Home
Ambi Oct's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
governments basically do three things: "Medicate, educate and incarcerate."
"When we shrink investments in higher education and research, "we shoot ourselves in both feet," remarked K.R. Sridhar, founder of Bloom Energy, the Silicon Valley fuel-cell company. "Our people become less skilled, so you are shooting yourself in one foot. And the smartest people from around the world have less reason to come here for the quality education, so you are shooting yourself in the other foot." " I can lose weight quickly if I cut off both arms, but it will surely reduce my job prospects.
"Empowering the individual and underinvesting in the collective is our great macro danger as a society," said the pollster Craig Charney. Indeed, it is. Investment in our collective institutions and opportunities is the only way to mitigate the staggering income inequalities that can arise from a world where Facebook employees can become billionaires overnight, while the universities that produce them are asked to slash billions overnight. As I've said, nations that don't invest in the future tend not to do well there.
in list: Insights into World affairs, BUILD SOCEITY: leader qualifications
don't pre-defect -don't strive to score more than opponent, not blind optimism -but still forgive on cooperation.
In a population with a certain percentage of always-defectors and the rest being tit for tat players, the optimal strategy for an individual depends on the percentage [more defectors>>defect always; more tit-for-tats>>preoptimism], and on the length of the game.
in a continuous prisoners' dilemma, if a population starts off in a non-cooperative equilibrium, players who are only marginally more cooperative than non-cooperators get little benefit from assorting with one another. By contrast, in a discrete prisoners' dilemma, tit for tat cooperators get a big payoff boost from assorting with one another in a non-cooperative equilibrium, relative to non-cooperators. Since nature arguably offers more opportunities for variable cooperation rather than a strict dichotomy of cooperation or defection, the continuous prisoners' dilemma may help explain why real-life examples of tit for tat-like cooperation are extremely rare in nature .
any single country is often hesitant to curb CO2 emissions. The immediate benefit to an individual country to maintain current behavior is perceived to be greater than the eventual benefit to all countries if behavior was changed
discipline and self-sacrifice involved in abstaining today have been "wasted" because the future relapse means that the addict is right back where he started and will have to start over (which is quite demoralizing, and makes starting over more difficult). there is an obvious benefit to defecting "today", but tomorrow one will face the same PD, and the same obvious benefit will be present then, ultimately leading to an endless string of defections.
cigarette manufacturers endorsed the creation of laws banning cigarette advertising, understanding that this would reduce costs and increase profits across the industry
When firms are aware of the activities of their competitors, they tend to pursue policies that are designed to oust their competitors as opposed to maximizing the performance of the firm. This approach impedes the firm from functioning at its maximum capacity
where newspaper boxes are left unlocked. It is possible for people to take a paper without paying (defecting) but very few do, feeling that if they do not pay then neither will others, destroying the system.
both cooperate (Friend), they share the winnings 50–50. If one cooperates and the other defects (Foe), the defector gets all the winnings and the cooperator gets nothing. If both defect, both leave with nothing. If you know your opponent is going to vote Foe, then your choice does not affect your winnings.
two scientists collaborating on a report would benefit if the other worked harder. But when your collaborator doesn’t do any work, it’s probably better for you to do all the work yourself. You’ll still end up with a completed project.
in list: BUILD SOCEITY: neurosciences and statistical methods to clinch truth
"a woman’s moral character isn’t judged by what she does, but what she doesn’t do (have sex). " This is a brand of misogyny embedded in our cultural DNA. Stories shape the soul of a culture. They transmit the values and beliefs of a culture. if you want to change a culture, change the stories.
slut-shaming as “the survival tactic of a second-class human being. sad attempt to weird power by those who feel they don’t have any. Women and girls lash out at other women and girls when they recognize that no matter how hard they work, and no matter what sacrifices they make, they will always have more to prove than men and boys do. We do it in a kind of self-defense: by calling you a slut, I am implying that I myself am not. We do it out of jealousy, competitiveness and scorn. We do it to exclude.
