I believe there is also a powerful inverse function as well, not mentioned in the research.
For example, give a guy who has been working out for years even the slightest excuse, and his shirt will come off in public. Ask the overweight test subject to do the same, and he will be reluctant.
Pretty obvious, it would seem, but this stuff is IMPORTANT if you are claiming to offer a mathematical model.
Umm . . . Aristotle's profound but narrow literary definition of the term 'tragedy' does NOT encompass all possible meanings of the word in normal discourse. I would expect any well-educated person to understand that - but I guess I would be disappointed.
I have many years of experience on both sides of this fence, and guess what? There is NO advice and NO approach that will work in all situations.
As a prospective employee, I have sent out resumes about positions for which I was highly qualified. These resumes were literate (no errors in syntax or spelling), succinct (brief but information-dense), even well laid out and printed on good paper - and most of the hiring people didn't notice the difference. Yes, the people who have the communication skills to write books or articles will look for those qualities, but the fact is that most of the people actually doing the hiring could not meet those requirements themselves.
On the other hand, it is extremely frustrating, when looking for a new employee, to receive 200 resumes of which the vast majority appear to be the pathetic efforts of clueless losers. If Mr. Spolsky got 'lots' of good resumes from well-educated applicants, he should consider himself extremely lucky.
As other posters have noted, a little personal contact will accomplish what no resume possibly could.
I am very confused by the many posts claiming that price fixing is legal, as long as there is no collusion among suppliers.
I worked in retail for many years, selling high-end electronics (audio, and later video, components). Price fixing on the part of manufacturers was absolutely forbidden. It still went on, but the government could come down hard on someone if they found out.
There were a number of clever ways manufacturers used to get around these restrictions. The most popular was a 'minimum advertised price' policy linked to advertising dollars (i.e., you got a rebate if you sold things at or above the recommended minumum price).
I have been out of the business for several years now, but I find it hard to believe that things could have changed that much. Could someone with solid current information please clear this up for all of us?
In my experience this past week, there has been absolutely no reduction in telemarketing call volume, and when I mention the DNC list, the callers hang up without telling me what company they represent. Since most of these firms have arranged things with their telephone service providers so that their names and numbers do not show up on my Caller ID, there is no way for me to know who is breaking the law in each case.
As long as telemarketers have such privileged arrangements with the phone companies, this DNC thing won't make much difference. Perhaps this loophole needs to be addressed by further legislation?
Unlike most of the commenters so far, I am attempting a serious response.
Cheap pens don't work reliably (although some are much better than others). The biggest problem I have with them is that they tend to disappear. The pens I prefer, while not really all that expensive, matter enough that I keep an eye on them. Somehow, it works.
Over the past 15 years, I have settled on two basic pens for all my writing needs: the rotring and Lamy ball pens. The Lamy is cute, colorful, distinctive enough to be instantly recognizable as mine, but cheap enough so that if I lose one I'm not upset. The refills last a long time, and the ink flows smoothly.
But my favorite is the rotring. Machined from solid brass, with a black or aluminum anodized finish, it has an ideal weight. It is slim but, with its knurled barrel, easy to grip (which addresses a major problem for me). This is a good example of the elegance of simplicity. Again, the refills are superior.
(BTW, I hate Cross pens because of their crappy refills, which I find blotchy and short-lived.)
I can't tell you how many times I have handed my rotring, for a signature, to someone with an expensive Waterman or Mont Blanc sticking out of his pocket, only to have it examined closely and handed back with the comment, "Nice pen."
These pens nearly disappeared from the market, but when rotring announced that they were discontinuing the model, Levenger persuaded them to keep it in production exclusively for their catalog. (Much of the Levenger stuff is grotesquely lacking in value, but for saving the rotring pen I forgive them a lot of other trespasses!)
Oh, and I believe they are also a good source for the Lamy (and other) inks.
The ideas from "Zen..." are superb advice; the problem is that it's very hard to state them clearly and succinctly.
