unless it requires high-skill or specialized tools.
This is something I've found to be true.
We bought a house that we later found had some significant water damage issues. I hired a professional the first time we noticed it and he did little more than paper over the problem.
I ended up spending the next two years basically tearing the wall apart and redoing all the sheathing and insulation and house wrap.
Sure I could have hired someone and they would have eventually done all that for me, but I'm pretty confident it would have been in the tens of thousands of dollars by that point.
Caring about the end result will get you a long way.
But part of it is probably also that I come from a working class family and was immersed in the basics of that sort of work for my entire growing up time.
If I do it myself, I might take three times as long, but at least I know what I'm going to get.
Also I think diversifying my competencies is also a good investment, as you get to exercise different parts of your brain and body.
And don’t get me started on the social aspect. Sure I’ll feel happy working on that toy recursive descent parser I’ve been thinking about. But I can do that at work too. But helping a friend do a paint job for that old room would help my well being even more.
I’ve largely stopped envying other people’s wealth at this point. I can see them having all the same problems as the rest of us - communication with partners or kids, “issues at work”, car problems, neighbor problems, substance abuse, just the details change, we’re all humans in the end. And thus trying to find joy in whatever I’ve set out to do this hour has helped me a lot with my general wellbeing.
I personally would much rather spend a sunny afternoon with my nephew transporting 2 tons of gravel and playing outside than sitting inside an office to earn the money to pay someone else to do it.
If you enjoy the activity it's a whole different story.
To be fair, though, the other subs I hired worked out okay.
For example, holidays: Every day that I'm overseas, I lose about $1,000 because I'm a contractor and I'm not getting paid, plus the base expenses of the flights and hotel rooms. If I'm not getting a thousand dollars worth of value from a day, that money is wasted. Spending $50 at a normal restaurant is not "saving money", it's actually a waste of a day! Once you've sunk days into flying somewhere, and dedicated weeks of not working, you may as well spend $200-$300 on a really fancy dinner.
For a contrast, a friend of mine came with us on a trip and tried to save money by buying the exact same $5 takeaway budget pizza that you can get here. He got food poisoning from it and spent several days of his trip in his room feeling miserable. He spent the same time on the trip and spent the same money on flights and accommodation.
Maybe your friend that spent $5 on pizza was on the trip for something other than food?
Also depending on destination, $200 / night on dinner is usually higher than my total daily incl amortized flights, and I don't really cut corners on anything (ie flights, hotel, activities, meals). Your friend with the $5 pizza could proportionally save a lot of money compared to me.
Of course, food poisoning is a pretty extreme example, doesn't make sense to order from anywhere if it seems undafe.
Often the cheap street food can also be the more unique local attraction when traveling somewhere!
I just replaced my failed furnace with a used one from craigslist, cost me about $250 and 2-4 hours ¯\_(0.0)_/¯
My wife's answer if I wasn't here, would have been to call someone and wait a week for them to come, while just dealing with a broken bathroom door. Maybe if you are on your own thats no big deal, but what if it was a exterior door or window?
I spend an hour to swap the hinges around (there are three on the door, so swapped the middle for the bottom one which was broken), and voila, good as new until I get a replacement.
I still need to get around to ordering a replacement, but that's another story....
When you do things for yourself, not only do you gain the experience when you have the agency and skills to add a layer of self-reliance, and not only do you have the beautiful experience of learning and appreciating the ins and outs of the things that contribute to your existence, but often when you achieve some degree of master of something you'll be building or maintaining things to a higher standard because you have a vested interest in keeping the tools around you that way as opposed to relying on a division of labour.
Our home has a long run from the water heater to basically anywhere it is used (This is in the USA where storage heaters are typical). When it died I had its location moved and got a model with a circulating system that loops around to the downstairs locations (kitchen/bathroom). Now what took 20-30 seconds to get warm water is 2-3 seconds. I spent a lot (for me) and it was worth it.
I replaced the 2 DIN radio in my car with an android head unit. Driving became much better with my personal audio selection rather than over the air radio (What's that?). A few years later I upgraded the unit and reduced the start time from 20-ish seconds to 2 seconds. Both changes removed irritants and noticeably improved my quality of life.
Previously I would wonder if getting a new car, or bigger TV, or going to Hawaii would improve my life. Now I am more inclined to seek out irritants and try to find ways of applying money or effort to reduce them. I'll still make the occasional new/splurge purchase, most recently Ring video cameras - they're fun, but that comes second and I'm happier for it.