all it does is reinforce the very idea that you’re trying to fight. As soon as you buy into a reality that brands any woman a ‘slut’, you buy into a belief system that attacks femalehood itself. This includes you. You sacrifice someone else in your effort to escape the boiling water, but you can’t get out of the pot. [crabs-in-the-pot syndrome -As one crab gets near the top and attempts to climb over the edge, another crab will naturally put it down in its own attempt to escape. As a result, all the crabs go to their collective doom. This is the problem whenever a woman defends herself by saying I am not a slut. ]
There are countless examples for history of women who have risen to the top because they’ve helped other women excel.
We can transcend. We can act like the pot doesn’t exist. We can refuse to use the word against another woman, or to acknowledge the word if and when it’s applied to us. We don’t need to explain or defend; we know that as soon as we do — as soon as we buy into that particular framework of beliefs – we end up perpetuating it, and we lose.
Better to create – to force into being – a new reality, one in which we are all sluts and whores and dinner whores – or none of us are.
We can commit to each other. We can lift each other up.
"satisfaction from anything, that thing has to be unattainable, or at the very least it must come with rules. You can get release and pleasure from the attainable, but not satisfaction. There has to be a limit, a line, which defines a transgression which then allows you to bump up against it-- and be satisfied. "
That's what he's spent the most time on, that's what he knows how to do the best. Better than driving, better than speaking, better than Xbox-- he has that mindset down to a reflex. So why would you expect he'd use any other technique for any other life problems that come up? If all you are is an expert hammerer, everything gets hammered. not to refrain-- you can't resist your desires forever. You must practice a new skill, you must become the kind of person who wouldn't turn to porn when they are: lonely; horny; boredy. If you practice a new skill enough times, it will become second first nature, and you will be a different person. Please note that it is that last part, not the giving up of porn, that makes the change difficult. Giving up porn is easy squeezy. Becoming the kind of person who doesn't need to use porn on Thursdays at 11:30p because that's when you have a few hours free is hard.
guilt is omniscient. You know it's guilt because no one else would blame him for what she did, and yet he knows with total certainty that it was his fault, even though it wasn't. Yet he knows it was. What he is actually feeling guilty about isn't that he wasn't there for his sister-- that's too easy to get out of-- but that his commitment to his own life made him not be there for his sister. Anyone who has ever lost someone to suicide knows this feeling, and everyone else does not.
understand your guilt as not coming from the failing but generated by you as self-punishment, so that you can go on with the rest of your life. Have you suffered enough today? Then go have a Reuben, they're tasty. You've earned it. The guilt always stays with you. Always. It never goes away. Never. I'm of course not saying you deserve it, but I know it is your inevitable tormentor. So either you reach some kind of stalemate with it or it beats you down. That stalemate is sublimation.
so when he sees the married woman from Act I again on the subway he doesn't get up to flirt with her. He lets her go, he has decided to be the kind of person who sublimates his sex drive to devote more attention to his whacky sister,. To being a better person.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
"if you're constantly concerned that you're a bad parent, you're not. You can't be because you're too aware of parenting itself. "
-that even gives me the confidence to believe that when am being constantly concerned to be live rightly, to be the solving doctor, to read with understanding then i'm a good human, doctor nd student since am TOO AWARE OF HOW TO LIVE,TREAT,STUDY WELL
in list: BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
-
These were the usual arguments. They seldom persuade, but their mere existence creates a counterweight to the accusations made by human rights groups: Someone who wants to claim it's their word against ours now has something to grasp. But Ball offered far more as evidence than interviews with Albanians who had fled their villages. He had obtained records from Kosovo's borders of who left and when. He had exhumation data and a wealth of information about the displaced. In short, he had numbers.
