If people are scared to share their thoughts, then that seems like the problem.
Also, how much of this communication is actually necessary? If someone doesn't care about an issue enough to write their own email, then why are they sending an email about it in the first place?
If you find yourself spooked by LinkedIn "gurus", I recommend Reddit for some comic relief. https://www.reddit.com/r/LinkedInLunatics/top/ is full of goodies. Here is my personal favorite:
You said it yourself, these are overwhelmingly people who've never built or maintained anything complex in their lives. If you're going to listen to what people on the Internet say, why not seek out people who can earn your respect?
This is a very interesting question, and a great motivator for Galois theory, kind of like a Zen koan. (e.g. "What is the sound of one hand clapping?")
But the question is inherently imprecise. As soon as you make a precise question out of it, that question can be answered trivially.
Generally, the nth roots of 1 form a cyclic group (with complex multiplication, i.e. rotation by multiples of 2pi/n).
One of the roots is 1, choosing either adjacent one as a privileged group generator means choosing whether to draw the same complex plane clockwise or counterclockwise.
A variant of this advice, that avoids some of the pitfalls, is to take time off to do something structured and specific.
Personally, in between jobs a long time ago, I chose to walk the Henro Trail, an approximately 800-mile Buddhist pilgrimage trail in Shikoku, Japan. To make a long story short, it was the experience of a lifetime.
I haven't, but others have written about the same trip. There's lots of material online these days, I'm not really familiar with it but if you google "Shikoku henro pilgrimage", all the hits will be about the same trip I took.
There is a wonderful book, Japanese Pilgrimage by Oliver Statler. He goes into the history of the pilgrimage and of Kobo Daishi, the monk whose path the trail follows. He also discusses his own personal experience walking the trail.
I can't speak for ndriscoll, but I am a university math professor with extensive experience teaching these sorts of topics, and I agree with their comment in full.
You are right that some (other) statements are harder to formalize than they look. The Four Color Theorem from graph theory is an example. Generally speaking, discrete math, inequalities, for all/there exists, etc. are all easy to formalize. Anything involving geometry or topology is liable to be harder. For example, the Jordan curve theorem states that "any plane simple closed curve divides the plane into two regions, the interior and the exterior". As anyone who has slogged through an intro topology book knows, statements like this take more work to make precise (and still more to prove).
This could certainly be fantastic, and very good advice. Or it could be a lot of bunk, I don't know. Given the source (i.e., RFK), I refuse to trust it.
The point of guidance like this is to be trustworthy and authoritative. If I have the ability to independently evaluate it myself, then I didn't really need it in the first place.
Of course, I might be mistaken to have ever trusted the government's nutrition guidance. It's not like undue influence from industry lobbying is unique to this administration.
>> If I have the ability to independently evaluate it myself, then I didn't really need it in the first place.
At what point in time was the government's guidance ever to be accepted on blind faith without critical evaluation? Take this input, compare with data on the same topic from other positions that are far from the source and make up your own mind.
If the government's guidance isn't to be at least mostly trusted, then I'm not sure the government should be offering guidance at all. (Which is perhaps a sensible position in itself.)
In other words, if I learn enough about nutrition to be able to critically evaluate the government's guidance, then is that guidance adding any additional signal? At that point, I should just rely on my sources about nutrition.
I've never been one to rely on official guidance blindly. For example I don't show up to the airport two hours early, and cheerfully laugh at advice that I should. But I'd like to believe that this guidance is better than total nonsense.
Haha good question. No, but I did not ask; I wanted to give them as much freedom as I could bear on aspects of the process I was not too attached to, so I let them pick.
I will say I was very happy with the animal they came up with! If I was not, I would have asked them to change it, and I bet they would have. They showed me a preview version early on, so there would have been plenty of time to do so.
Also, how much of this communication is actually necessary? If someone doesn't care about an issue enough to write their own email, then why are they sending an email about it in the first place?
reply