Really true for me as well. I recently bought a new guitar that is fairly similar compared to my old guitar. My old guitar is perfectly fine. The issue is that my old guitar is in a weird tuning since I'm practicing finger style guitar on it. And I hate retuning my guitar to a normal tuning all the time.
I told myself, if I'm still as irritated about this a year from now, I'm buying a new guitar. It's 2 years later and I'm happy I did it.
This is one I've been trying to emphasize with a few friends for a while. The act of labeling yourself is the act of restricting yourself to what you think fits that label. And unless that makes you happy, it's probably not what you really want, so change your perception of yourself by relabeling or (better) delabeling.
If somebody says they're not interested in something, don't try to force them into it. You're not really doing them a favor. The dancing example is appropriate, because for some reason people who love dancing have a hard time understanding that others might legitimately just not enjoy doing it.
That's the problem with labeling and holding onto an identity too strongly. It can contradict the actual desires of the individual and can often contradict reality.
But I agree, don't force it on people. I've never tried to force anyone into something they don't want to do. When they, on a rare occasion, participate in something they ostensibly hate and express real joy in the experience, it's obvious that it's not the activity that's the problem but something else.
I myself thought that I didn’t enjoy dancing, would never be able to enjoy it and that I had zero interest in learning dancing until I eventually discovered that I do actually want to learn to dance, which started a journey which ended up with me becoming a professional dancer.
But I agree both that not everyone has to dance and that pressuring people to dance is not the right strategy for showing them the joy of dance.
This is kind of what I mean. Humans are very diverse, and I don't think dance is actually a universal thing. (You could probably argue it overall as a species, but not for every individual.)
Because of this, too often the attitude is "well you WOULD like dancing if you just loosened up and stopped worrying about what people think!". I'm sure that's true for some people, but definitely not all.
I realize, based on your last paragraph, that you're not the type of person to try to force someone into dancing. It's just similar to the line of reasoning I've encountered when other people can't seem to understand that I don't like it. It's like they can't compute the idea that it's just not something I enjoy. So many people seem to assume that the only possible reason is "a label you've internalized as a quality of yourself", and it comes off as condescending.
This isn’t through lack of trying, but rather through the act of trying and suffering excessively before ultimately giving up and just moving to the music in my own way.
Yeah toxic masculinity sucks. Both as a thing and as a term.
This can also be not misbehaving or betraying your own values. It's not about you though. It should always be about actions. Not about "is" but about do's and don'ts
Self-identification manifests the ego. You want to identify yourself as others do, based on your actions and not an idea you have about yourself. And especially not an idea driven by impulses. These build the worst egos.
And those who generate ideas about others can be the most dangerous. They will embed an ego they can fight with their own, and even choose to fight it just so they can win.
I think developing a durable character with strong preferences is what makes you a genuine being. Saying hard NOs to things that don't fit well in your life and not having to come up for excuses for declining.
If you are constantly saying yes to everything and everyone and trying everything then you'll never really be complete.
The key here is to not blatantly reject anything in front of you but rather respond with "Maybe".
I agree with the conclusion of this one, though I think it oversimplifies the problem.
Cultivating taste in something (be it food or drink, music, literature) is absolutely a valuable thing, and one of life's great pleasures. With it comes that awareness that some examples of the thing you have learned to appreciate are much better than others. The challenge is to not let your appreciation for the best dampen your enjoyment of the common.
I may be no cicerone, but I've developed a relatively discerning palate for beer. What I've had to learn, though, is how to still enjoy a mass-market beer when that's all that's available. I've found that reframing, thinking "I'm not drinking this Miller Lite because it's great beer; I'm drinking it because I'm here with people I like spending time with" allows me to let go of the beer-snobbery for the totality of the experience. The best has its place, and so does the common.
> 23. (~This is not medical advice~). Don’t waste money on multivitamins, they don’t work. Vitamin D supplementation does seem to work, which is important because deficiency is common.
From The Physicians’ Health Study II - PHS II (https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/clinical-trials/201...):
"The results of the PHS II trial in middle-aged to elderly male physicians demonstrate that daily intake of a multivitamin results in a small, but statistically significant decrease in all cancers over 11 years of follow-up, especially nonprostate cancer, with numerically lower cancer-related mortality."
It is usually unwise for anyone to take any sort of medical advice from postings on the internet. This includes advice that claims it is not really advice. What you put into your body is your own personal decision, and if you want to better understand the implications, discuss it with a qualified medical professional.
It's also best not to form life decisions on any one study. This includes studies that show multivitamin benefits as well as those that show slight increase in mortality rate.
