bePoliteAlways

Thinking little more on this. Today's independent become tomorrow's conventional. Not sure if the same person maintains the independence or gets tied to their idea and in a way loosing the independence. In scientific community too new ideas are challenged by conventional great scientist sometime.

Convention and independently-minded is based on "majority" belief. With time "majority" belief changes so the one who was "independently-minded" becomes "conventional". Not sure how to categorize the old-convention minded one as.

One more thing to consider if twitter/facebook are publisher or not is see how they earn money? They earn money in very similar way like a publisher does, by advertisement. Like any publisher they will want to make sure that content on their platform is "advertiser friendly".

You can take up some interesting challenge. Since you are convinced of your thoughts: 1) Maybe you can come up with good explanation and logical step so that you can convince say 50% of the people with your thought. Don’t assume if someone is not convinced that they don’t get it. The advantage is either you will spread the knowledge or if there is any flaw in the logic you may find it. 2) Another challenge to make life interesting: Can the word “meaningless” have any meaning without comparing with “meaningful”? Do the word “meaningless” and “meaningful” always exist in pair or can the word “meaningless” exist independently? A simpler example is like saying everyone is “selfish” because everyone does what “they want”. Does the word “selfish” has much value if it is defined that way ? If we define something as “tautology” there may not be a need for that word. If we can define in a way “selfless” and “selfish” both can exist only then the word “selfish” has more value in conveying something. One advantage of defining selfish where no selfless human can exist is you can confuse a “selfless” person into believing that he/she is “selfish”. If you define a selfless as a person whose happiness depends on other person happiness than you can define selfless and selfish. I am still looking for a better way to explain what I mean. 3) At an abstract level everything can be simplified. Things become interesting at detailed level. How do various thing interact and results into something. This may look interesting if you like problem solving for the sake of problem solving. There are many interesting problems to solve like how to come up with a “thought process” such that everyone is always happy. Can we teach that thought process?

Interesting. Three points one from science, one from spiritual and one from literature. 1) This article talks about "causal entropic force" which can give "intentions" to inanimate object. https://www.wired.com/2017/02/life-death-spring-disorder/ 2) Read somewhere that instead of figuring out "self" exist or not, Buddha suggested to observer and realize how concept of "self" arise. 3) In the book "of human bondage" author writes, the concept of self arises from pain.

This is what I have concluded for learning: 1) Figure out a way to have feedback on what you are doing and improve on that. Basically training the neural networks in the brain. Of course the feedback you choose matters like "inner game of tennis" or "drawing from the right side of the brain" talks about using non-judgemental feedback and trusting your capability. 2)Choosing the difficulty of the task to train yourself. If too hard you will give up, if too easy no good or get bored, so always keep it at a point where it is somewhat hard.

Also thought people may find this article from andrew ng interesting: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140320175655-176238488-lear...

I also feel the Punishment is "cruel" but I am unable to give alternative to society yet. Saints/religion has given some alternative but not everyone follows.

There are two points which may appear contradictory but may not be contracditory.

1) People act according to past experience, environment and internal biology. 2) People environment also consist of the knowledge that "For any given situation there are many options and if one looks hard and tries one may choose an appropiate response". If the society emphasize on this aspect a person might be more willing to make a "choice". Of course not everyone will respond the same way to this knowledge.

1) doesn't imply that there is no "choice" and 2) doesn't imply that we are not "programmed" to behave in certain ways. Actually it might be that 2) is helping us to "program" people in certain way.

In the context of "crime and punishment", as we get better at 2) or someother scientific development we can reduce the need for "punishment".

The best analogy I could think of explaining the above language play on mind is following. Say you are training a new chess player to improve the game. You can say one of the two things: 1) For a given board position there are limited options. 2) For a given board position there are many options.

While both being true on thinking deeply they can have different effect on the person. It also matters what we emphasize. For a person thinking less 2) may be better thing to emphasize. For a person thinking lot 1) may be better to emphasize.

Another interesting ted talk on human brain vs others: https://www.ted.com/talks/suzana_herculano_houzel_what_is_so...

It talks about number of neuron and why cooked food helps us in giving the energy required for the large number of neurons. Also cooked food gives us free time to think. (edited for clarity)

Thanks from my side. I have added only few comments but a regular visitor of this site for years now. A friend introduced me to this forum.

I think moderators are doing an excellent job to keep this forum decent and interesting.

Of course I also thank the people who make this forum and share interesting information.

Very Nice interface. Takes things to the next level. However seeing the word workflow I assumed that there will be visual graphical representation of "my task" for a given project. It will show dependencies between the tasks. I assumed it will be show me the different steps visually with a nice diagram and I can drill into things to see subtask if required etc. (edited to make it more clearer)

I felt the harder things to convince someone(including self) is to spend lot of time to learn the "other skills" (mentioned in the article). People do try to improve their "other skills" to some extent but that may not be enough. Feedback loop for seeing the impact of the "other skill" is long and it is harder to measure. So one doesn't know if one has learnt enough.

Regarding boring. I have found that sometime if we zoom out too much things are boring. Life is boring if we think everyday we just wakeup, work, sleep. When we zoom in and look at the variety and try to understand life becomes more interesting.

Zooming in too much also can cause boredom. Zoom into the coding too much and think I am just typing another ifThenElse or while loop or some keystrokes it can be boring too.

Usually I have found, for management work zooming out makes it interesting for me. Technical work usually is interesting at the level I see it.

Like some people mentioned listening to music, doing something else when the work look boredom can also keep one going with passion.

The other challenge is once the work becomes routine, one starts feeling anyone can do it. One starts feeling am I justifying the money I get for it?