Fluffy and The Aeneid

February 7th, 2010 . Posted in Mythology | No Comments »

Fluffy resembles Cerberus, another giant, 3-headed dog. This is how it’s described in The Aeneid, where Aeneas and the Sybil are entering the underworld (p.196, translated by Robert Fagles):

“These

are the realms that monstrous Cerberus rocks with howls

braying out his three throats, his enormous bulk,

squatting low in the cave that faced them there.

The Sybil, seeing the serpents writhe around his neck,

tossed him a sop, slumbrous with honey and drugged seed,

and he, frothing with hunger, three jaws spread wide,

snapped it up where the Sybil tossed it - gone.

His tremendous back relaxed, he sags to earth

and sprawls over all his cave, his giant hulk limp.

The watchdog buried now in sleep, Aeneas seizes

the way in, quickly clear of the river’s edge,

the point of no return.”

I like Rowling’s way of getting Potter around Fluffy (playing a song on a flute that causes Fluffy to go to sleep) better than Virgil’s way of getting Aeneas around Cerberus (a drugged seed that causes Cerberus to go to sleep). My guess is that Rowling took inspiration from how Orpheus (in another story) got around Cerberus (by playing his lyre, which caused Fluffy - I mean, Cerberus - to go to sleep).

Not surprisingly, after Potter gets by Fluffy, he then descends to an underworld … Hmmm …

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone Review (Joanne K. Rowling)

February 7th, 2010 . Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

I read Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (for Americans, that’s the Sorcerer’s Stone - philosopher, sorcerer, no difference) recently.

Without further ado:

I liked the word games (I was very happy to figure out right away that the Mirror of Erised was the Mirror of Desire spelt backwards) and word play, and was surprised at how funny I found the book. For some reason I would laugh almost every time the dog Fluffy’s name was mentioned (that’s the giant, 3-headed dog that will tear you limb from limb unless you play it a song, in which case it will reluctantly lie down and start to fall asleep).

My major complaint was that I wished Rowling had added a little more of a reason to the Muggles’ anti-wizardry behaviour. Because they were uni-dimensional, I found them unconvincing, but I realize the primary audience for the book wasn’t adults.

Overall I recommend it, if only to get an idea of the cultural phenom known as Harry Potter. I just might try the second book.

Hire no one - and other ideas for focusing on what you’re really good at

February 7th, 2010 . Posted in Complexity, Priorities | No Comments »

Chris Guillebeau has a thought-provoking post with tips on his business strategy:

“My model is: keep it lean, hire no one, and outsource very little.”

Some comments:

“1. Hire no one. [...] If I have to supervise someone else doing boring work, it’s not that different from doing it to begin with. The things are still on my mind one way or another.”

Basically, I think this is right. Before hiring someone, you should consider how the business can a) not do whatever it is you might be hiring them for, b) automate it, c) find a third-party (that operationally will be basically like automating it), or d) get a consultant who works on a project-based (and if it makes sense outcome-based) remuneration model.

In that order. If you want a business that doesn’t start to take up your entire day and bog you down with management stuff, and where instead you can focus on what you’re really good at related to the business, the exceptions to this will be few (namely, where there is something very, very important for the company that requires a longer-term focus without easily identifiable projects, but even there … my advice is to consider a)-d) ).

“2. Outsource very little. [... Instead] of outsourcing, you can just stop doing stuff. I don’t want employees, assistants, or clones in India to answer my email. I actually like hearing from my customers and don’t want to create a barricade between them and me.”

The latter is an important point. For his point about just stopping doing stuff, see a) above.

“3. Offer no customization. [...] Once you start providing options, color, sizes, and so on, things get complicated. If you want to stay deliberately small, don’t customize.”

I would put this a little differently. If you are going to get big (in revenue), you need to simplify or the complexity curve may easily overwhelm your company (maxim: simplicity is required for effective complexity).

“4. Pursue a lot of opportunities, but don’t be afraid to cancel. [...] Failing quickly is OK; dying a slow death is not.”

Important point. See also Quit often and quit early, but note that what you don’t want to do is drop something just because it’s getting a little tough.

“5. Offer more to the right people. Properly set up, the creative use of cross-selling and upselling can rock your business world.”

Yep. Note that cross-selling requires having multiple products. Also see How to turn customer service into an asset.

Now go forth and keep it simple in your business, and you will soon be as Zen as this.

Another tip for how to enjoy going to the gym

February 7th, 2010 . Posted in Psychology | No Comments »

In Leo’s post The Ultimate How to Get Lean Guide, one of the fitness experts says to try adding caffeine 30 min. before a workout to boost intensity. Another recommends a few cups of high-quality green tea a day.