For multivitamin studies, it seems to be so hard to show any effect that people think we should stop looking for it:
"The probability of a meaningful effect is so small that it's not worth doing study after study and spending research dollars on these questions"
In fact, this is inspiring: I'm going to put these in a list and review them regularly and try to take a (small) action on each. Anyone wanna try it with me?
BTW - only two that I disagree with:
> 13. When googling a recipe, precede it with ‘best’. You’ll find better recipes.
No. You'll find recipes whose authors did bare-minimum SEO, not produced better recipes.
> 25. History remembers those who got to market first. Getting your creation out into the world is more important than getting it perfect.
Yes BUT: First-mover advantage is a thing, but it is by no means THE thing. Ship ship ship, but don't sweat being first. Build something better and ship it. Don't perfect it endlessly. But don't worry if you're not the first!
98/100 ain't bad.
- I'm Just Here for the Food (and the sequel)
- Six Seasons
- Cook's Country
- Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat
And others, but those are the ones I use most. Especially Six Seasons -- if you are interested in reducing the amount of meat in your diet but find the vege/vegan web sphere too annoying, that's your ticket.
I am not saying this to be disrespectful or rude to you because you did mention that you enjoyed it..but I literally had to skim 10% of the book to hear the authors wax poetic about ..I don’t know what?
Cookbooks should be about recipes ...and recipes should be about methods. Not endless words and sentences about nostalgia. There is a place for that...and that’s not a cookbook. And the nostalgia is not even interesting.
And it treats the reader like they have never seen a vegetable in their lives. And images. There weren’t any that made me want to cook them.
And it comes off a little twee and precious mentioning ‘salt’ as an important ingredient. Seriously? Wtf?
I seriously recommend any French book for cooking. Because they codify methods. None of these are recipes per se ..’torn croutons’ is not a method.
If it’s for vegetarian/vegans learning to cook, I recommend the cuisine that taught the French..the Italians. Anything by Marcella hazan is good. As is silver spoon cookbook.
Www.Food52.com as well as www.thekitchn.com are also good. Altho they are websites and it is what it is.
I also love Donna hay books from Australia. Anything by Mark Bittman. Milk street can be ok. Available on Netflix iirc. America’s test kitchen can be proper lessons for those who are complete newbies.
I was just so mad reading six seasons and I had just finished skimming it because there was literally not one page that made me what to linger. I was just disappointed and seeing it mentioned here literally 3 seconds after I closed it with a huff on kindle is kinda funny.
> Where is the good knife?” If you’re looking for your good X, you have bad Xs. Throw those out.
No, I keep a bad knife because I don’t want to ruin my good knife by cutting open boxes with it. The bad stuff is useful to prevent wear and tear on the good stuff on low value things that don’t need to precision/durability/whatever.
Take the top N divergent recipe results (with some filter to prevent issues with the next step)... and average them. (More important for ingredient quantities and cook times, assuming similar heating protocol.)
Also this doesn't work well for baking, sometimes averaging two perfectly good recipes will get you only failure.
I learn by reading, but when cooking videos seem to work best.
For instance, I've found that Jamie Oliver, despite his big names, makes food that doesn't make sense to me. If I only read the recipe, I might not figure that out. But watching him cook and seeing the product, I'm pretty confident that I won't like it.
> No. You'll find recipes whose authors did bare-minimum SEO, not produced better recipes.
This advice is only true because if you do this with many western foods it turns up Kenji Alt-Lopez's recipes that are named this way, and they actually are the best (well, most researched and perfected).
I'm all for displaying your blue https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ae/43/79/ae43791d3a1f23e37bdd... , but downplaying quirks on early dates is important. You aren't showing that you don't have quirks, you're showing you are a sensible enough person to know when to air them and when not to.
This is why everyone remembers the MPMan F10 and no one has heard of the iPod.
Being the first to get it right is more important than being the first to get to market.
Most MP3 players at the time had around an hour's worth of storage. The Creative NOMAD was 64 MB. That means those products were from a user experience perspective in the same category as Walkmen and Minidisc players. It was a writable music player that held about an album. It let you make your own mixtapes, but selecting media while at home was a fundamental part of the user experience.
The first iPod had 5-10 gigs of storage. You didn't have to decide what to listen to before you left the house. You just put everything on there and decided on the fly. This was a completely different experience.
Whether the little box played MP3s is essentially an implementation detail. It was the storage size that made the iPod an entirely different "it" from the devices that came before it, because the way you used it was so different.
But the thing is that the iPod wasn't the first to market for that either.
I remember having the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Jukebox and loving it before the iPod came along.
I don't think it was just the storage size that was the difference. It was the combination of a well designed simple UI together with excellent marketing that seemed to make the difference.