Traditionally, human rights work has been more akin to investigative reporting, but Ball is the most influential of a handful of people around the world who see that world not in terms of words, but of figures. His specialty is applying quantitative analysis to mountains of anecdotes, finding the correlations that coax out a story that cannot easily be dismissed.
-
But possessing an ocean of testimony is not the same as knowing the truth. No matter how many cases we learn of, they might not be representative of the whole. A truth commission might be scorned by a particular linguistic or ethnic group, which means its members don't come forward to speak. Fewer media reports of killings might actually mean fewer killings -- or it could mean that journalists were intimidated into silence. Human rights groups might record a decline in violence because budget cuts forced them to fire half their outreach team. Rape might never be disclosed. Video collected by cell phones tells us only what was witnessed by people with cell phones.
- 8 more annotation(s)...
"It is the intensity with which you listen to what’s happening around you.It is the way you gather information and translate it to wisdom about yourself, your work, your audience, your marketplace, and the deep instinctive sweetspots where they start to intersect. "
in a way that draws on your unique layering of personality and intelligence and personal history. You bring all of yourself (your selves) to your work: your shadow as well as your shiny public face.
Your right audience can’t recognize you until you step out from hiding. If you operate behind a mask, people will be attracted to the mask and not to you. When it gets knocked off — and sooner or later it will — people will be confused, or dismayed, or angry, and they will desert you.
The problem isn't the relationship, the problem is you.
drive for novelty- "rather than chase new experiences they close off from the outside world and dream them. They don't end relationships, they stay caulked to the inside of one, unmoving, ungrowing, apathetic; while their minds and DVRs are an imaginarium. The few things they do choose to jump recklesslsy into are obvious go-nowheres: one night stands (for the married man); making a movie; daytrading. They're easy to attempt, and easy to blame on externalities when they inevitably fail. They don't break up with the girl, they ignore her until she breaks up with them."
All opportunities are open to anyone who wants to work, a new car, a big house, a career. But no one told the men that those things were for their families, not for them, that none of this would make them happy, and, indeed, would make them realize how little their lives are really worth-- unless they understood that their lives had value only if it was of value to someone else. So for a while they chased sex, affairs, or took up an out of the house hobby (e.g.golf). Something to give them the temporary illusion that they were free, and that the world had possibilties
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
"the point was to create a dramatic event upon which to focus energy and thus delay any kind of physical forward motion. By engaging in conflict that is impossible to resolve."
for the purpose of maintaining his ambivalent world so no concrete decisions need to be made. Concrete=loss of potentialities= no thanks. he chose her to get rejected; to get jealous; to get sad over; to obsess over. And then to recruit the rest of his world into this problem. Nothing matters more than ego integrity; nothing matters more than the status quo.
All of that is unconscious, and as soon as I say that word a specific group of people goes bananas. No one likes to think they're not in control of their own lives, that they're saddled with an Abusive Boyfriend that wants nothing to change; but if they are in control, why are they anxious all the time? Why so little progress despite resources, opportunities, and freedom? If they're in control of their own lives, why do they all dress alike?If you're in control, why do these relationships happen to you? Isn't it more likely you chose them?
I'm not against introspection, I am against masturbation. I'm against edging. The critic wants to be able to contemplate, to go to therapy and discuss and introspect and what he will do there is talk about himself, think about himself, identify patterns in his life, things that have held him back-- and nothing will change.
The therapy becomes an elaborate narcissistic defense, the promise and appearance of progress while protecting an at best artificial and at worst non-existent identity. "I want to learn why I am this way." Then what? Will learning why you made those choices be what changes your choices? You're still eating junk food, aren't you? You're eating it while you're learning how bad it is.
"But... why am I this way?" That question is a narcissistic defense. It doesn't want an answer, it wants you to keep asking the question.
"I'm a good person, I just am making bad choices." Wrong. You're not a good person until you make good choices. Until then you are chaos.
And you know it.
