• 15 Posts
  • 219 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 18th, 2021

help-circle
  • Ah that makes sense. Maybe it’s a European/US difference, but it could be just a Time Timer thing. My air fryer is from an American company and it has the same timer as you (wind it up clockwise, then the hand moves counter-clockwise).

    I wonder if both types of timers (wind up clockwise and wind up counter-clockwise) seek to distinguish themselves from normal clocks in different ways:

    • Wind up clockwise timers (like your stove and my airfryer) let you know it’s not a normal clock by flowing counter-clockwise.
    • Clockwise timers (like a Time Timer) let you know it’s not a normal clock by having a red disk slowly become smaller.


  • Ah. To set up the timer, you do pull the hand counter clockwise, as if you were pulling a spring-loaded car backwards for it to move forward on its own. After you release the Time Timer, its hand will move forward on its own, normally, clockwise.

    It is a bit unusual, but the point of the timer is to see how much time you’ve got left. It’s like a battery charge percentage. You know that when the battery reaches zero, you’ve got to charge it up again.

    I hope the explanation helps. If not, feel free to ask or to check out the videos in the Time Timer website. After all, it is a strange product.


  • A Time Timer.

    They’re not cheap, especially for a timer that’s bare bones (~20 USD).

    But it has changed my work life.

    1. People who want to interrupt me while I’m working can now see how long until I have my next break. So I am interrupted less.
    2. Now I self-regulate a bit better, so I’m able to work longer without destroying myself in the process. I take breaks that help me with repetitive strain injuries and with feeling like I’m a human being and not just a machine.
    3. Now I remember to actually start timers when I start working. I know this is a bit silly, but I was having trouble creating a habit of stopping for breaks. I tried to solve this by setting timers on my phone, but I constantly forgot doing it. Now I’m reminded to start a timer by something that I see on my desk.



  • I’m so sorry for the wall of text. I hope I can come back and clean it up and make it clearer:

    How to work?

    Use the Pomodoro technique: 25 minutes of work - 5 minutes of break

    1. Set a 25 minute timer.
    2. Remove all distractions, especially social media and notifications.
    3. Work until the timer runs out.
    4. Set a 5 minute timer. Take a break. Stand. Drink water. Don’t use your phone or social media. Repeat.

    Make sure to celebrate (1) when you remember to do a Pomdoro, (2) while doing it, and (3) immediately after you finish it.

    What do I mean by celebrating? Imagine you got an email telling you that you got the job you wanted. How would you react? Or imagine your favorite teacher/professor tells you they’re proud of you. How would you react? Try to generate those emotions to celebrate.

    Why celebrate? Habits are not created by repetition. They’re created by emotions. Dopamine creates connections and fosters learning.

    How to make sure that information sticks in your brain and that you understand deeply? Active recall. After you read something, close the book or your computer and try to explain it from memory. This doesn’t work if it’s not from memory. It doesn’t matter if you struggle. In fact, the more you struggle to remember something, the better you learn it.

    I like to structure my active recalls with Visible Thinking Routines. You can search for them online. I particularly like See-Think-Wonder, Think-Puzzle-Explore, and Connect-Extend-Challenge.

    Now, I’ll recommend some resources:

    The single most useful thing you could do for the least effort is mindfulness. It’ll help you get out of mental ruts. You could use the Healthy Minds program. I donate to them. They’re wonderful.

    Second most powerful thing you could do is work on psychological flexibility. You can check out A Liberated Mind by Steven C. Hayes. I cannot stress enough how important psychological flexibility is. It underlies everything we do.

    If you want to learn about Visible Thinking Routines, there’s a book on it. I don’t remember the name, but the introduction is spectacular and gives a good sense of why we should focus on deeply understanding rather than rote memorization or mindless repetition. This technique (thinking visibly) is the single most important reason I graduated summa cum laude from my programs. I used to suck at studying. Now I am good at it thanks to visible thinking routines (and Anki).

    I also recommend Make it stick the book. Additionally, I recommend Barbara Oakley’s Learn like a Pro, but I only do it if you first read A Liberated Mind, the book on visible thinking routines, Tiny Habits, and The Sleep Book. Why? Oakley’s book teaches a bunch of stuff that I think is straight up wrong and potentially dangerous, such as its recommendations for sleep and for habit formation.

    I mentioned it but I should single out Tiny Habits. It’s a game changer. It will help you do anything in life.

    You could do relational frame training if you want to increase the speed at which you understand things through relations. Check out Steven Hayes’ A Liberated Mind for more on this.

    If Pomodoros are a struggle, you could try TimeTimers or similar products. Getting a good visualization of time helps people to auto regulate. I have used them with people with ADHD and they are better than digital timers or old-school clocks.

    If organization is an issue, Getting Things Done (but first read A Liberated Mind, because GTD assumes some things about the mind that aren’t true. I’d also recommend Cynefin, the book, because the natural planning process is not universal and different contexts require different interventions). I’d also recommend Personal Kanban, if you’re organizing your study habits



  • People do or don’t do things depending on three variables: motivation to do it, the ability to do it, and the prompt to do it.

    • Motivation could be lacking in some cases. People need to understand the purpose of turn signals. However, I don’t think there’s an anti-turn signal discourse going around. At least as far as I know.
    • I don’t think it’s ability, because activating turn signals is relatively easy for most people.
    • I think prompts could also be lacking.

    How do we change this?

    The Behavior Design answer would be something like this: We need to patiently and kindly train people to recognize prompts to the turn signals. “When you get to the corner, put your left hand on the turn-signal control and move it up. Then turn right.” We also need to celebrate it the instant they do it. “Perfect”. Of course, you need to have a good relationship with whomever you’re doing this with.