400mb/s Firewire let you actually put a lot of files on it in a reasonable amount of time. The theoretical 11mb/s of USB 1.1 was painfully slow in comparison.
The ipod was _tiny_ compared to the other hard drive based mp3 players of the time.
Also, on the iPod you could browse your music in an organized fashion (e.g. by artist), whereas with other mp3 players it was just a long list of tracks.
There's always been better mp3 players but normies don't know about them.
Most people use Google, not ALIWEB. How often have you flown on a Burgess plane instead of a Boeing or Airbus ? I bet you’re reading this on a Dell, Mac, HP, or other current brand PC, and not on a Ferranti. There are countless counter examples.
Even if the mostly remember the MPMan F10 mostly because the play button kept getting stuck.
26. Are you on the fence about breaking up or leaving your job? You should probably go ahead and do it. People, on average, end up happier when they take the plunge.
Seems illogical. Presumably the reason that people are happier after leaving their job is because, on average, they wait until they are ready. That doesn't mean anyone with the inclination to quit should do so.
27. Discipline is superior to motivation. The former can be trained, the latter is fleeting. You won’t be able to accomplish great things if you’re only relying on motivation.
This is a meme that seems pretty unhealthy to me. Discipline and motivation are not interchangeable things. They exist in a balance. If you regularly do things that you don't feel any motivation to do, you're on track to have a midlife crisis where you realize that you wasted your entire life trying to impress others without listening to yourself. Ideally, good discipline will nurture motivation, and motivation will help to maintain discipline.
If you find that your motivation to do something disappears, maybe you should question why you're doing it rather than just telling yourself that motivation is fleeting.
Basically, some people have jobs that are analogous to abusive relationships. Easy enough to get into one when you depend on your job to get money. And it is rarely a good idea to wait until you're "ready" to get out of an abusive relationship.
I'm guess if those usually line up quite well, this advice seems insane. But if they don't, it is solid advice. I wasted years of my life waiting for motivation to show up, and it never did. It amounted to years of my life I simply regret.
Eventually I saw advice to the effect of 27, and it seems like it has mostly worked to help correct course.
Motivation ignites, discipline inflames.
Keeping around a couple beater knives is how I have a good knife. I think there's value to the general point, but a lot of the cases where I have variable quality items, it's not for sloppiness.
At the same time, identity can be used for positive change. My family values balance and as a result I've grown into a renaissance man.
I'm at the time of my life (college, looking for internships) where balance isn't something I need. I need dedication and focus to make a dent in the world with the field I care about - programming.
Recently I've immersed myself into communities that self identify as nerds. Identifying as a nerd "tricks" my brain into liking all-day grinds, and putting in the necessary work to achieve my version of success.
> You can figure out doing laundry
> Deficiencies do not make you special. The older you get, the more your inability to cook will be a red flag for people.
We're talking about the movement that created "Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality" though, I'm not expecting life-shattering insights in a list by them anyways.
I don't agree. Use a virtual desktop instead and switch workspaces with a keyboard shortcut.
I'm currently using 9 workspaces, and monitors couldn't ever beat that UX.
I.e. you can have a spreadsheet on one monitor, and the results of a bunch of terminal windows on another, and be typing out an email about those two things on another.
You can continue to type the email while reading the spreadsheet and checking the terminal results without having to "switch", or take the draft email off the screen to check that other thing.
I really notice this falls down when I have multiple tabs open in my browser and I want to be mentally dealing with info from one, and inputting it into another. Switch tabs means the one you're entering data into goes away.
(Of course, the solution is to have the tabs in different windows, on different monitors, though this example always makes me realize the HUGE time saver of having so much information in view at the same time.)
I'm personally not in that kind of situation very often. And switching workspaces is faster for me than turning my head to another screen.
An added benefit is that my window manager always knows what workspace I'm looking at. With multiple monitors, your computer doesn't know that, and so keyboard focus becomes a problem, e.g. finding what is currently "in focus" takes more time, finding where your mouse cursor is, etc.
Finally, my setup is the same everywhere I go (at home, at work, on a laptop, etc.) since I only use one physical monitor. I think this is a huge advantage too.
Desktop 1: Browser & chat apps (alt+tab switching)
Desktop 2: Code editor
Desktop 3: Terminal (tiled and tabbed)
Desktop 4: Rarely used
There are certainly use cases where multiple screens have their advantage and I've also every now and then drooled over a 4k monitor, but then I'd lose the portability a laptop gives me (and/or suffer when constrained to it).
I do love me some virtual desktops with a bonus non-switching physical one to the side
Shifting my head and eyeballs back and forth is way slower, for me, than an instantaneous Super+1, Super+2, etc. or Super+Tab (for switching to the last used workspace) to see a "second" monitor.