I unwittingly combined these just awhile ago. I noticed I would sometimes feel groggy when I was going to go workout, and after 10 or 15 min. working out I would want to stop (my workouts are usually pretty intense, lasting no more than about 30 min.). I started drinking some green tea (usually half a cup to a cup) before heading to the gym (caffeine takes about 30 min. to kick in, so it would typically start to kick in part way through a workout).

It worked (and also associates the feel-good that comes with caffeine to going to the gym, which can make it more easy to get going to the gym*).

Also see How to enjoy going to the gym.

Have fun!

*Caffeine, like pretty much anything, if over-used can cause various problems, including stress and sleep problems. Using only green tea reduces the chances of this, as the amount of caffeine is relatively low. I have about 2-3 cups of green tea a day right now.

Important questions from Ferriss

January 29th, 2010 . Posted in Habits | No Comments »

A couple questions Ferriss asks himself on a regular basis, from here:

1. What is the one constraint, if removed, that would make me 5, 10, or 20 times as productive? Ditto for private life.

2. What if I had to do this in 15 min., how would I define it or delegate - what would I do?

3. What is the downside if I lose this person for 3 months, 6 months, or forever - did I need them before I considered them necessary?

Comments:

1. Important.

2. Beware of short-term long-term tradeoffs when asking these kinds of questions. You might be able to do something in much less time that works, but has longer-term effects that often make it worth spending more time in the beginning.

Tricky decisions: how to evaluate when to just get started

January 22nd, 2010 . Posted in Experiments, Getting Started (Strategic), How To Quit, Psychology, Small Tasks | No Comments »

One maxim I like is: “just get started.” (Sometimes known as the “Fire! Aim” approach.) There are times when another maxim, like “measure twice, cut once,” seems better, though. How to resolve the tension?

In this case, there are implicit factors that underlie the maxim. By being aware of the underlying factors, you can recognize when a rule of thumb should be broken.

Without further ado, factors to consider for the maxim “just get started”:

1. Is it reversible? If so, that’s a point in favour of just getting started.

For example, you might be hesitant to take a class if you think it means taking the whole thing. If, however, you can stop going at any point, that’s a point in favour of signing up.

2. Can you start small? If so, that’s a point in favour of just getting started.

This is similar to 1. If you can start small, it often means you can refine your approach in iterations, in effect “measuring” as you go, or as in 1. decide to quit at a relatively early point.

(Note: beware of slippery slopes. A slippery slope is where the structure of something is such that it’s actually deceptively difficult to reverse something. If you’re an employee, allowing a boss to use the Puppy Dog Close on you is one example.)

3. Is there a large amount of uncertainty which can be remedied by getting on the ground? If so, that’s a point in favour of just getting started.

This combines with 2.

4. Is it difficult to get a good initial idea of what’s involved by doing a small amount of initial research? If so, that’s a point in favour of just getting started, as the measuring (”measure twice”) will be difficult to implement at the very beginning.

(In starting a business, I favour “just getting started,” but in that context I mean “do initial research, but for weeks instead of months, and then start getting feedback by actually starting.”)

5. Is there ‘decision paralysis’? (trying to make a perfect choice causes ‘no choice’) If so, that’s a point in favour of not worrying so much about getting it perfect in the beginning, and instead focusing on just getting started.

By understanding what lies behind a rule of thumb or maxim, you can know when you are in a situation where the underlying logic suggests that you break the maxim. Often, what distinguishes an expert from a novice is those who know when to break the easily learnt principles or rules.

How to increase your vacation by 5x

January 18th, 2010 . Posted in Experiments, Motivation, Psychology | 3 Comments »

In 4HWW, Ferriss advocates a 2-3 month ‘vacation’ initially (p.256, revised edition):

“True freedom is much more than having enough income and time to do what you want. It is quite possible [...] to have financial and time freedom but still be caught in the throes of the rat race. One cannot be free from the stresses of a speed- and size-obsessed culture until you are free from the materialistic addictions, time-famine mind-set, and comparative impulses that created it in the first place.

This takes time. The effect is not cumulative, and no number of two-week (also called “too weak”) sightseeing trips can replace one good walkabout.

In the experience of those I’ve interviewed, it takes two to three months just to unplug from obsolete routines and become aware of just how much we distract ourselves with constant motion. [...]