Your problem is not unique: too much freedom. If you were stupid you could plug into the system easy, one talent= one job. But for you there are too many possibilities. Your parents being deceased, being in college, being smart... that's the ether in which a naturally worried, "is this good enough?" young man finds himself. The mistake many with that problem make is thinking that the problem is "themselves" and they need more introspection, or more insight, or more "brain hacks." You need less of those things. What you need are goals with concrete steps that you force yourself to boringly take.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
"You may get to choose an identity, but you can't pretend to be someone else."you have no control over first impressions and even less over second and third impressions. Hold tight to your identity, I sometimes say, because no one else is buying it.In her defense, if defense is actually needed, she tried to downplay her looks.but as is the problem with some women who don't know the game, all this had the opposite effect. You may get to choose an identity, but you can't pretend to be someone else.
since no one can understand her they are left only with what they see-- the very thing she was trying to mask. The result is she is incomprehensible except as attractive: "...and you can tell she's really hot underneath all that..." Take a highly technical paper and black magic marker out one sentence, people will spend more time trying to look through the magic marker than they will trying to understand the technical paper. And if they manage to figure out the redacted sentence, it will be assume to be a proxy for the entire paper, even if it isn't.
You can't judge a book by its cover. But if no one understands the book, they will judge it by the cover, if they bother to at all. And if the cover is confusing also, well, forget it.
These parents need her to be real, but she can't be real, her whole professional demeanor is based on the suppression of real.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
a kind of love that substitutes magnitude of emotions for quality of emotions because that's the next best thing. I don't mean this next part as an insult: toddlers do this. They want you to extra love them up, but if you're watching the Radiation King they'll not hesitate to lick an electrical socket to get attention. They would rather you yell at them than ignore them, and that emotional charge they get temporarily sustains them. Spam isn't ham, but if you're starving it'll do. And yes, eventually you will get used to, and even like, Spam. It is repetition compulsion and it is inevitable.
Yes they are afraid but the real fear is abandonment, starvation: this is your whole life, how do you walk away from everything you know? You know it got violent yesterday, but you also feel emotionally full: the contrast between yesterday's anger and today's teddy bear gift is so gigantic that your emotions top out, like cocaine or winning at blackjack. The absolute value of that love may be much less than "a good man's," but he can't provide the differential. That's the toddler problem.
While you're yelling from the outside "get away from him!" from the inside they try to deflect with high emotion substitutes: drugs, pregnancy, cheating. After a while, your life is that cycle. You can break up, sure, but each of you will probably repeat that pattern elsewhere, because the problem isn't the specific partner in front of you but the way you sustain your relationships. And when you both work off the same patterns, you'll be together ten years longer than you should be.
The only solution I have ever seen work is that one of the people has to change the way they respond to the other. one thing I've noticed about the mutually abusive is their clinging to spirituality because when you live by no rules the psyche demands you to impose them from without:
And when the toddler comes ferociously upon you and yells, "I AM TWO AND I AM UNCONTAINED!" do you beat him like a dog? Teach him that the rest of your life will have to wait while you unleash your anger on him-- so central is his existence? Or rather, do you calmly show restraint, neither do you reward his mania with your emotion? They are filled by your love, but they will settle for your attention. He who feeds a Chaos will raise a Demon.
You can complain about who is glorifying what and how someone is being represented as whatever, but in doing so you ignore the millions of people-- kids-- who are feeling neglected by you and represented only by Eminem et al. If you focus on Domestic Violence and miss their internal struggle, then you will neither stop Domestic Violence nor affect their lives, and they will abandon you. They already have.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
"Like any woman wracked by SELF-DOUBT, when it FEELS LIKE A SCENE, u feel COMPELLED TO FOLLOW THE SCRIPT. No means no, but yes is what it says on the page. Hence yes to the boss's extra work; yes to letting your friend vent on the phone even though you're late; yes to being in a threesome because your boyfriend wanted to. But later, when you're done shooting for the day and you have a chance to be yourself, you finally say"
If she thinks that the ring is a symbol of what a guy thinks of her, then the small ring is what he thinks of you. Upgrading the ring after the fact won't upgrade his feelings towards you. Which is the problem. RATHER THAN COMMITTING TO HER OWN MAXIM-- it's a symbol of love-- she DOWNPLAYS it, LETTING HIM OFF THE HOOK TO MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE THAT ALL IS WELL.