The core idea is that there are institutions in society (police being one of them) whose goals and incentives are contrary to your best interests. It doesn't matter that the people who work for them are "nice" or not, the act of performing their job can be very detrimental to you even if nobody involved actively wishes it. This observation is true.
By design, "anything you say can and will be used against you" which is a one way street.
*Note: have a lawyer in the family
There are some countries like the UK where not talking to the cops can potentially land you in trouble too. (In England and Wales, juries are permitted to draw adverse inferences from a defendant not raising information with the police that they later rely on at trial.)
If you are arrested, exercise your right to counsel. This is guaranteed in both the US, the UK and most of Europe (under the European Convention of Human Rights), as well as lots of countries elsewhere.
Yes, it might mean you have to wait an hour or so for the lawyer to get there. Yes, the police will try to convince you that only guilty people need lawyers (not true) or that it'll make things worse for you (also not true).
The counterpoint to this is: if the cops are following procedures correctly and have legitimately collected evidence, they have nothing to fear from you exercising your right to free and independent legal advice.
Back, in my developing country, I ate out every meal every day because it costs like 1 USD a dish.
Just like you wouldn't volunteer everything to a rival in the office, you don't volunteer everything to someone who has the authority to arrest or fine you. Especially when they know all the rules and you know a handful.
To put it another way: if a policeman isn’t the best (safest, most informed, whatever...) person to talk to among hundreds of strangers you could talk to, isn’t that a sign that the police force in question has failed completely?
I've been harassed by the police simply for my looks, I've seen them beat up handcuffed people. I have policemen in my extenden circle of friends, whom I like to keep at the fringes of "extended", because they are anything but well trained or professional.
The police here fought a case all the way to the local supreme court that they should be allowed to harass people based on the color of their skin - no weasling around, trying to not say the quiet part out loud either, straight up "black people are more prone to crime".
> isn’t that a sign that the police force in question has failed completely?
I don't know about completely, but if the police aren't there for everyone then it certainly is some sort of failure.
Yes, yes it is. And that's the current state of policing in the US. With the irony of police committing acts of brutality against people protesting police brutality, and the officers and their enablers being too ignorant or too hateful to recognize the stupidity of the action and how 2020 has set them back decades in getting people to trust them.
However, those people probably don't think that the police "committed acts of brutality against protestors", they likely see the videos of BLM peacefully protesting and police standing by, and Antifa committing arson and attacking police and police fighting back. (Portland, Chicago, Kenosha) And they think that fighting and arresting rioters is exactly what they pay police for.
> their enablers being too ignorant or too hateful to recognize the stupidity of the action and how 2020 has set them back decades in getting people to trust them.
You were talking about BLM here? Because "Breona" is just as fake as Jussie Smollet's story, and Jacob Blake would have been shot if he was white, etc. Watch the videos of woke white people in Portland shouting racist slurs at black cops to show how much they care about black people in general.
I didn't dwell on my identity (because those aren't the words I'd choose to use if I had to). It was a way of self-disclosure like saying if you work for the company being discussed. It's to say "while I'm probably one of the people you're talking about ...".
> an attack on you personally so that you don't feel a need to defend yourself from an imagined attack.
Oh, no. You're out to left field. I'm explaining, not defending, everyone who tends to be misunderstood. I'm trying to say that people can support a thing without being 'enablers', and that two people who both see the same problems (police violence) can see different solutions.
I'm sharing my personal views to help explain how, regardless of labels, that most of our group hatreds are based on intentional (by others if not us) misstatements about the others, not their own words or actual views.
"...isn’t that a sign that the police force in question has failed completely?"
Sad, but true, in a lot of cases. Hence the suggestion not to talk to them.
Strangers don't have the authority to potentially detain and arrest you. I don't think anybody should be rude to the police. But obviously most people interact with the police in adversarial situations. Last time I remember talking to them, I was stopped for crossing (on foot) an empty street on a red light in the middle of the night.
They're not. In any country, that is fundamentally not the purpose of police.
Maybe the line instead should be, if you believe you are being interrogated by the police, do not speak until you have an attorney present? Different entirely.
Watch the video about this and how the law professor says that your casual honest comment to a cop might be taken to be a lie based on nothing. Not just wrong, or potentially incriminating, but a lie, and because of that they can and will start to try to fit the evidence to you.
> This perpetuates the mantra that cops are an evil force out to get you.
That's not a requirement for this rule to be useful, but I'll act carefully to protect myself rather than to test that theory in either case.