Learn to slow down. Get lost intentionally. Observe how you judge both yourself and those around you. [...] Take at least two months to disincorporate old habits and rediscover yourself without the reminder of a looming return flight.“

I realized even though I’ve been implementing 4HWW ideas for about 2.5 years, I’ve never actually done this while unplugging from work. I always took my laptop, or checked e-mail regularly (from internet cafes or whatever - even if I wasn’t responding to the e-mail).

I recently went on a vacation for a little less than a week and implemented some of the above ideas as an experiment.

I did 3 things in particular:

1. I didn’t take my laptop. I had traveled without my laptop before, but not combined with …

2. I didn’t check e-mail. At all. In fact, I never used a computer during the entire trip, including internet cafes.

3. I also turned my cell phone on silent mode, and rarely checked it.

I think doing the above 3 things increases the effectiveness of the time by something like 3-5 times. So, 1 day of vacation without laptop, e-mail, or cell phone = 3-5 days of ‘vacation’ with.

For example, somewhere between days 2 and 3 I completely relaxed and forgot about what business e-mails might be coming in. Interestingly, though, by day 4 I started to get excited about business projects.

Turning the internet off also forced me to rely on people and local signs for information about what was happening and where to go. This was actually more fun, I found.

Part of how to get improvements and how science progresses

January 9th, 2010 . Posted in Problem Solving, Science, Technology | No Comments »

Seth Roberts has two important paragraphs here:

I think it goes back to my old comment (derived from Jane Jacobs) that farmers didn’t invent tractors. Some people claimed they did but I think we can all agree farmers didn’t invent the engine on which tractors are based. You can’t get to tractors from trial and error around pre-tractor farming methods. Even though farmers are expert at farming. I think that’s what happened here. I am not a food professional or even a skilled cook. My expertise is in psychology (especially psychology and food). Wondering why we like umami, sour, and complex flavors led me to a theory (the umami hypothesis) that led me to a new idea about how to cook.

And this goes back to what many people, including Atul Gawande, fail to understand about how to improve our healthcare system. The supposed experts, with their vast credentials, can’t fix it — just as farmers couldn’t invent tractors. Impossible. The experts (doctors, medical school professors, drug companies, alternative healers) have a serious case of gatekeeper syndrome. The really big improvements will come from outsiders. Outsiders who benefit from change.

This relates to the insider-outsider, a concept Seth has talked a bit about here:

In the case of the Shangri-La Diet, I was (a) close enough to the field of nutrition that I could understand the research but (b) far enough away so that I could say what I thought without fear of reprisal. Nassim Taleb is in the same relation to the field he criticizes. Just as Saul Sternberg and I knew a lot about the outcome measure (psychological tests) but were not nutritionists, Weston Price, a dentist, knew a lot about his outcome measure (dental health) but was not a nutritionist.

It’s curious how rarely this need for insiders/outsiders (inside in terms of knowledge, outside in terms of career) is pointed out. It’s a big part of how science progresses, in small ways and large. Mendel and Darwin were well-educated amateurs, for example. Thorstein Veblen wrote about it but I haven’t read it anywhere else.

Filling the void

January 9th, 2010 . Posted in Experiments, Psychology | No Comments »

One of the biggest challenges I’ve faced in implementing 4HWW ideas is moving from spending almost all my time on business, to significantly reducing that amount of time and then having a ‘void’ because I didn’t have new interests cultivated.

I had lots of false starts before hitting on some things I’m currently enjoying and seem to be half-decent at, and it took me quite a while to start really finding them (a year, but more like two years).

Here are 7 questions Tim Ferriss gives in 4HWW to help in starting to figure out what things might be worth pursuing to ‘fill the void’ (p.300, revised edition):

1. What are you good at?

2. What could you be the best at?

3. What makes you happy?

4. What excites you?

5. What makes you feel accomplished and good about yourself?

6. What are you most proud of having accomplished in your life? Can you repeat this or further develop it?

7. What do you enjoy sharing or experiencing with other people?

Have fun!

Signal and Pattern

January 6th, 2010 . Posted in Science | No Comments »

Signals have the following interesting property: the same signal can be interpreted as fitting different patterns.

Once a pattern is (supposedly) established, various things are interpreted one way that might have been interpreted a different way if another pattern had been (supposedly) established.

(A good example of this in politics is “defining your candidate.” The basic idea is: define your own candidate, i.e., create patterns that future events will be interpreted through by voters, before your opponent does it for you.)

This has ramifications for not just scientific theories but everyday theories we have about ourselves and the world.

It’s probably useful to be aware that the current pattern we think we have established may not be correct, and briefly think through other possible patterns and how the new signal would be interpreted if they were what we thought was the case.

« Older Entries