The ring isn't a just a symbol of love, but RESTITUITION.Prove to me you think I'm worth it. If it sounds bitchy you aren't listening: you prove to me I'm worth it. Give me something you don't give the other girls, can't give the other girls. You, who can get any girl he wants, make me know how valuable I am. Because I don't have any idea, otherwise I wouldn't be shaking you down for a bigger ring and I certainly wouldn't be trying to get you back.Happiness is not the goal, what she's hoping for is AFFIRMATION. She wants the kind of guy who is a symbol of the value she thinks she wishes she had.typical of so many women: anything that tells me I'm worth it cannot tell me who I am.
thappiness is out so the only objective scale you have to measure value is energy and emotion. Is there passion? Is there drama
hypotheticals like this can only be answered because you're controlling for the most important and limitless variable, the other person. So the point of these hypotheticals isn't to determine a code of behavior but to broadcast to others something about yourself.
The kind of man whom you're going to have to nudge towards a bigger ring, to cajole into being more selfless, to whip into settling for you-- is the kind of guy you are hypothetically attracted to. And you know who that kind of guy finds attractive? You.
These hypotheticals are dreams. The lesson isn't what you would do; but how did you construct the fantasy? That tells you who you are, and it's telling you to you think you should leave your Wednesdays free. He might come over...if you refuse a ring from a guy which is less than what you wanted, thinking it's a symbol of his love but HOPING IT IS NOT a symbol of his love, then the problem isn't the ring, the problem is you.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
"It doesn't mean I've said everything I thought (so-called "radical honesty"where there is no filter between brain and mouth) and it doesn't mean I've revealed everything possible although as one person once put it, "reading James Altucher's blog is like watching an ongoing train wreck". Believe me, it could be a lot more of a wreck."
That could lead to hurt, pain, dissonance, immaturity. Nor is this "revealing honesty" where you just tell people everything about yourself. If I did that I'd probably be in jail five times over. And then my kids would miss their father. Nor was Obi-Wan saying a "white lie" to get some small-term advantage or avoid some small disharmony.
What's the benefit of being honest with yourself? Recognizing my weaknesses, working on them, recognizing the liberating benefits of not having those weaknesses, using the experience of that liberation to help others - these are all benefits of being honest with yourself. start by being grateful for what u hv. and always ask- why am i doing this, why do i need this.
If people know that you are above and beyond honest with others, they will listen to you. when I am constructive with either criticism or suggestions then it helps the people I am talking to.They will know that your words are weighed out carefully.People notice extreme (not "radical" but "extreme") honesty. They reward it. The world rewards it. they believe u.anxieties and stresses go away because of the confidence you instilled in them, then events are more likely to go the way they want. You will have helped create the future.
Every second you say to yourself: are my words honest, and NOT HURTFUL to anyone? Are these the exact words that are BEST FOR EVERYONE and no other words would do. Then those are the words you use. That is honesty.How do you know what are the exact words that are best for everyone? You don't.It takes practice.
i've seen my boat sink over and over because I couldn't plug all the leaks. I've barely left the port. I want to cross the ocean now.
Honesty will get me across that ocean.
"So many different times I’ve thought it – “I want to die”. Sometimes I meant it, sometimes I didn’t. But when I look back on it, never did I really want my heart to stop beating. I just wanted the death of these various emotions that were hurting me not just emotionally but physically.
I wanted the death of MY LACK OF CONTROL OVER a world that is furious, and chaotic and beautiful and messy.