For me, guilt was always a reliable indicator--if I was feeling bad about something (whether it was something I was supposed to be doing, or something I had already done), then I knew I couldn't function effectively. As long as you are beating yourself up, there is no way you can do your best work.
I think this may be happening to you, because you state that you have stopped playing games and watching TV, which suggests that you are punishing yourself in an attempt to improve your behavior. This simply won't work, as you have observed.
Instead, when you find yourself struggling with these feelings, just stop it. Recognize that it is counter-productive to think bad things about yourself. Once you can dissociate your thinking from your emotional baggage, you really can see things much more clearly.
At that point, you can calmly decide to start whatever task is before you. Once you are over the initial hump, the momentum of what you are doing should carry you forward.
And do give yourself a break once in awhile. If you are not enjoying life, then what's the point of getting on with it? Good luck.
The information is public because, for the most part, the work is performed by private citizens working for publicly owned contractors, according to plans drawn up by other public organizations, and paid for with publicly accountable funds. Where do you even begin to start restricting such information? I don't want to live in a society where every building permit has to be overseen by a security agency, and every cable installer, etc., needs security clearance.
I know this is a little off-topic, but I thought the quote from Judge (Richard) Posner was interesting: "Willful blindness is knowledge, in copyright law...One who, knowing or strongly suspecting that he is involved in shady dealings, takes steps to make sure that he does not acquire full or exact knowledge of the nature and extent of those dealings is held to have criminal intent."
How is this different in copyright law than in criminal law? If this standard were applied to any number of high-level politicians, heads (of state) would roll!
One possible use for these things is supposed to be "ascertaining the soundness of an earthquake-damaged structure." But, as anyone who has ever lived in San Francisco can tell you, you just don't build with bricks and masonry in earthquake zones!
I think this engineer needs to get out of the lab occasionally.
What is the average life of a building? Now, what is the average life of electronic components? And what is the average life of data formats or transmission protocols?
Slashdot Mirror
I believe there is also a powerful inverse function as well, not mentioned in the research.
For example, give a guy who has been working out for years even the slightest excuse, and his shirt will come off in public. Ask the overweight test subject to do the same, and he will be reluctant.
Pretty obvious, it would seem, but this stuff is IMPORTANT if you are claiming to offer a mathematical model.
Umm . . . Aristotle's profound but narrow literary definition of the term 'tragedy' does NOT encompass all possible meanings of the word in normal discourse. I would expect any well-educated person to understand that - but I guess I would be disappointed.
I have many years of experience on both sides of this fence, and guess what? There is NO advice and NO approach that will work in all situations.
As a prospective employee, I have sent out resumes about positions for which I was highly qualified. These resumes were literate (no errors in syntax or spelling), succinct (brief but information-dense), even well laid out and printed on good paper - and most of the hiring people didn't notice the difference. Yes, the people who have the communication skills to write books or articles will look for those qualities, but the fact is that most of the people actually doing the hiring could not meet those requirements themselves.
On the other hand, it is extremely frustrating, when looking for a new employee, to receive 200 resumes of which the vast majority appear to be the pathetic efforts of clueless losers. If Mr. Spolsky got 'lots' of good resumes from well-educated applicants, he should consider himself extremely lucky.
As other posters have noted, a little personal contact will accomplish what no resume possibly could.
I am very confused by the many posts claiming that price fixing is legal, as long as there is no collusion among suppliers.
I worked in retail for many years, selling high-end electronics (audio, and later video, components). Price fixing on the part of manufacturers was absolutely forbidden. It still went on, but the government could come down hard on someone if they found out.
There were a number of clever ways manufacturers used to get around these restrictions. The most popular was a 'minimum advertised price' policy linked to advertising dollars (i.e., you got a rebate if you sold things at or above the recommended minumum price).
I have been out of the business for several years now, but I find it hard to believe that things could have changed that much. Could someone with solid current information please clear this up for all of us?
In my experience this past week, there has been absolutely no reduction in telemarketing call volume, and when I mention the DNC list, the callers hang up without telling me what company they represent. Since most of these firms have arranged things with their telephone service providers so that their names and numbers do not show up on my Caller ID, there is no way for me to know who is breaking the law in each case.
As long as telemarketers have such privileged arrangements with the phone companies, this DNC thing won't make much difference. Perhaps this loophole needs to be addressed by further legislation?
Unlike most of the commenters so far, I am attempting a serious response.
Cheap pens don't work reliably (although some are much better than others). The biggest problem I have with them is that they tend to disappear. The pens I prefer, while not really all that expensive, matter enough that I keep an eye on them. Somehow, it works.
Over the past 15 years, I have settled on two basic pens for all my writing needs: the rotring and Lamy ball pens. The Lamy is cute, colorful, distinctive enough to be instantly recognizable as mine, but cheap enough so that if I lose one I'm not upset. The refills last a long time, and the ink flows smoothly.
But my favorite is the rotring. Machined from solid brass, with a black or aluminum anodized finish, it has an ideal weight. It is slim but, with its knurled barrel, easy to grip (which addresses a major problem for me). This is a good example of the elegance of simplicity. Again, the refills are superior.
(BTW, I hate Cross pens because of their crappy refills, which I find blotchy and short-lived.)
I can't tell you how many times I have handed my rotring, for a signature, to someone with an expensive Waterman or Mont Blanc sticking out of his pocket, only to have it examined closely and handed back with the comment, "Nice pen."
These pens nearly disappeared from the market, but when rotring announced that they were discontinuing the model, Levenger persuaded them to keep it in production exclusively for their catalog. (Much of the Levenger stuff is grotesquely lacking in value, but for saving the rotring pen I forgive them a lot of other trespasses!)
Oh, and I believe they are also a good source for the Lamy (and other) inks.
The ideas from "Zen..." are superb advice; the problem is that it's very hard to state them clearly and succinctly.
For me, guilt was always a reliable indicator--if I was feeling bad about something (whether it was something I was supposed to be doing, or something I had already done), then I knew I couldn't function effectively. As long as you are beating yourself up, there is no way you can do your best work.
I think this may be happening to you, because you state that you have stopped playing games and watching TV, which suggests that you are punishing yourself in an attempt to improve your behavior. This simply won't work, as you have observed.
Instead, when you find yourself struggling with these feelings, just stop it. Recognize that it is counter-productive to think bad things about yourself. Once you can dissociate your thinking from your emotional baggage, you really can see things much more clearly.
At that point, you can calmly decide to start whatever task is before you. Once you are over the initial hump, the momentum of what you are doing should carry you forward.
And do give yourself a break once in awhile. If you are not enjoying life, then what's the point of getting on with it? Good luck.
The information is public because, for the most part, the work is performed by private citizens working for publicly owned contractors, according to plans drawn up by other public organizations, and paid for with publicly accountable funds. Where do you even begin to start restricting such information? I don't want to live in a society where every building permit has to be overseen by a security agency, and every cable installer, etc., needs security clearance.
I know this is a little off-topic, but I thought the quote from Judge (Richard) Posner was interesting: "Willful blindness is knowledge, in copyright law...One who, knowing or strongly suspecting that he is involved in shady dealings, takes steps to make sure that he does not acquire full or exact knowledge of the nature and extent of those dealings is held to have criminal intent."
How is this different in copyright law than in criminal law? If this standard were applied to any number of high-level politicians, heads (of state) would roll!
One possible use for these things is supposed to be "ascertaining the soundness of an earthquake-damaged structure." But, as anyone who has ever lived in San Francisco can tell you, you just don't build with bricks and masonry in earthquake zones!
I think this engineer needs to get out of the lab occasionally.
What is the average life of a building? Now, what is the average life of electronic components? And what is the average life of data formats or transmission protocols?