    Now, that is not the only solution; there are many. We might have one solution if we zoom in on one person. We might have another solution if we zoom out to a whole city or country.

    In any case, if we want to solve the problem with Behavior Design, you could check out Tiny Habits.



  • Interesting. So the terms of service have not changed, and yet people are saying that they did. I wonder if there are criticisms that are still valid. For example, the terms of service that you linked:

    • do not let me use a VPN (¶6.4)
    • do not let me use glitches (¶6.4)
    • do not let me own the copy of the game that I bought, but instead give me a limited license to it (¶2.1-2.2)
    • do not inform me about future updates to their terms of service (¶10.2)
    • force me to enter arbitration and do not let me be part of a class action lawsuit or have a trial by jury (¶17.5)
    • link to their privacy policy, which:
      • does not let me opt out of having my data bought, merged, and sold through ad networks or data brokers (§ Categories of Information Collected, § How We Use Information and Our Legal Grounds, § Sources of Information We Collect, and § When We Share Information ¶ 5— all sources combined)
      • does not attempt to deliberately minimize data collection to protect my data. With the only exception of children’s data, their purposes are extremely vague (§ How We Use Information and Our Legal Grounds, as well as the entire document, because they do not attempt to do this in their privacy policy)
      • does not attempt to anonymize my data (I cannot provide a citation because there is no attempt to do this in their privacy policy)
      • does not specify the purposes of gathering and using information about any installed application on my device (§ Categories of Information Collected— this is especially worrying)
      • does not let me opt-out of data collection categories for specific purposes (cannot give a direct citation because they simply do not do it; instead, they wrote vague types of information they collect —such as “details about… other information related to installed applications” in § Categories of Information Collected, as well as vague purposes in § How We Use Information)

    So, coming back to the original claim you were debunking:

    They added spyware to it.

    Your response was

    No, they didn’t.

    And I agree with you, now that I have read their terms of service and their privacy policy. Of course, we’re assuming that they haven’t changed their terms of service. If we assume that, then their spyware clauses weren’t added. No. They were always there. They have always said that they gather “details about… other information related to installed applications” on my device for purposes that can include merging and selling my data to data brokers and ad networks.



  • The problem you’re describing (open sourcing critical software) could both increase the capabilities of adversaries and also make it easier for adversaries to search for exploits. Open sourcing defeats security by obscurity.

    Leaving security by obscurity aside could be seen as a loss, but it’s important to note what is gained in the process. Most security researchers today advocate against relying on security by obscurity, and instead focus on security by design and open security. Why?

    Security by obscurity in the digital world is very easily defeated. It’s easy to copy and paste supposedly secure codes. It’s easy to smuggle supposedly secret code. “Today’s NSA secrets become tomorrow’s PhD theses and the next day’s hacker tools.”

    What’s the alternative for the military? If you rely on security by design and open security for military equipment, it’s possible that adversaries will get a hold of the software, but they will get a hold of software that is more secure. A way to look at it is that all the doors are locked. On the other hand, insecure software leaves supposedly secret doors open. Those doors can be easily bashed by adversaries. So much for trying to get the upper hand.

    The choice between (1) security by obscurity and (2) security by design and open security is ultimately the choice between (1) insecurity for all and (2) security for all. Security for all would be my choice, every time. I want my transit infrastructure to be safe. I want my phone to be safe. I want my election-related software to be safe. I want safe and reliable software. If someone is waging a war, they’re going to have to use methods that can actually create a technical asymmetry of power, and insecure software is not the way to gain the upper hand.


  • After reading what I have posted, it’s totally fair to believe that I do not find beauty or inspiration in nature. However, I can give you some reassurance.

    How? Well, I actually I find the battle against entropy amazing and inspiring. A while ago I was sipping tea while my dog nestled next to me, and I was moved thinking about how we make each other so happy. I am also moved by people, people who look beyond their belly button, people who are kind, people who are good at what they do.

    It’s not just that we’re doomed to accept brutality and appreciate tiny slivers of beauty. There’s actually steps that we can take to support life. For example, we can become a part of an assemblage that we like. Sometimes that assemblage is a group of friends, a political group, or an organization. You know you’re in the right place when your incentives align with that of the group. There’s an alignment around shared values, shared goals. Your atoms are keeping your structural integrity. Your cells are keeping you alive. Your thoughts are aiding you in problem solving and connecting with others. And your friends are connecting with you.

    There’s quite a bit more to this, so if you’re interested in this way of understanding the world, you can check out Prosocial by evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson and psychologists Paul W. B. Atkins and Steven C. Hayes.




  • I agree that there’s a layer of human subjectivity in this whole discussion. Within that layer, I think it’s okay to get a gut sense that nature is brutal and grotesque. My goal is to avoid romanticizing nature.

    Once we’re able to avoid our human bias of romanticizing nature, we can take the discussion to another layer, a layer that could be called more objective.

    For example, we could talk about entropy and evolution’s attempts to fight against it. We could talk about evolution occurring at multiple scales and dimensions simultaneously, such as atomic structures, cells, and multicellular organisms. These are examples of assemblages, and they expand the possible behaviors of the parts. In other words, assemblages make the whole greater than the sum of the parts.

    So, how does entropy, evolution, and assemblages connect with our discussion? Well, brutality and grotesqueness can usually be translated into the language of entropy and assemblages. Killing someone destroys an assemblage and increases entropy. Torture and trauma reduce the probability of an organism exhibiting variation in their behaviors. They reduce the emergent properties of the assemblage.

    Is it always better to choose the language of entropy and assemblages over brutality and grotesqueness? No. Context matters. Again, if the goal is merely to avoid the romanticization of nature, the brutality and grotesqueness layer is appropriate.