And all of those things did die eventually. How small they are in the rear view mirror. And a little bit of me died with each one of them.
But I’m still alive."
-
If I were back in high school and someone asked about my plans, I'd say that my first priority was to learn what the options were. You don't need to be in a rush to choose your life's work. What you need to do is discover what you like. You have to work on stuff you like if you want to be good at what you do.
-
don't give up on your dreams. I know what they mean, but this is a bad way to put it, because it implies you're supposed to be bound by some plan you made early on. The computer world has a name for this: premature optimization. And it is synonymous with disaster. These speakers would do better to say simply, don't give up.
What they really mean is, don't get demoralized. Don't think that you can't do what other people can. And I agree you shouldn't underestimate your potential. People who've done great things tend to seem as if they were a race apart. And most biographies only exaggerate this illusion - 24 more annotation(s)...
-
it might be wise to tell them that tediousness is not the defining quality of work, and indeed that the reason they have to work on dull stuff now is so they can work on more interesting stuff later.
-
The definition of work was now to make some original contribution to the world, and in the process not to starve. But after the habit of so many years my idea of work still included a large component of pain. Work still seemed to require discipline, because only hard problems yielded grand results, and hard problems couldn't literally be fun. Surely one had to force oneself to work on them.
If you think something's supposed to hurt, you're less likely to notice if you're doing it wrong. - 13 more annotation(s)...
-
difference between those who do and those who might have done.
-
But great work is something else than mere brains.
- 42 more annotation(s)...
"our confidence about how well we know someone comes from the vividness of our impression of them" but thats not equivalent to the veracity of impressions.
in list: PERSONALITY TYPES & Thinking patterns in decision-making, how to be an adult & be great at it too
Some ideas so obviously entail alarming schleps that anyone can see them. How do you see ideas like that? The trick I recommend is to take yourself out of the picture."Instead of asking "what problem should I solve?" ask "WHAT PROBLEM DO I WISH SOMEONE ELSE WOULD SOLVE FOR ME?""
Why work on problems few care much about and no one will pay for, when you could fix one of the most important components of the world's infrastructure? because their unconscious mind shrank from the complications involved.Your unconscious won't even let you see ideas that involve painful schleps. That's schlep blindness.
A company is defined by the schleps it will undertake. And schleps should be dealt with the same way you'd deal with a cold swimming pool: just jump in. Which is not to say you should seek out unpleasant work per se, but that you should never shrink from it if it's on the path to something great.
the most valuable antidote to schlep blindness is probably ignorance. Most successful founders would probably say that if they'd known when they were starting their company about the obstacles they'd have to overcome, they might never have started it.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
CONVERSATIONAL RESOURCEFULNESS often means doing things you don't want to.With the good groups, you can tell that everything you say is being looked at with fresh eyes and even if it's dismissed, it's because of some logical reason e.g. "we already tried that" or "from speaking to our users that isn't what they'd like," etc. Those groups never have that glazed over look.
Chasing down all the implications of what's said to you can sometimes lead to uncomfortable conclusions. The best word to describe the failure to do so is probably "denial," Intellectually they were as capable as the successful founders of following all the implications of what one said to them. They just weren't eager to.As well as failing to chase down the implications of what was said to them, the unsuccessful founders would also fail to chase down funding, and users, and sources of new ideas. But the most immediate evidence I had that something was amiss was that I couldn't talk to them.they've already decided what they're going to do and everything I say is being put through an internal process in their heads, which either desperately tries to munge what I've said into something that conforms with their decision or just outright dismisses it and creates a rationalization for doing so.
in list: how to be an adult & be great at it too, BUILD SOCEITY: psychological law
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
-
Assessment
All the sites offering insig...
Items: 20 | Visits: 19
Created by: eflclassroom 2.0
-
teachertraining
All the places for materials...
Items: 35 | Visits: 19
Created by: eflclassroom 2.0
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo