Reddit mentions: The best decision-making & problem solving books

We found 876 Reddit comments discussing the best decision-making & problem solving books. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 217 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

1. Thinking, Fast and Slow

    Features:
  • A good option for a Book Lover
  • It comes with proper packaging
  • Ideal for Gifting
Thinking, Fast and Slow
Specs:
Height8.22833 Inches
Length5.5118 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2013
Weight1.24 Pounds
Width1.45669 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

5. The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives
Specs:
Height9.55 Inches
Length6.4 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMay 2008
Weight1.18 Pounds
Width1.08 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

6. Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions

    Features:
  • Hardcover
Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
Specs:
Height9.58 Inches
Length6.43 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2016
Weight1.2 Pounds
Width1.3299186 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

8. Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days

Sprint How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days
Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days
Specs:
Height8.375 Inches
Length5.5 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMarch 2016
Weight1.25 Pounds
Width1 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

9. Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten

Analytics Press
Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten
Specs:
Height11 Inches
Length8.5 Inches
Number of items1
Weight3.56928402178 Pounds
Width1.4 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

10. The Art and Craft of Problem Solving

The Art and Craft of Problem Solving
Specs:
Height9.200769 Inches
Length7.2988043 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.5652820602 Pounds
Width0.901573 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

11. How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character

How Children Succeed Grit Curiosity and the Hidden Power of Character
How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character
Specs:
Height8 Inches
Length5.3125 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJuly 2013
Weight0.45 Pounds
Width0.679 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

12. The Four Steps to the Epiphany

K S Ranch
The Four Steps to the Epiphany
Specs:
Height9.25 Inches
Length7.5 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.85 Pounds
Width0.75 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

13. Now You See It: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis

Analytics Press
Now You See It: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis
Specs:
Height11 Inches
Length8.5 Inches
Number of items1
Weight3.4281881741 Pounds
Width1.3 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

14. Cribsheet: A Data-Driven Guide to Better, More Relaxed Parenting, from Birth to Preschool

Cribsheet: A Data-Driven Guide to Better, More Relaxed Parenting, from Birth to Preschool
Specs:
ColorGold
Height9.28 Inches
Length6.2 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2019
Weight1.24 Pounds
Width1.2 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

15. Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior

    Features:
  • Broadway Business
Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior
Specs:
ColorWhite
Height8 Inches
Length5.2 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJune 2009
Weight0.4 Pounds
Width0.6 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

16. When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing

When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing
Specs:
ColorWhite
Height9.29 Inches
Length6.29 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJanuary 2018
Weight1.02 Pounds
Width0.97 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

17. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving
Specs:
Height9.5 Inches
Length6.25 Inches
Number of items1
Weight0.5952481074 Pounds
Width0.5 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

18. The Essential Deming: Leadership Principles from the Father of Quality

Used Book in Good Condition
The Essential Deming: Leadership Principles from the Father of Quality
Specs:
Height9.4 Inches
Length6.2 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.3558429113 Pounds
Width1.4 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

19. Principles: Life and Work

    Features:
  • It can be a gift option
  • Easy to read text
  • This product will be an excellent pick for you
Principles: Life and Work
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateSeptember 2017
Weight1.82101828412 Pounds
Width1.6 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

20. Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions

Picador USA
Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
Specs:
Height9.0700606 inches
Length6.0999878 inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2017
Weight0.89 Pounds
Width0.9850374 inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

🎓 Reddit experts on decision-making & problem solving books

The comments and opinions expressed on this page are written exclusively by redditors. To provide you with the most relevant data, we sourced opinions from the most knowledgeable Reddit users based the total number of upvotes and downvotes received across comments on subreddits where decision-making & problem solving books are discussed. For your reference and for the sake of transparency, here are the specialists whose opinions mattered the most in our ranking.
Total score: 166
Number of comments: 9
Relevant subreddits: 1
Total score: 92
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 37
Number of comments: 4
Relevant subreddits: 4
Total score: 36
Number of comments: 5
Relevant subreddits: 3
Total score: 23
Number of comments: 5
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 16
Number of comments: 12
Relevant subreddits: 1
Total score: 11
Number of comments: 3
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 10
Number of comments: 4
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 8
Number of comments: 3
Relevant subreddits: 1
Total score: 2
Number of comments: 4
Relevant subreddits: 2

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Top Reddit comments about Decision-Making & Problem Solving:

u/s1e · 4 pointsr/userexperience

I'm sorry if the reply turned out a bit too general, but the individual steps depend a lot on the specifics :)

As I said before, it's crucial that you understand the problem domain as good, or better than your customers. I like to think of it as the Fog of War in strategy game maps. I can only effectively perform once I have explored enough territory to see the big picture. Here's roughly how I would try to wrap my head around such a challenge, if the company hired me to help:

Customer

Who are the customers? It's actually possible to think of the customers just in terms of their needs and desires. But it's useful to know their demographic attributes, so you can choose whether your solution is going to be a lateral or a niche one. For instance.. Trello is a lateral solution, because the kan-ban methodology can be applied to many different types of problems. On the other hand, It could be argued that 500px is a niche solution, because it caters to photographers more than meme authors. It's very easy for 500px to figure out where photographers hang out online and in the real world, should they choose to reach out to them in any way.

The job (Problems / Desires)

The customers usually have some sort of job to be done. That job is driven by their desire for a benefit, or a lingering problem that needs solving. Those benefits can range from monetary to peace of mind or social status. And problems can range in severity. Furthermore, different customer segments can rate some problems and benefits as more important than others. This is the combinatorial explosion of stakeholders and their points of view, that informs a strategy of a good product designer, and causes an uninformed designer to arrive at an optimal solution only through brute force or sheer luck.

Solution

Sometimes the solution has to be drawn up from scratch, optimized or entirely re-imagined. So what is the existing solution? What would an utopian solution look like? A complex problem might require a solution in the form of a toolkit of multiple core activities (Like Google, HubSpot or Moz). A focused solution though, can be embodied in a single product (Caffeine.app keeps your mac from going to sleep). If a solution is complex behind the curtains, but you make it simple and gratifying from the user's point of view, it may seem like magic to them.

Business

The things that you do behind the curtains are some core activities, that might require some key resources. That's how the business makes sure it spends less than it earns on a customer (unit economics). It's easy to paint a picture where the world is split between sociopathic capitalists with a greedy agenda & empathic designers, who champion the user's priorities. But a similar solution with a sound business foundation will always be better for the customer, because it stands a better chance of outperforming the economically inferiour solution in the long run. It's the job of a designer to balance between the two aspects. So much so, that the Elements of User Experience places big emphasis on both Business Objectives & User Needs.

Communication

Once you love your people, and you have a way to show it to them, you'll have to start and maintain some sort of relationship. You can identify Touch Points or Channels. If, for instance, your customers are tourists looking for a place to grab a meal before boarding the next train, you can administer your solution right then and there, at the train station. But most of the time you'll be reaching out to your potential users somewhere between you and them, probably through a third party (online publication, app or ad network). It may take multiple exposures in different contexts, before somebody decides to give your solution a try. So a customer might bump into your message at certain touch points, open a communication channel like a newsletter or notification subscription, and only then decide to commit. There's often talk about a multiple stage funnel, through which we try to shove as much of our target market. But you can also look at customer lifetime stages as vertebrae in the cohort spine. For instance.. Slicing out customer segments by lifetime lets SoundCloud identify differences between a newcoming podcaster & a long-time podcaster, and communicate with each of them appropriately, even though most of the people that care about SoundCloud are producers and record labels. Staying on top of communication also helps you avoid conversion attribution mistakes, so you can communicate more effectively.

Here are some resources related to those subjects:

  • Value Proposition Design, Alexander Osterwalder: How to map the Customer, their Problems and Desires to a Solution.
  • The Innovator's Dillema, Clayton Christensen: Describes how disruptive innovators solve existing problems in novel ways.
  • Minto Pyramid Principle, Barbara Minto: How to communicate the value propositions to a rationally minded customer.

    A bit more business related:

  • Four Steps To The Epiphany, Steve Blank: A user-focused methodology for efficiently finding a viable business model, called Customer Development.
  • Business Model Generation, Alexander Osterwalder: His first book takes a broader look, dealing with booth the business and customer side of things.
  • Lean Startup, Eric Ries: What Steve Blank said.

    Once I have a good understanding, I would focus on Information Architecture, Experience Design, Production & Iteration. I can't spare the time to write about those now, but here are some related resources:

  • Elements of User Experience, Jesse James Garret: What a typical experience design process is made up of.
  • About Face, Alan Cooper: Another take on the whole process, dives a bit deeper into every stage than Garret's book.
  • Don't Make Me Think, Steve Krug: One of the first books to gave the issues of IA and UX design a human, customer point of view.

    I might write more about the specific subjects of IA and UX later, when I find the time. In the meanwhile, check any of the three books with italicized titles, if you haven't already.

    Peace o/
u/Broskidoski · 1 pointr/PurplePillDebate

> For me, RP is like economics. It's a model of human behavior that is built on predictions and patterns.
> TRPers are like economists. There are many "schools" that are built around RP, some of which are more closely aligned with the model (from my perspective) and some of which are not. And just because someone says they are an economist does make them an expert in economics.
> Trying to understand RP just from reading what various TRPers write is as ridiculous as trying to understand economics from what various self-proclaimed economists write.

Actually, I'm mostly referring to the sidebar when I discuss TRP concepts. And comparing TRP to economics is a great example.

Remember why the financial crisis happened in 2008? That's right - flawed ideas of economics. There's tons of literature on how applied neoclassical economics quickly can become a self-fulfilling prophecy which apparently produces results in the short term, but in the long term spells doom.

Same thing applies to TRP. Compare the average TRPer to an investor during the pre-crisis area. The investor buys MBS-funds which seem to pay off infinitely. So he puts more and more money into it, after a while he has invested everything he owns. Sometimes people warn him that his assets are based on mortages that will immediately default, and thus are worthless in the long run. But he points at his current net worth: Can't people see that this is working? Suddenly the entire market crashes do to the innate rotten nature of his MBS funds, and he is left with no assets and a whole lot of debt.

Same thing for the TRP guy. Spends years acting in line with TRP philosophy. It ostensibly works at first, but people are telling him that his behavior will not allow him to reach his goals in the long term. He ignores them and continues his TRP lifestyle. 5 years down the line the woman of his dreams leaves him. She's tired of him dissmissing her and walking away at the slightest hint of anger from her ("Holding frame"), she's tired of him not taking her seriously ("Amused mastery") and she has grown aware of how fragile and insecure his ego is as he seems to interpret anything she says as an insult ("Passing shit tests"). Now the man is fucked.

> Ugh. I hate the direct comparison to PUA. I know little about PUA as a whole (though some of their actions do seem to line up with what I would recommend), but I know I'm not the only RPer who bemoans RP turning into something like "PUA 2.0". RP, to my mind, is not just a new form of PUA. It goes way beyond what I understand of PUA, which really seems to only focus on short-term hookups.

Every single TRP idea existed in the PUA community. The most famous part of the community (popularly seen in "The Game" By Neil Strauss) involved tips and tricks for short-term hookups. The "Inner game" part of the community is pretty much identical to TRP. Just look at videos from RSD (Real Social Dynamics) and you'll find pretty much every TRP concept there.

> Again, you are focusing on the doing and not on the being (which isn't surprising, given that many TRPers make the same mistake). It's back to the old "fake it until you make it" idea. If you know who you need to be (like, say, confident), it can be useful to emulate that quality until you actually express it naturally, but to assume that the faking it is the making it is completely off-base.

I disagree. This is a flawed way of thinking. You cannot emulate confidence until it appears. Confidence is a feeling that makes you act and feel a certain way. We know from psychology that confidence is the result of your experiences within a given field and your interpretation of that. The only thing you accomplish by acting confident is that you get better at... acting like a confident person. Most people see through that easily.

> The end goal of RP is not to "do alpha", it's to "be alpha." If you are being alpha, all the rest of the shit will fall into place.

I understand the differences her between being and doing. But if you are actively (as is promoted in the sidebar) doing "Alpha male stuff" like "Holding frame" or "Amused mastery", then you are actually just teaching yourself a set behavior. You are not actually being authentic and acting in line with your own values - which would be what the idealized "Alpha male" would do.

> I can always tell that someone just attended a class or training by the fact that their actions are so out of alignment with their being.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about! Would that leader "Be" a leader by faking it until he made it?

> My understanding of the "hypergamy" dynamic and how men and women express and feel love differently comes from years of both reading various experts and studies on the subject of human sexuality and from my countless conversations (and relationships) with other people from all walks of life, so it's hard for me to reference something off-hand. I would say that the work of David Buss goes a long way towards validating the idea of hypergamy/polygyny as base sexual drives in humans, so I would check him out for that. Not included in this discussion, but I found that Esther Parel advocates a view of sexuality that confirms the idea of AF/BB, so that's another non-RP source.

I'm familiar with David Buss and evolutionary psychology. And yes, it describes why the impulses men and women have when it comes to sex have evolved. Women have evolved to be more selective because they risk pregnancy, while for men no such mechanism has been adaptive. However, men are also strongly attracted to visual cues of genetic fitness, just like women. There is nothing gender specific about the idea of "Hypergamy" if it is merely defined as the desire for an attractive partner.

> Why is that so hard to believe?

There are plenty of reasons for this in an evo psych perspective. The most important one being that the high SMV man has other opportunities. Unless the woman is equally high in SMV, there's no way for her to know that he won't just pump and dump her, then leave her for a prettier woman. Then she's stuck with a baby and no man to protect her. Bad idea.

But in terms of real life applications, I was referring to the "Branch jumping" idea. Let's say you have a girlfriend. She meets a guy who has a better job than you, is more confident, looks better than you - he is a higher SMV male.

Does she immediately leave you if he hits on her? According to the idea of branch jumping : Yes.

> What people ideally want and what people can realistically get are two totally different animals.

Of course. I mean, If everyone got what they wanted, I'd be a space cowboy. But I'm not, and I'm still quite happy with my career. And just like I'm happy with my career, a woman can be happy with her man even though he's not the perfect man. And a man can be the same.

> Most of life requires trade-offs that result from a cost benefit analysis.

Are you applying classical economical assumptions to human behavior? Because it seems you're talking of humans as rational actors. I recommend this book by Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize winner in economics, which describes why humans do not fall in line with the assumption of the classical "Economic man".

> And it's interesting that you perceive polygamy as the result of patriarchal societies. I would maybe conjecture that you think that, conversely, monogamy is not a result of patriarchal societies? If so, there are many anthropologists who would disagree with you. They see enforced monogamy as something instituted by men for men and not for the benefit of women.

The old-fashioned form of monogamy is patriarchal because women had to marry. They couldn't work or go to school. Modern monogamy is not a patriarchal construct. And since we've already covered evolutionary psychology, it's worth mentioning that humans have an evolved pair-bonding mechanism which includes emotions aimed at keeping the relationship exclusive (Jealousy).

> The assertion that "women wouldn't want to share" presumes a modern setting for mating, which would be a mistake. I guarantee you that, at a time when resources were scarce and survival was a daily question, the concern over "sharing" becomes far less important than the concern over "how do I ensure the survival of my child and myself? How will I ensure that sufficient resources are available for accomplishing that?"

We agree here. If nuclear war ravaged the world tomorrow this would definately be the case.

> Additionally, it must be noted that the whole notion of humans being naturally monogamous, especially for life, doesn't really hold up in either an academic or a real world sense. Clearly, monogamy, especially life-long monogamy, is not the natural order of things for humans (otherwise, we wouldn't have all the conversations about n-counts and cheating and divorce and...). Humans have found that lifetime monogamy can work well for both parties in certain settings, but that does not mean that's what we are wired to do.

We have a drive for pair bonding, that's about it. It doesn't really make sense to talk about a "Natural order of things" with humans, the entire success of our species is contingent on us being adaptive. For a lot of people. life long monogamy will work. For a lot of people, it won't. The reasons why and why not are unique to each case and infinitely complex.

> I could write a book on this. Many authors already have. I don't have time now, but maybe we can get into it at some point. In the meantime, this is probably one of the most explored topics in human sexuality.

Sure, I'm interested.

u/ArthurAutomaton · 2 pointsr/math

It's a good question that's hard to answer exhaustively. Here are some pointers. Maybe they can help to start a discussion.

  1. Paul Zeitz writes the following advice in The Art and Craft of Problem Solving (emphasis added):

    > It isn't hard to acquire a modest amount of mental toughness. As a beginner, you most likely lack some confidence and powers of concentration, but you can increase both simultaneously. You may think that building up confidence is a difficult and subtle thing, but we are not talking here about self-esteem or sexuality or anything very deep in your psyche. Math problems are easier to deal with. You are already pretty confident about your math ability or you would not be reading this. You build upon your preexisting confidence by working at first on "easy" problems, where "easy" means that you can solve it after expending a modest effort. As long as you work on problems rather than exercises, your brain gets a workout, and your subconscious gets used to success. Your confidence automatically rises.

  2. A useful term to know is self-efficacy, which means "one's belief in one's ability to succeed in specific situations or accomplish a task". The Wikipedia article mentions four factors affecting self-efficacy, which are worth looking at. "The experience of mastery is the most important factor determining a person's self-efficacy. Success raises self-efficacy, while failure lowers it." This is consistent with Zeitz' advice to start with easy problems and then gradually increase the level of difficulty.

  3. Another factor affecting self-efficacy is "vicarious experience". This is "most effectual when we see ourselves as similar to the model", but I still think it helps to know that many eminent mathematicians have experienced feelings of self-doubt at some points in their careers. Here are some quotes that illustrate this; they're from Advice to a Young Mathematician, which is well worth reading.

    > One struggles unsuccessfully with small problems and one has serious doubts about one's ability to prove anything interesting. I went through such a period in my second year of research, and Jean-Pierre Serre, perhaps the outstanding mathematician of my generation, told me that he too had contemplated giving up at one stage. Only the mediocre are supremely confident of their ability. The better you are, the higher the standards you set yourself — you can see beyond your immediate reach. — Michael Atiyah

    > When I arrived in Moscow in my last year of graduate study, Gel’fand gave me a paper to read on the cohomology of the Lie algebra of vector fields on a manifold, and I did not know what cohomology was, what a manifold was, what a vector field was, or what a Lie algebra was. — Dusa McDuff

  4. Finally, in my opinion there's nothing wrong with getting nervous in office hours and fumbling with easy questions. I've done this myself several times. It's just the nerves talking. As one gets more comfortable and relaxed with the situation (the fourth factor affecting self-efficacy), one gets better at keeping calm and tackling the questions one piece at a time.
u/WalksOnLego · 1 pointr/Bitcoin

Short answer:


> "People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results, they choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar." - Michael Burry; The Big Short.

> Why don't any of the people around us understand bitcoin? Why do they ignore it? Why do they refuse to look below the surface?

Because critical thinking consumes energy, and is not pleasant. Whenever we learn new things we have to fire up parts of the brain that we don't use as often.

For example: Learning to drive a car is a stressful and unpleasant time because your brain is fired up learning all the new skills, at once. After a few years you can drive without even thinking.

It's called Fast Thinking and Slow Thinking, slow thinking being when you are learning new skills, material, ideas etc., and fast thinking when you can do things automatically.

In short: People, all of us, don't like to think slow.

Long answer:


There's a book on the subject Thinking, Fast and Slow by Deniel Kahneman

> Major New York Times bestseller
> Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award in 2012
> Selected by the New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011
> A Globe and Mail Best Books of the Year 2011 Title
> One of The Economist's 2011 Books of the Year
> One of The Wall Street Journal's Best Nonfiction Books of the Year 2011
> 2013 Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient
> Kahneman's work with Amos Tversky is the subject of Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds

> In the international bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, the renowned psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think. System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation―each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.

> Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives―and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble. Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award and the Los Angeles Times Book Prize and selected by The New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow is destined to be a classic.

u/rebelrob0t · 3 pointsr/REDDITORSINRECOVERY

I went to one AA meeting when I first got clean and never went back. I understand people have found support and success in it but to me, personally, I felt it only increased the stigma of drug addicts as these broken hopeless people barely hanging on by a thread. It's an outdated system that relies on little science or attempting to progress the participants and relies more on holding people in place and focusing on the past. Instead I just worked towards becoming a normal person. Here are some of the resources I used:

r/Fitness - Getting Started: Exercise is probably the #1 thing that will aid you in recovering. It can help your brain learn to produce normal quantities of dopamine again as well as improve your heath, mood, well being and confidence.

Meetup: You can use this site to find people in your area with similar interests. I found a hiking group and a D&D group on here which I still regularly join.

Craigslist: Same as above - look for groups, activities, volunteer work, whatever.

Diet

This will be the other major player in your recovery. Understanding your diet will allow you to improve your health,mood, energy, and help recover whatever damage the drugs may have done to your body.

How Not To Die Cookbook

Life Changing Foods

The Plant Paradox

Power Foods For The Brain

Mental Health

Understand whats going on inside your head and how to deal with it is also an important step to not only recovery but enjoying life as a whole.

Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy

The Emotional Life Of Your Brain

Furiously Happy

The Science of Enlightenment: How Meditation Works

Educational

If you are like me you probably felt like a dumbass when you first got clean. I think retraining your brain on learning, relearning things you may have forgot after long term drug use, and just learning new things in general will all help you in recovery. Knowledge is power and the more you learn the more confident in yourself and future learning tasks you become.

Illegal Drugs: A Complete Guide to their History, Chemistry, Use, and Abuse

Why Nations Fails

Ideas: A History of Thought and Invention, from Fire to Freud

The Modern Mind: An Intellectual History of the 20th Century

Thinking, Fast and Slow

The Financial Peace Planner: A Step-by-Step Guide to Restoring Your Family's Financial Health

Continued Education / Skills Development

EdX: Take tons of free college courses.

Udemy: Tons of onine courses ranging from writing to marketing to design, all kinds of stuff.

Cybrary: Teach yourself everything from IT to Network Security skills

Khan Academy: Refresh on pretty much anything from highschool/early college.

There are many more resources available these are just ones I myself have used over the past couple years of fixing my life. Remember you don't have to let your past be a monkey on your back throughout the future. There are plenty of resources available now-a-days to take matters into your own hands.

*Disclaimer: I am not here to argue about anyone's personal feelings on AA**







u/Robswc · 1 pointr/algotrading

Do you have an edge? You mention you've been trading for 2 years, so I'll assume you do (but its ok if you haven't nailed it down).

Basically, you just take your edge, write it into python (or whichever language you want) and get it to generate a buy, sell or close signal. Once you have that down, just use an exchange's API to place your orders.

I do have a channel dedicated to this stuff, but at this point I think you're probably a bit more advanced than total beginner, it still might help you out though :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nX4YEcTJlc

>what to learn/focus on & recommended resources: math, programming, strategy creation?

For me I've found that, programming wise, its never really that complicated. Sure, if you're going to be using some ML or advanced data analysis or something you might need to sharpen your programming but at least for me, the best resources I found had to do with market psychology and understanding the broader markets and trading in general. Some books I can recommend there are:

Trading in the Zone, By Mark Douglas - https://www.amazon.com/Trading-Zone-Confidence-Discipline-Attitude/dp/0735201447

Fooled by Randomness, by Nassim Taleb - https://www.amazon.com/Fooled-Randomness-Hidden-Markets-Incerto/dp/0812975219/ref=sr_1_1?crid=13LH3VBFX62OH

Skin in the Game, by Nassim Taleb - https://www.amazon.com/Skin-Game-Hidden-Asymmetries-Daily/dp/042528462X/

Algos to Live By, by Brian Christian - https://www.amazon.com/Algorithms-Live-Computer-Science-Decisions/dp/1250118360/

A Short History of Financial Euphoria, by John Galbraith - https://www.amazon.com/History-Financial-Euphoria-Penguin-Business/dp/0140238565/

>process beginning to go live: collect data, write code, test code, start trading?

In simplest terms (this is how I do it), get data via websocket, feed it into your algo, have the algo generate signals, use (write) another program to use those signals to trade. I find splitting up the risk management, buy, sell and close into different parts helps. I would also back and forward test too. Essentially that's all there is to it. 99% of this stuff for me at least is optimizing my algos and trying to run them on multiple markets. The programming behind them isn't that complex, its the math and theory.

Its not terribly impressive but this is what I was able to do with some algos recently:

https://twitter.com/robswc/status/1093328001243189248
https://twitter.com/robswc/status/1082782861869109253

even today I got one in:

https://twitter.com/robswc/status/1121943953564164102

but really, there's ppl out there that can do much better. I'm pretty content with my algos performance. I thought about tweeting every position once upon a time but realized since I'm not shilling some stupid course I don't have to really prove anything other than I'm not pulling stuff out of thin air lol.

I would definitely do forward testing though, whatever you do. Perhaps even add a human element to manage the risk at first. Just get the edge down and go from there, good luck! :)

u/toadgoader · 1 pointr/INTP

Thinking, Fast and Slow - Daniel Kahneman


Major New York Times bestseller
Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award in 2012
Selected by the New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011
A Globe and Mail Best Books of the Year 2011 Title
One of The Economist's 2011 Books of the Year
One of The Wall Street Journal's Best Nonfiction Books of the Year 2011
2013 Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient
Kahneman's work with Amos Tversky is the subject of Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds

In the international bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, the renowned psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think. System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation―each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.

Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives―and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble. Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award and the Los Angeles Times Book Prize and selected by The New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow is destined to be a classic.

https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

u/KarnickelEater · 57 pointsr/starcraft

Here is a scientific explanation of the Artosis curse: Regression toward the mean.

Basically, Artosis makes his predictions based on observations of high above (their own usual) average achievements of players. The problem is that there is actually quite a bit of randomness involved. At the high level SC II is being played at no single player is skilled enough to dominate everyone else (consistently, but likely not even at any one point in time if everyone would play against everybody else instead of just a random(ha!) selection). Randomness means, that when you observe someone being above average the chance that next time you observe them they will be WORSE, closer to the mean (back to normal!), is much higher compared to observing them doing something outstanding again.

I would like to point out that this is ONE of the forces at work. It does explain the Artosis curse. It does not (need to!) explain everything that goes on in the world or even just in the world of SC II. And it doesn't claim that this happens every single time, only on average.

Here is what Kahneman used as an example:

> The psychologist Daniel Kahneman, winner of the 2002 Nobel prize in economics, pointed out that regression to the mean might explain why rebukes can seem to improve performance, while praise seems to backfire.[8]

> “I had the most satisfying Eureka experience of my career while attempting to teach flight instructors that praise is more effective than punishment for promoting skill-learning. When I had finished my enthusiastic speech, one of the most seasoned instructors in the audience raised his hand and made his own short speech, which began by conceding that positive reinforcement might be good for the birds, but went on to deny that it was optimal for flight cadets. He said, “On many occasions I have praised flight cadets for clean execution of some aerobatic maneuver, and in general when they try it again, they do worse. On the other hand, I have often screamed at cadets for bad execution, and in general they do better the next time. So please don’t tell us that reinforcement works and punishment does not, because the opposite is the case.” This was a joyous moment, in which I understood an important truth about the world: because we tend to reward others when they do well and punish them when they do badly, and because there is regression to the mean, it is part of the human condition that we are statistically punished for rewarding others and rewarded for punishing them. I immediately arranged a demonstration in which each participant tossed two coins at a target behind his back, without any feedback. We measured the distances from the target and could see that those who had done best the first time had mostly deteriorated on their second try, and vice versa. But I knew that this demonstration would not undo the effects of lifelong exposure to a perverse contingency.

If you only read one book this year, let it be Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.

u/windywelli · 1 pointr/DecidingToBeBetter

Ok /u/ACfireandiceDC, here goes:

I was diagnosed ADD a few years back after I read an account of someone describing their ADD symptoms on a Humans of New York post, of all things.

I read their life story and thought, shit, this sounds awfully relateable.

As soon as I was diagnosed, it became obvious I'd suffered since I was a child, and in-fact my Dad had, too - ADD is often genetic.

In being diagnosed, I was able to start better understanding why I acted in certain ways, and therefore able to start deploying strategies to navigate the challenges I faced.

This included starting on medication, initially Ritalin, but at this stage, I take Dextroamphetamine as I find it's much kinder to me later in the day during the 'crash' associated with amphetamine stimulant meds (note: the effects are entirely personal and vary greatly from person to person).

With hindsight, it's now obvious to me that ADD, and many other similar 'labels' are a general attempt to describe a group of symptoms that can range wildly from diagnosee to diagnosee - what I'm trying to say is that similar to Autism, I believe ADD and other similar disorders are sub-sets of a spectrum.

In my case, and by that I mean my individual 'genetic' traits which are associated with ADD, I suffer from the following things:

  • Performance anxiety/perfectionism
  • Extreme procrastination
  • Difficulty focusing
  • Problems with timings and organisation

    There are probably a few more I could squeeze in, but for the most part that's my slice of cake.

    Now, at this stage of the game, a few years into the diagnosis, I've spent much time and effort reading books, studies, anecdotes and so forth which have lead me to some interesting conclusions (that I have no doubt will continue to evolve):

    Overall, I think most of my symptoms are a manifestation of a type of anxiety, not dissimilar to what I imagine you experience with OCD.

    As a designer, if I can't get something 100% spot on within my own idea of 'perfect', I'll quickly end up grinding to a halt and giving up.

    Likewise, if I mess up a deadline early on, I'll lose all ability to continue, instead, becoming stuck in a bottomless pit of self-loathing and procrastination.

    My point is, I can trace most of my symptoms back to this type of 'anxiety'.

    I think, in many ways, this stems back to a conflict between my self-image and the reality of productivity requiring the suspension of 'perfection' in order to get things done.

    What I mean is: in my head, I want everything I do to be perfect because my ego constantly tells itself that it's special and unlike everyone else - when I look around, I see everyone elses work that seems mediocore and average, and I 'know' that I am capable of so much better, but then when I am working on something, as soon as I faulter and begin to struggle to get it 'just right', I am no longer capable of working and the procastination sets in - perhaps just a sub-conscious defense mechanism against the realisation that I, too, am mortal, and not as 'perfect' as my ego so desperately needs me to be - a form of cognitive disonance.

    As a side note, I've often wondered if this insecurity stemmed from my parents, or perhaps from bullying during my formative years - a question I fully intend on getting to the bottom of as soon as I can afford to see a professional.

    With this realisation under my belt, I've slowly but surely been able to make great strides in the last few months towards something that finally seems like an effective counter-attack.

    When starting a big project, I let myself spend hours, if not days, engrossing myself in the details and getting comfortable with the task set out before me. I find this helps silence many of the 'voices' (metaphorical) before they have a chance to bring me down and derail the train.

    The aim is to understand what I need to do, how I'm going to do it, and importantly, that I can do it, alongside a light but constant reminder that I need to focus on finishing something over lower quality rather than giving up on something nearer to perfection (in my industry, a common phrase is 'Just Fucking Ship It' (ship = launch) and 'Shipped is better than perfect').

    Alongside the effective medication, frequent cardio, no longer drinking alcohol, a good nights sleep, meditation and a quiet, healthy work environment, I'm starting to see real change.

    I'm no-where near the 'utopia' of productivity I have in my mind, and honestly, I likely never will be - that's okay.

    But as someone who has spent literally years hating myself for not being able to command myself into action, the slightest signs of a 'pulse' are incredibly exciting.

    It's taken a lot of effort and time to get here, but I firmly believe that if I can, anyone can.

    If you have any further questions or think I might be able to share some other useful information, please feel free to message me or simply reply here (this applies to OP and anyone else who might stumble across this reply, at any point in the future).

    As much as I hope you find this reply useful in some way on its own, I also want to leave you with some actionable steps:

    If you haven't already, take a look at the GTD 'Getting Things Done' methodology. Regardless of whether you implement it or not, learning the 'science' behind it will help you on your journey.

    Here's a good place to start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOSFxKaqOm4

    Then here: https://blog.zenkit.com/a-beginners-guide-to-getting-things-done-3cc1a5123b98

    Some brilliant books I'd suggest are as follows - I'm not great at reading a book the whole way through these days, so I find Audiobooks to be a God-send (mainly Audible):

    Mindset by Carol Dweck

    https://www.amazon.com/Mindset-Psychology-Carol-S-Dweck/dp/0345472322

    Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard by Chip & Dan Heath

    https://www.amazon.com/Switch-Change-Things-When-Hard/dp/0385528752

    Ego is the Enemy by Ryan Holiday

    https://www.amazon.com/Ego-Enemy-Ryan-Holiday/dp/1591847818

    Principles: Life and Work

    https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Life-Work-Ray-Dalio/dp/1501124021
u/organizedfellow · 2 pointsr/Entrepreneur

Here are all the books with amazon links, Alphabetical order :)

---

u/Kakuz · 5 pointsr/books

I would go with Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow". It can be rather tedious at times, but it's such a great summary of recent work in social and cognitive psychology that it's worth it.

Oliver Sacks, as mentioned before, is another great author. Very approachable, very interesting, yet quite informative.

I have heard that Dan Ariely is a great author. Predictably Irrational might be a great read.

Steven Pinker's How the Mind Works is also great, but I would recommend Kahneman over him.

Finally, I would recommend a classic: William James - The Principles of Psychology. It's old, and some stuff is dated, but the guy had amazing insight nonetheless. It'd be a great intro reading just to see where psychology came from.

I would stay away from Jonah Lehrer, since he was accused of academic dishonesty. His book "How we Decide" was an extremely easy read, and a bit watered down. On that tangent, I would also avoid Malcolm Gladwell. Sacks does a better job at explaining psychology and neuroscience to a general audience.

Hope that helps!

u/another_user_name · 1 pointr/science

Other books that I found really useful, informative, motivating and accessible in high school include Feynman's QED -- a really cool introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics that I read my senior year -- and Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe. I think somebody mentioned it already.

Mathematics, the Loss of Certainty is a really good discussion on the history of math. Also quite accessible. I read it my freshman year of college.

More tangential books that I've enjoyed include The Drunkard's Walk and Chances Are. They cover similar ground, though, and I like the latter better.

There's also some pretty good fiction that gives you the flavor of some of the mindbending concepts that can arise from physics. Robert Heinlein's Time for the Stars is a good "juvenile" book that takes a step into the Twin's Paradox. Time dilation pops up in Larry Niven's A World Out of Time as well. For solar system level astrophysics, Niven's The Integral Trees postulates a really cool alternative to planets.

I read most the fiction around the time I was in high school, with the exception of Time for the Stars. Ironically, it's the only one that I can guarantee doesn't have "adult themes." I don't know what sort of restraints your parents put on your reading, though. They're all good books.

The other thing, other than books I mean, you can do is find a mentor or club in your area that could help put you on your way. An astronomy club would be a good idea, but there may also be physics or chemistry styled mentors in your area. They're likely to act out of a local university or research center (I live in Huntsville, Alabama, where Marshall Spaceflight Center is located. I know they have outreach/mentoring programs).

Oh, and I know I'm going on, one last thing that I found really useful and fun was my involvement in summer programs. In my case, the big one was Mississippi Governor's School, a three week summer program. It was an awakening from a social standpoint. (Ten years later, a large proportion of my friends either attended it or I know via some connection to it, still.) And it had an astrophysics class, which was awesome. I know other states have programs like it (assuming you're in the US), and MGS at least is easier to get into than commonly believed. People think a counselor's recommendation is required, but it's not and you get two opportunities to attend, between sophmore and junior and junior and senior years. It's unlikely you're in MS, of course, but other places have similar programs.

Good luck with things and keep us posted. :)

u/puppy_and_puppy · 7 pointsr/MensLib

I'm not sure if this would work or not, but I would try redirecting people who have conservative or right-wing leaning views at least toward better thinkers than Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson and toward optimistic views of the future of society, to cull some of the us-vs-them and zero-sum thinking that plagues these discussions.

Sometimes it feels like men, especially, feel existentially threatened by other modes of thought, so being at least sympathetic to the good bits of their ideas and offering something similar but that promotes openness and liberal ideas may help.

Hans Rosling's Factfulness presents a pretty optimistic view of the world. It's all getting better! Seriously!

Jonathan Haidt (and Greg Lukianoff for the first book)

u/Dota2HelpBot · 2 pointsr/pcmasterrace

Can check my previous answers on this topic (just answered one a few comments ago) and I work in the field high and long enough to lead and hire teams.

> What are some of the best jobs in hardware engineering ?

Completely depends on your option on 'best'. But in terms of pay it is military hardware R&D and R&D for a company like Intel, but again it depends on a ton of factors.

> What type of hardware engineers work on processors ?

What part? What is takes to make a modern processor is actually very complicated and has a ton of different engineering to it from material science to computer engineering and computer science.

> What type of hardware engineers work with medical technology?

I actually use to work on medical tech and I also have a Biomedical engineering degree, you don't "need" to if you have a solid other engineering degree but it drastically helps.

> Should I go for my masters in hardware engineering ?

Completely depends on what all you want to do, in engineering a masters isn't nearly as required to make a jump in the field as other majors but if you want to get into the deep R&D field then yes.

> I want to start on the management side of the technology field what degrees would help me get at the top of management after college ?

Define "management" because if you just mean things like 'lead developer' and so on then just your the same major with some years of experience.

> Are there any classes that I could watch for free to get ahead in my courses ?

Code academy and various tech talks are good. CMU, MIT, and a few others put up various resources for their programming and computer science classes online.

> What are important coding languages I must learn ?

OH BOY, people fixate WAY to hard on this and honestly one of the biggest ways to "tank". There are for sure 'useful' programming languages that many companies are hiring for but it is much more important to know HOW and WHY programming languages work because it makes it easier to pick up a ton on the fly.

Beyond that one of the "best" starting programming languages to learn is Python. Once you comfortable with that then work with C/C++ and then brush up on how assembly works.

> Are there any math courses that will prep me for the field?

Discrete mathematics is the foundation of modern computer science and one of the biggest things that differentiate candidates I interview.

> Any books that I could read on a daily basses regarding the field ?

This is my 'default' starting book for those interested in the field but might not fully know enough for higher level topics.

Short answer: DO NOT expect to be instantly jumping in to working with some 'really cool shit'. Heck you shouldn't even be really thinking of actual computers and hardware for awhile and learn just how important and how deep the "True Math" we had was.

u/Gazzellebeats · 5 pointsr/LetsGetLaid

>I don’t regret having one, just extremely ashamed of being sexual and communicating it to girls and also showing it to the world. Attracting girls’ attention and whatnot isn’t very hard but progressing things to dating, holding hands and eventually sex is impossible. I can’t even call them or message them on Facebook or Whatsapp because I just feel like an idiot for doing so. Making a move in clubs and bars is also difficult although I once got close to leaving with a girl but she didn't want to. I got made fun of a lot growing up for not having a girlfriend and this made me feel like i do not deserve one. It doesn't matter if I've got the green light to go ahead I just feel really ashamed do it. Even something like looking at a fit girl wearing a short skirt makes me feel bad for checking her out and that I shouldn’t be doing it.


I know what you mean. I've been there myself, but even when I was there I was entirely self-aware of my shame and I was skeptical of the validity of my emotional reactions; I realized they were ingrained. Being aware of your emotional reactions allows you to be emotionally proactive. Your sex-negative problem is mostly an emotional issue, and not much else, right? I've been there. I wouldn't doubt that you are also decent looking and have both latent and actualized social skills. Most intelligent introverts have a lot of potential to be who they want to be because they know themselves more deeply than others. You must use your introverted nature to your advantage and recognize the differences in others and yourself. In all honesty, there are an infinite number of unwritten rules; everyone's abstract/emotional logic is different. Many of them are foundational and predictable, however; including yours and mine. Like anything else, being emotionally predictable is not a black/white issue. It is a grey area, and you have to balance your reliability with creativity.


Being made fun of for not having a girlfriend is just as sexist as being made fun of for not having a boyfriend; gender equal too. Were you ever shamed for not having a boyfriend? It's clearly a matter of groupthink and extroverted style; not for everyone. Dating relationships, for extroverts especially, are often attention-getting and showy. They wear their relationships like trophies won. Usually introverts prefer a more private relationship because they have less social desire and are often shamed because of it. Introverts are “themselves” more often in private. Extroverts are “themselves” more often in public. There is no shame deserved either way, regardless of popular opinion. Both styles have their strengths and weaknesses, and you should try to introject some of the traits that you enjoy in others; regardless of type. That is how you become balanced.


>I’m receiving counselling from a pastor who advocates the whole “no sex before marriage” thing and believes that people should only date to get married and sex is only for making kids which is stupid IMO because I do not plan on getting married anytime soon.


Counseling from a Catholic pastor? Watch out, that is one of the most notorious sex-negative societies out there. They own the abstinence-only charade while they parade horribles. Marriage is not the answer to anything; it is an institution of the state. Anything else attached is sentimental.


If you haven't already, I recommend doing an in-depth study of animal sexual behaviors; especially the most intelligent animals. All animals have sex for pleasure, but some animals are only driven to have sex at certain times of the year; humans are on a 24/7 system.


>I’ve tried the no fap route and gotten very high days counts but that hasn’t really helped me at all.


Sexual frustration doesn't help anyone. If you are mindful, then you can use your libido to further your goals, but it is not an all-cure.


>Got any sources to help overcome sex-negative perspectives? I’m interested in recreational sex not baby making sex.


Absolutely. I recommend starting with actual sex science and learning about male and female psychology and neurology. Then work your way into reading about sex culture. You should also study developmental psychology as you will probably need the clinical context in order to objectively self-evaluate your childhood influences; it is necessary for self-therapy. The best therapy will always be self-therapy; no one will ever know you better than yourself.


Evolutionary Science and Morals Philosophy:

The Selfish Gene

The Moral Landscape

The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?


Sex Psychology, Science, and Neurology:

Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex

The Female Brain

The Male Brain

Why Men Want Sex and Women Need Love

What Do Women Want

Why Women Have Sex: Understanding Sexual Motivations from Adventure to Revenge (and Everything in Between)

Sex: The world's favorite pastime fully revealed


Behavioral Psychology and Abstract Economics:

How Pleasure Works

Freakonomics

Quiet: The Power of Introverts In A World That Can't Stop Talking

Thinking Fast And Slow

We Are All Weird


Developmental Psychology:

Nurture Shock

Hauntings: Dispelling The Ghosts That Run Our Lives


Empathy Building:


Half The Sky

The House On Mango Street

Me Before You

The Fault In Our Stars

Also check out James Hollis' Understanding The Psychology of Men lecture if you can find it.



Movies: XXY, Tom Boy, Dogtooth, Shame, Secretary, Nymphomaniac, Juno, Beautiful Creatures, and The Man From Earth.



All of these things are related, but it is up to you to make the connections; pick and choose which material suits your interests best. These are the things that came to mind first, and they have all influenced my perspectives.

u/MrSabuhudo · 0 pointsr/changemyview

It seems you asked the right questions, since my answer turned out longer than expected. I actually had to split it up, because of the character limitation. So I hope my effort is of benefit to you. In any case, you should probably get a hot chocolate or something. :-D

Question 1


I think there are several reasons, why people might make these arguments (Note that these are not refutations of the arguments themselves, but speculations about their psychological roots / motivations):

  • Far-leftists see capitalism as an evil system that produces exploitation. Therefore, anarcho-capitalism would logically result in a maximum of exploitation, since it's like regular capitalism on steroids. It goes without saying that ancaps like me don't agree with anti-capitalist exploitation theory.

  • Most people just have a very strong status-quo-bias (basically what you suggested by referring to it as alien). As psychologists have believably suggested, it's very exhausting and unpleasant to change one's world view in any way. Since ancapism proposes such a radically different world view as the mainstream one, most people understandably don't want to consider it, because that poses the risk of exhaustion and discomfort. That applies especially to people who are not very interested in politics anyway, so the vast majority.

  • Moderate but politically active people might like the thought that they can improve society by wisely participating in its leadership. Ancapism basically tells those people: It doesn't matter how wise you are, you are not wise enough to rule over other people. That might be damaging to some people's ego.

  • And then there are the minarchist-libertarians, who are very close to ancaps. These people make the best arguments against ancapism, because they would actually like it if ancapism did work and they understand our arguments the best, since we think so similarly.

    As for the validity of the arguments themselves, I don't think the criticisms of the first three groups are quite easily refuted. But the minarchists make some points about the nature of defense services that definitely need to be considered. (E.g. positive externalities lead to an underproduction of defense services, making an anarchist society vulnerable to conquest.) The only possibility of ancapism turning south is basically the emergence of new states and a resulting regression to statism. That process would obviously involve a lot of bloodshed and ancapism should therefore be avoided if a violent return to statism is inevitable. I'll provide some of my own thoughts why I consider that unlikely.

    I think several factors play a role in the sustainability of "Ancapistan":

  • The anarchist territory should be as large as possible, so private property insurance companies can pool enough funds for efficient defense against neighbouring statist societies.

  • The surrounding statist populations should be as civilised and enlightened as possible, so it's harder for their respective states to justify war against the anarchist territory to their populations. (Lichtenstein probably has a good shot, Israel not so much.)

  • The population of the anarchist territory should be as armed and educated about property rights / libertarian ethics as possible, so any neighbouring state considering invasion would have to expect very high costs of keeping the invaded population under control.

    The education and enlightenment factor is likely to improve with time, so I do think the anarcho-capistalist society is inevitable. (Basically like marxists think communism is inevitable. I do see the irony there, lol.)

    Once the whole world is anarchist, I see little reason to worry about the emergence of a new state. That being said, going back to statism would be the worst case scenario. So we're in the worst case scenario right now... and hence, it can only get better if we try.

    If you want me to elaborate more, I'll gladly do that, but you can probably learn more from people smarter than me. I'll provide a book list further below and here is a great lecture on the specific topic. It's still a good idea to ask me any specific questions though.

    Question 2


    I haven't read anything by Ayn Rand. Her books are extremely long, so that's a turn-off. From what I've heard about her: I think her objectivist approach to ethics is both weird and wrong. However, her novels probably convey a good "sense" of capitalism. I have that already though, so I don't think I'm missing much. She might have been influencial in the sense that she has made many people familiar with ideas ancaps share. But her own ideology is statist in the sense that it actively supports a minarchist state and rejects ancapism on ethical grounds (as stated by Yaron Brook, the most prominent objectivist / follwer of Ayn Rand I know). I myself am much more of a fan of Murray Rothbard, which is basically the "founder" of anarcho-capitalism anyway. He's surely the most influencal person in the movement, Hans-Hermann Hoppe taking the controversial second place.

u/J42S · 2 pointsr/IWantToLearn

This is a repost of my comment on this reddit thread

Check out harry potter and the methods of rationality.

u/donyadine · 9 pointsr/phinvest

Hello! I am a social investment supporter. My journey started last year when I read Hans Rosling's book: Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World -- and Why Things Are Better Than You Think. According to Hans, the best investment opportunities are in the emerging markets of Asia and Africa. He described how we should look at statistics to make smart business decisions. I especially liked how he was optimistic about the future of the world and how countries are working hard to get out of poverty. It's not an investing book per se but it gives a good insight on where you might want to focus your attention if you want to make a difference in this world. It also solidified my rule to invest in the Philippines only and not be distracted by any foreign investment product (as I am currently based abroad).

Here's a TEDtalk as an intro to Hans Rosling: https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty/


I further asked myself how could his ideas be particularly applicable in the Philippines, where a lot of my countrymen are still living in poverty? Fortunately, I found Vince Rapisura on Facebook and he constantly discusses being a "Social Investor." Before meeting him, I have never heard anything about Social or Impact investing. I thought investing was just to make my money work for me. But through him, I learned that investing can create more value than just mere profit. We can select investments that have a conscious goal of making a positive impact on society. Vince's company, SEDPI, is focused on such ventures and his presentations are on his website: https://vincerapisura.com/impact-investing-handouts/

I am still reading more books about the topic and my search got me to Banker To The Poor: Micro-Lending and the Battle Against World Poverty. It was written by Muhammad Yunus and he earned a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in Bangladesh. I think his concepts are pretty similar to what Vince is doing with his company.

Let me also share this episode about Tagum Cooperative (which Vince has been raving about recently) and I must say their work and mission are inspiring: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQbtbORwUfE

Sorry, I am just blabbing about my recent reading/watching list but to answer your question, yes, socially responsible investments have been on my mind lately and I got excited when I saw your question. I admit that I still have an index fund and I know that some companies there don't have the best reputations, so I am slowly transitioning and studying more materials in order to invest in enterprises that I can understand and have the same principles as I do. It is a hard task but hopefully, I would get there. If you ever have a chance to attend a seminar by Vince, I'd say go for it.

u/qualmick · 3 pointsr/TryingForABaby

Oof, no. Not really. I stuck around TFAB for a reason - out there is colder, and even stranger. Some FAM people are very concerned about period consistency. Babycenter is ancient and overly optimistic. "Taking Charge of Your Fertility" is the lengthier, rantier, guide to learning all the fertility awareness method basics, but the fertility friend charting course is free, convenient, and teaches you all you really need to know.

I did eventually get lucky and am now a parent myself, but there is a veritable cacophony of advice for new parents and most of it is stressful garbage or smug asshattery. Everybody is still trying to sell you stuff, whether it is predatory sleep consultants or organic premade baby food delivery. Shoot me.

The humor on the ugly volvo resonates with me, particularly this one. I also occasionally link people who are on the fence about kids to this gem.

McSweeney's has some great breastfeeding... tips? Advice? Unsure.

Emily Oster is everybody's favourite economist because of "Expecting Better", and she recently published a book on baby stuff.

I've been looking for the mom version of this column, but from what I can tell it does not exist. Haha.

It's also not rocket science. If you are looking after yourself, and doing your best to be the best person you can be... that is really huge. Yes, it's good modelling for children down the line, but looking out for yourself through medical problems (as you probably know) is really tough! Cultivating patience, kindness, gratitude - these things deserve their own mention, since they do generally improve quality of life.

If you find anything you really like, let me know! I'm curious. :)

u/Mablun · 1 pointr/exmormon

I did economics and highly recommend it. A few years out and I'm at 100k with a secure job now and promising career. I had a similar academic situation as you but decided to just stay at a state school where tuition was free. I don't know if I would have accepted it (because of the financial costs) but I wish I would have applied to some Ivy leagues and considered it more.

As a side, studying behavior economics contributed greatly to me leaving the church. Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel prize in economics and I'd highly recommend his book: Thinking, Fast and Slow.

Ultimately my advice is to remember that you're going to win in the end on this one so make it a priority to keep a good relationship with your parents. They'll probably be upset when they find out; they might start yelling; just stay calm, don't get angry back. Keep telling them that you love them and want to have a good long term relationship with them.

u/snapxynith · 12 pointsr/SocialEngineering

As you realize becoming great at social skills is just like training any other skill. Realizing you can train it will allow you to build the skill stronger than others who stumble into it. So many will say you can't get better or amazing by reading in a chair. They're right. Read a little, apply a lot, take notes, then review what you did right and what you did wrong, repeat. Get a mentor or training buddy if you can, it accelerates learning, because we can't see ourselves the same as those outside us can. Make a regimen to go out, greet and meet people every day. Or at least three times a week minimum, make it a habit.

I can tell you that I've been in customer service and sales jobs, they taught me nothing because my skills were garbage and sub-par. So I didn't have a paddle for my raft in the world of social interaction. All I got was "people get irritated if I cold approach or try to sell them. Or worse I have to dump mountains of information to make them feel safe." So after studying for the better part of a decade, here's some points that got me to the basics and more advanced subjects. With the basics under your belt, then a job or daily practice will get you understanding and results.

First, learn how to steady yourself mentally, breathing exercise here. Breathing is important as we seem to be learning your heart rate and beat pattern determine more about our emotions than we'd like to admit.

Second, Accept and love yourself, (both those terms may be undefined or wishy-washy to you at the moment, defining them is part of the journey.) Because you can only accept and love others the way you apply it to yourself first.

Third, pick up and read the charisma myth. It has habits/meditations that will be a practice you use every day. I'd say a basic understanding will happen after applying them over three months. Never stop practicing these basics, they are your fundamentals. They determine your body language. The difference between a romantic gaze and a creepy stare is context of the meeting and body language, especially in the eyes.

Sales or cold approach networking will do the same for practice. If you do sales or meeting new people, it is a negotiation. You're trying to trade "value" (safety + an emotion). So if you figure out how to make yourself feel emotion, then inspire emotion in others, mutual agreements happen. Start with Why is a good reference. Here is a summary video. Chris Voss will help you find out that you don't tap into people rationally, you tap people emotionally, big think summary video. Or the full book treatment, Never Split the Difference. The supporting book for Chris Voss' position can be helped by reading Start With No

For training habits and understanding how we execute behaviors, Thinking, Fast and Slow

For dealing with hard arguments and heavy topics both Nonviolent Communication and Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most

Learning what listening is, instead of "hearing" people. Just Listen: Discover the Secret to Getting Through to Absolutely Anyone is a good book for that. This is touched on in Never Split the Difference and in the Charisma Myth because true listening, making the person you are speaking with feel "listened to and understood" is most of what makes a charismatic person work.

u/cutestain · 27 pointsr/Entrepreneur

My advice is to follow 3 tracks.

  • Build relationships. Find local meetings where people building products/companies or other designers go. Such as: 1 Million Cups, Open coffee club, Creative Mornings, CoFounders Lab, StartUp Grind, local UX meetups. Pick 1 weekly and go every week. Pick 1-2 others, go when you can. Talk to the people who run the group. See if they need any help checking people. Volunteer to do that. If you get to, be friendly and chat with people on the way in. This is your tribe. Don't feel like you don't belong b/c you are young or are checking them in (or whatever other excuse your mind might come up with). This is your opportunity to find out about what people are working on. Some people will be working on something that interests you, that you have the skills to help with (eventually if not now), and have a personality you could enjoy working with. Give 100% of these people your card. Tell them you do UI/UX on contract. Ask for their card. Talk to them more at the end of the meeting if you can. Not in a sales way. But in a get to know more about them way. Then follow up with an email shortly afterward, a few days to a week. And in 6 months again if you haven't connected since. Do this every week for 2-3 years and you will have your client base and reputation in town. If you need practice to feel confident doing the networking part, then practice. Your career counseling dept at college could probably help you practice. Friends can be good practice too. Comfort with networking is critical to running your own business. Your goal should be to eventually lead a recurring meeting.

  • Build your skills. First college is great for learning some things. I believe it is terrible for learning UI/UX. Studying behavioral economics would probably be the most applicable, some psychology or data science as well. UI/UX moves too fast. But here are my recommendations for becoming good at UI/UX quickly:

  1. Start using Sketch app by Bohemian coding. It is the current industry standard.

  2. Sign up for Subform app wait list. It will probably be the next industry standard. But is not available yet.

  3. Study design systems Practice using these elements to create screens. Download the Sketch file. Then grab the elements you need and create screens to build an app (preferably to solve a simple problem you care about). Start small. Practice designing quickly. Then go back and make details precise. Eventually you should be able to build your own design system like this.

  4. Study material design and iOS design.

  5. For inspiration in practice, look at examples on Dribbble, Behance, and at the apps you use everyday.

  6. Get feedback from friends and family on the things you have designed.

  7. Read books like Inspired, Seductive Interaction Design, Sprint, Product Leadership. There are many more.

  8. Understand you need to know more than design to do contract work for small businesses. Your clients may often ask for one thing but really need something different. Study business in general. Read books and magazines about business models, industry shifts, etc. Good UX designers are always balancing user needs and business model needs. There is no formula for this. It takes practice. Lots of practice. Youth and inexperience here will be a challenge. Talk to as many people in their 30s/40+s about business lessons they have learned as you can. This knowledge will help your design.

  9. Don't wait for the perfect idea to practice. Practice everyday.

  • Build your savings. So you can go full-time at a co-working space. This is less direct advice. But you will need to have a few months of living expenses saved so one day you can dive in. A co-working space costs a few hundred per month but this is where your client base likely lives or goes to meetings occasionally. Being part of one shows you have a professional presence. And the serendipity at these places can be off the charts. And I highly recommend not working form home only for many reasons, sanity being an important one. Also, contract work can be feast or famine. I have had a handful of weeks in the past 4 years where I have needed to complete 60 billable hours work. This is more stressful than the weeks where I only have 20 billable hours b/c I save knowing work will be up and down.

    ----

    These are things that led me to where I am today. Others may have completely different or contradictory advice. But these are my go to methods. And most of my clients in the past 2 years have come to me. I didn't call them, or post an ad. Generally they found me through a recommendation from a friend, LinkedIn, Twitter, slack group, Dribbble, or at a meeting.
u/darthrevan · 2 pointsr/ABCDesis

Short answer: Americanize your name on resumes to increase your chances for responses. Once you get interviewed and after you have established comfort/ease with the interviewer/employer, you can then casually explain your real name at an opportune moment.

Longer answer: Someone who likes "American-sounding" names isn't necessarily racist. It has to do with what scientists call cognitive ease. "American-sounding" names are more familiar, more easily recognized, and much easier to process by American brains. Less effort is involved, and what's easier is associated with more positive feelings. As we see from the article in this post (and that I've seen in other articles), that does give you an advantage.

In this job market, you want every advantage you can get. If Americanizing your name can do it, do it. You're not a race traitor or surrendering your heritage, you're being strategic. Like I said, you can always explain later.

Source for the cognitive ease stuff: this highly praised book by a well respected author. It's not some fad or psych mumbo jumbo, it's very well grounded in research.

Edit: Now if after you get called in for an interview you get vibes that the person is disappointed/not happy that you're different than what they expected...ok maybe then discriminatory attitudes are possible. But (a.) that still doesn't mean you might not impress them/change their mind anyway and (b.) better to have an interview with a chance of discrimination than no interview at all.

u/tunabuttons · 3 pointsr/BabyBumps

Another vote for both of the Emily Oster books, and the best practical book I've read is Heading Home with Your Newborn. Also this one's not a pregnancy book but I would strongly recommend How to Talk so Little Kids Will Listen if you're at all scared of the toddler through kinder stage. It's an entertaining read that aligns well with developmental psychology and has all these really funny real life examples of using the strategies from the book.

If I had to only pick a handful, I'd pick those.

I also liked the Ina May book which people will recommend a lot, but keep in mind it really is exclusively about childbirth and it's a bit crunchier than the average (though this pertains to the birth stories included more than Ina May's actual writing IMO). There's a good interview with her on the Longest Shortest Time podcast that addresses some of the things I felt the book could have benefited from stating outright to avoid sounding a little preachy at times.

If you're looking for like a detailed read that starts with absolute basics that would be especially good for anyone who hasn't researched much on pregnancy before, I would recommend Pregnancy, Childbirth, and the Newborn: The Complete Guide. It's as thick as a textbook but it doesn't read like one. They have a page in most sections directly speaking to partners as well, which is neat.

u/distantocean · 10 pointsr/exchristian

That's one of my favorite popular science books, so it's wonderful to hear you're getting so much out of it. It really is a fascinating topic, and it's sad that so many Christians close themselves off to it solely to protect their religious beliefs (though as you discovered, it's good for those religious beliefs that they do).

As a companion to the book you might enjoy the Stated Clearly series of videos, which break down evolution very simply (and they're made by an ex-Christian whose education about evolution was part of his reason for leaving the religion). You might also like Coyne's blog, though these days it's more about his personal views than it is about evolution (but some searching on the site will bring up interesting things he's written on a whole host of religious topics from Adam and Eve to "ground of being" theology). He does also have another book you might like (Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible), though I only read part of it since I was familiar with much of it from his blog.

> If you guys have any other book recommendations along these lines, I'm all ears!

You should definitely read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, if only because it's a classic (and widely misrepresented/misunderstood). A little farther afield, one of my favorite popular science books of all time is The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker, which looks at human language as an evolved ability. Pinker's primary area of academic expertise is child language acquisition, so he's the most in his element in that book.

If you're interested in neuroscience and the brain you could read How the Mind Works (also by Pinker) or The Tell-Tale Brain by V. S. Ramachandran, both of which are wide-ranging and accessibly written. I'd also recommend Thinking, Fast and Slow by psychologist Daniel Kahneman. Evolution gets a lot of attention in ex-Christian circles, but books like these are highly underrated as antidotes to Christian indoctrination -- nothing cures magical thinking about the "soul", consciousness and so on as much as learning how the brain and the mind actually work.

If you're interested in more general/philosophical works that touch on similar themes, Douglas R. Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach made a huge impression on me (years ago). You might also like The Mind's I by Hofstadter and Daniel Dennett, which is a collection of philosophical essays along with commentaries. Books like these will get you thinking about the true mysteries of life, the universe and everything -- the kind of mysteries that have such sterile and unsatisfying "answers" within Christianity and other mythologies.

Don't worry about the past -- just be happy you're learning about all of this now. You've got plenty of life ahead of you to make up for any lost time. Have fun!

u/xxgoozxx · 3 pointsr/Nootropics

I’ve been dealing with the same issue for years. I recently tried something that seems to help in a peculiar way. I also have no issues sleeping or staying asleep (averaging 8.5 hours a night - SleepCycle and OuraRing).

Try taking a form of B12 (or other B vitamin) before bed. For example, I have recently added MTHFR to my nightly sleep stack (usually take 400mg Magnesium and occasionally 100mg of L-theanine and/or 500mg Ashwagandha). (Note that the link I provided is the actual supplement I buy and use. I have no affiliation other than I have seen this doctor and like his products. You can find similar B vitamins from other sources such as Thorne or on amazon).

Results for me (n=1): I don’t feel like I go into deep restful sleep when I add this B Vitamin to my nightly stack. However, I do feel awake in the morning and ready to go. I almost feel like I do not need coffee! (And I LOVE coffee in the morning). Ive also noticed the same/similar feeling after I have taken a 5hr Energy Shot/drink at night when I go out to the bars or in Vegas (I hate Redbull, but for some reason a 5hr energy reduces my hangover in the morning and again has me ready to go when I wake up).

Interestingly, 5hr Energy has a similar makeup as the MTHFR vitamin I take.

pros/cons of B Vitamin before bed: pros: I wake up feeling “awake”; cons: I don’t feel like I got deep/restful sleep.

Additional recommendations: use the SleepCycle app to try and target/hack what’s going on with your sleep. I have “sleep notes” in the app (eg. What I ate before bed, supplements taken, etc). SleepCycle asks you how you woke up in the morning (green = good, red = bad, white = n/a) and graphs charts based on how you report how you woke up (green vs red vs white). I love SleepCycle for this reason. It’s all in the data. Data, Data, Data!

Last recommendation: try to take a cortisol/adrenal test if you have a doc that will help you do that. It’s a saliva test. You spit into a tube when you wake, and then throughout the day. It measures your cortisol levels.

One more recommendation: there’s also a body of research regarding Timing (some people are morning people and some people are night owls). This book has some insight into the timing of decisions and morning/night people: [WHEN: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing](When: The Scientific Secrets of... https://www.amazon.com/dp/0735210624?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share).

edit: words/spelling and formatting

u/MattDotZeb · 4 pointsr/smashbros

It's very difficult to get around it.

You have to stay very focused on a goal. For me, since ROM7, it's been to finish every match I play. Has that happened? No, but I understand the situations it has not and I'm very pleased with how things have been going.

It also helps if you read autobiographies or books on sports psychology (or psychology in general) to get ideas & techniques on how to better your mentality.

Here are some that have helped me immensely.

  • Golf Is Not A Game Of Perfect

    • Currently reading this. It's obviously about golf, but it's about the mental game of golf. It's applicable to Smash, or basketball, or most competitive subjects. One of my favorite take-aways thus far is to look at an error such as an SD or a missed tech and think of it like "Well, there was a percentage chance that this would happen. Odds are it wont happen again. Just gotta trust my tech skill and stay sharp."

  • Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength
    • This goes into exactly what the title states. It gives a history of research into willpower, or ego, and describes how people can behave different based off their current situation. Sleep deprivation, poor diet, getting a burst of motivation and deciding to change everything (think January 1st) can all be detrimental to your mental state. It also discusses methods of improving your willpower which can be related to habitual actions.

  • The Power of Habit
    • This is a book that goes into habitual responses and how one can better understand them/change them. Useful information across all parts of life.

  • Thinking, Fast and Slow
    • This is one I've revisited multiple times. It's quite a long read, but there's much to learn. Specifically it goes into two systems of thought. Your system 1 is your implicit (unconscious) system. It's what tells you the answer to 2+2 as you read it even though I didn't ask you to solve it. System 2 is the system that takes over when I tell you to give me the answer to 72 x 103. (Mathematical examples are great for conveying the ideas of these systems) It later goes into more economic psychology and decision making.


      PS. I'm not telling you where, but if you don't want to create a book collection PDFs of each of these may or may not be online.
u/strazor · 1 pointr/startups

Good questions.

1 - What is the importance of a cofounder? The answer depends on a lot of things, mostly the value that a cofounder could bring. The challenge is finding someone who will invest a lot of time and is willing to see a 16 year old as an equal. I am 34 years old and I would have a hard time personally with that. When it comes to startups, founders don't spend a lot of time helping each other develop skills. Usually you have pretty distinct areas of responsibility and have to train yourself in whatever those areas are. Said differently, a cofounder is more about what skills they bring to the table that they can execute somewhat independently rather than their ability to personally help or train you. If you are able to develop what you envision yourself, a cofounder might not be necessary. But to be clear, a great cofounder is worth a whole lot. You just have to overcome unique challenges because of your age and background. My personal recommendation to you would be that you should at least learn enough to develop the MVP yourself. I think it is unlikely you would find a skilled developer to act as a cofounder for free for you (equity is still free until it is paid out, and it usually isn't).

2 - Should you use kickstarter? Hard to make any recommendation without a good understanding of your product and potential audience. Have you done any market research? Have you looked at what makes a product successful on kickstarter vs not? Is your product physical or software (what it sounds like)? How has that type of product performed before on kickstarter?

A good book I would recommend if you get serious is The Startup Owner's Manual by Blank and Dorf.

u/LeyonLecoq · 3 pointsr/samharris

>Why does it matter - in daily life that is - whether people are the way they are because of nature or nurture?

It informs how you should go about achieving your goals. If a property is intrinsic and cannot be changed then you need to construct your systems of behaviour around accommodating that property.

For example, hobbes' leviathan. We know that when left to our own devices, humans aren't very fair to each other. Not even necessarily because of maliciousness, but because of a bunch of intrinsic cognitive biases, that among other things predisposes everyone to perceiveing losses they experience as far worse than gains they (and others) receive, which means that any time two parties take from each other they will both perceive the other party as horribly injust and themselves as perfectly reasonable, leading to ever-increasing escalations of reciprocation that rarely lead anywhere good. But you can mitigate all that by taking the enforcement of justice out of the people directly involved's hands and giving it to an (ideally unbiased) third-party.

Of course this is a lot more complicated than my simple explanation here, but hopefully you get the point I was making. When we know what parts of human nature can't be changed (at least not yet, eh), we have a much better chance of building an environment that leads us to the results we want to have. The same goes for interacting with others in daily life. You are much better equipped to interacting with people when you really understand why they do the things they do (and why you do the things you do!) than when you're not.

Incidentally, if you want to read a good book about a lot of these intrinsic cognitive biases then I recommend Thinking, Fast and Slow. It summarizes a lot of often surprising intrinsic cognitive biases - and outright cognitive illusions - that our brains fall prey to, which we have to be aware of when we design our systems in order to get those systems to do what we want them to do.

u/osestella · 5 pointsr/AskFeminists

Thats going to seem a bit weird but I will say: make your points before saying you are a feminist because anti-feminists are going to be more open about your ideas. That's how I usually discuss politics with my borderline fascist family. I've been smart enough to never express a clear position because I know it's counterproductive when someone is veeeery oppose to your position.
When they speak about politics I mostly try to make them question their positions and beliefs by asking questions of giving facts giving a impression of neutrality.
Don´t get me wrong I do proclame myself a feminist loud and proud but I know how and when its productive to do so.


This opinion might be a bit controversial here but This website gives a very interesting input on what I'm saying:
"People are irrational.  One of the ways I know this is true because there’s an entire book written about it.  An example of how we act irrationally is called diagnosis bias.

A particularly fascinating study showed that the smallest change in the way you describe someone can completely alter the way you perceive their behavior.  How about an example?

A university class (unknowing lab rats) had a substitute professor.  To introduce the professor, the class members were given short bios.  What they didn’t know was that half the bios had been very slightly altered (e.g., exchanging warm, positive adjectives for cold, callous ones).

After the lecture, the students were asked to review the professor.  The entire class saw the same man say the same things, yet the reviews were split 50/50 positive and negative.  Half the class said he was personable, considerate, and engaged, while the other half said he was ruthless, would do anything for success, and didn’t care about students or people."


​

There is another thread here that gives excellent advice on how man (in this case teenage boy) can help: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/dajc0u/how_could_i_be_a_feminist_as_a_teenage_boy/

ps: My boyfriend had the same issue on his work - it sucks.

u/TheESportsGuy · -60 pointsr/nfl

This sub is very hostile to opinions and information they disagree with. A general sign of low education/intelligence/strong system 1 control

I know you're kind of joking/light-hearted, which is why I've chosen to respond to you.

Winning a super bowl in your first year as a head coach is obviously a strong indication that you're going to be a good coach. However, there are coaches who have won Super Bowls and then been proven to be less than great coaches in the NFL. Barry Switzer, Don McCafferty, Jon Gruden, Pete Carroll (?), Mike Ditka...All won a single super bowl. None of them have an amazing coaching legacy. Pete Carroll's is still undecided. I guess Gruden's technically is too.

Doug Pederson seems like a really good coach to me. However, there's no way there's enough information on him yet to say that he's a net positive reflection on Andy Reid's coaching tree.

u/herkyjerkybill · 2 pointsr/DataVizRequests

there are a few really great resources that were mentioned already.

I found Tufte books a little bit abstract and more geared toward data visualization philosophy and not as practical as some of the other resources out there in terms of creating interactive, business-focused data visualizations. While I really like them, it may not be the first ones you grab.

I highly recommend books and blogs by these people---all but Stephen Few are active on Twitter (bolding the highest 3 recommendations):

Stephen Few:

u/heethin · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

\> I'm open to suggestion about how to "demonstrate" to your satisfaction that I'm acting rationally,

I hardly have an idea what you claim. How could I know what would demonstrate proof of it?

\> Given the available evidence, I've concluded that Christianity best fits what we know about the world.

Ok, what evidence?

\> the most persuasive part is the ethical system laid out in the Gospels, which best expresses a super-human morality.

This expresses why you like it, not why it's Right.

\> I have some personal experience of God as well, and a strong sense of the numinous in general

More detail on that would be helpful.

\> when I first started having these discussions online it was hard to believe that not everyone has that same feeling.

There's a good chance that with training in meditation, most people can. Certainly, what little you've offered so far is similar to the description offered across many religions around the world... and that gets us back to the question of how you know that yours is the Right one.

\> I won't ask you to demonstrate that you come by your conclusions rationally, because I assume that anyone going onto a debate subreddit has done their homework until proven otherwise.

Which of my conclusions? Evidence suggests that people don't come to their conclusions rationally. See Daniel Kahneman's work.

u/Froghurt · 0 pointsr/AskHistorians

To offer a different perspective, what made Japan's recovery so amazing is that they had something to offer most other industrialized countries didn't have at the time: quality. Japan has been the world's leader in quality standards ever since the 1950's.

After world war II, Japan was the first country to say "Quality over quantity". They implemented quality management as the basis of their new economy. To achieve this, they hired quality contemporary "guru's" (for lack of a better term). Willam Edwards Deming probably being the most well-known of them.

There have been books written about quality management (and tons of books about Deming alone), so I'm not going to focus on his philosophy here. The main reason for Japan's economic recovery is quality management however. When the entire world was still focusing on mass-production, they started focusing on quality production.

Eventually the new philosophy started to produce results. In the 1970's, people simply began to realize Japanese products were way better in quality, and Western producers realized there was a competitive gap, and Deming's work finally began to receive recognition in the 80's.

Deming's focus wasn't only on product quality, but also on quality management. Continuously upgrading/testing/innovating the product became the new standard.

Other quality leaders were Genuchi Taguchi, Walter Shewart, and Joseph Juran

Some links on quality management:

Main Wikipedia page

Quality Function Deployment

Toyota Production Systm

Kaizen

Books on Quality Management:

Gemba Kaizen

William Edwards Deming

Juran's Quality Control Handbook published in 1951, Japanese scientists liked his work and invited him to implement his system

To summarize, Solow's growth model might provide a basis for the Japanese economic recovery, but the decision to focus on quality for products instead of quantity was way more important. The West only started to catch up in response to that in the 1980's (e.g. Motorola's Six Sigma programme). Yes, the help of the US did give Japan the ability to improve their economy, but their huge economic growth and how well they used that aid was due to

u/barraymian · 2 pointsr/pakistan

I wish you best of luck with the endeavour. A few suggestions

  • Please quality control your product
  • If it's cheap material and going to go bad after two washes than your business is not going anywhere. I can already buy extremely cheap shirts online
  • Figure out what differentiates you from your competitors
  • Take a look at Markhor.com. These guys (founders are a guy and girl) are doing an excellent job of product messaging and marketing, market differentiation, quality control and customer service. They way I found out about them was thru a blog talking about how they are trying to be a sustainable and a humane business who looks after their workers. They did a crowd funding for raising funds and message that worked for me personally was their desire (genuine or not) to pay their workers well and to support them.
  • check out a book called ["The startup owner's manual"](The Startup Owner's Manual: The Step-By-Step Guide for Building a Great Company https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0984999302/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_TdJWAb555BTCG)
  • See if you can incorporate US pricing on the website of you hope to sell overseas and you should be planning to see oversees.

    Starting your own thing is hard but is well worth the effort. Again, wish you best of luck!
u/Aoe330 · 1 pointr/atheism

>you don't need to pretend that dreams are 100% scientifically understood

I never said that. I simply stated that there is no evidence that dreams are anything other than brain activity. In fact, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that it is only brain activity, and doesn't come from any outside force at all.

>a "drunkard walk" is not sufficient for any scientist

Drunkard's Walk is a term used to express a type of statistical theory. It's fine if you didn't know that.

>I do not discount the possibility that there are non-corporeal entities that are undetectable through current scientific means or organic sensation, which can somehow affect our perceptions or otherwise interact with our unconscious brain.

I discount it because there is no evidence to support it. You may as well believe there is a teapot halfway between here and Mars, or a flying spaghetti monster for that matter.

I believe in evidence. I will follow where that evidence leads. The evidence that dreams are some sort of cosmic vision and not just the brain playing out scenarios is incredibly lacking.

You seem to think I'm arrogant for dismissing your idea in favor of one with greater evidence in it's favor. Try to see it from my perspective; you are claiming that you are party to some secret or greater knowledge of a paranormal or supernatural world, and have at best anecdotal evidence to back up your claim. I on the other hand can go to any campus book store and pick up at least one book about neuroscience that is infinitely more verifiable than any of your anecdotal evidence. Can you really blame me for laughing at your idea?

u/Yelesa · 1 pointr/geopolitics

> also many people don't understand or exaggerate that developed and undeveloped part, years ago i was with a friend of mine and we were talking to some girl from germany for fun, and she asked us "do you in syria have cars and phones like us?"

That just means 'developed' and 'underdeveloped' are poor labels, or that 'underdeveloped' contains a much wider group than the other one. Factfulness separated people in 4 income groups, perhaps this is better with you?:

> Level 1: People live on less than $2 a day. Rosling estimates that one billion people are living at or below this threshold. They get around on their own two barefoot feet, cook over an open flame like a cookfire, fetch water in a bucket, and sleep on the ground.

This is what most people understand if they hear the word underdeveloped/developing. Basically, tribes and very conservative lifestyles.

> Level 2: This is the income group where the majority of the world's people live. They get by on between $2 and $8 a day and might have some possessions like a bicycle, a mattress, or a gas canister for cooking at home.

This is the stereotypical view of Eastern Europe, India, Southeast Asia, and Latin America in movies, and while this might be true in those regions for rural areas, most of the people living there are level 3 and 4.

> Level 3: This is the second most populous category on Rosling's list, after level 2. People in level 3 live on anywhere from $8 a day to $32. They have running water, might own a motorbike or car, and their meals are a rich and colorful mix of foods from day to day. They also probably have electricity and a fridge, which makes things like studying and eating enough varied nutrients easier.

What you were talking about are countries in Level 3.

> Level 4: Like level 1, roughly one billion of the world's people live on this level. They make $32 a day or more and have things like running water (both hot and cold) at home, a vehicle in the driveway, and plenty of nutrients on their plate. They've also likely had the chance to finish twelve years of school, or more.

Basically, the people who want to help.

u/AthertonWing · 3 pointsr/summonerschool

Never let another player dictate your play to you. If they're pinging for something, take a moment and think for yourself about whether or not it's a good play - Don't automatically go for it because they're pinging, but also don't automatically dismiss it because they're being annoying about it. Deep breath, make a call.

After the game, take time to re-watch that moment in the replay, and try to see it from their perspective - what are they losing for you not being there, and what are you gaining for being where you decided to go? Did you make the right call? If you think so after looking at it for a few minutes, don't worry about it. Tons of people make emotional pings because they don't know what to do and they feel trapped and pressured. But, you can't change the likelihood of the play to succeed just because one of your teammates wants it to work.

Making the right play - the one that you know you can make, the one that feels right - is going to net you a better result over time, because the frequency of people actually afking when you don't camp for them is actually quite low - negativity bias will have you having an easier time remembering the ones that do because it's such a stand-out moment, and availability heuristic will have you overestimating the frequency of them because you can remember them happening more recently, but if you actually collect some data about how often it happens, over a large sample size, like say a month or two, you'll see that it's not that big of a deal. (For more information on the biases mentioned, check out "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman)

In short, make your own decisions, but consider other people's opinions while making them. Don't sweat the small stuff, because focusing on your own play (which you have control over) is much more effective than focusing on external factors like teammates (which you can't). The difference between you and a pro-player isn't your teammates. Learn, grow, win, climb.

u/WhatWayIsWhich · 10 pointsr/videos

https://www.amazon.com/Factfulness-Reasons-World-Things-Better/dp/1250107814

Please read a book like this. Wealth disparity might be getting larger but the world is getting better for people due to capitalism.

Wealth gaps are a red herring. Yes, we should tax rich people more and close loopholes and redistribute a bunch of it. However, rich people should exist and having billionaires is not a problem. Having rich people actually has made the world better in a lot of ways. We just need to have them provide more than they have already.

u/Astamir · 1 pointr/writing

Alright, I'll expand. Hope you bear with me, this might be long and slightly tangential.

Basically, most of our strong beliefs are not something that we inspect regularly in our conscious mind. They are rather part of a general worldview that seems natural to us and are not given much thought ever. These beliefs more or less fit the worldview of our surrounding social environment, and that makes them relatively invisible to us. Not only that, but they often get boxed with what we perceive to be an objective perspective on reality. It's not a belief if it's reality, right? The beliefs that we do notice tend to be marginal beliefs that are more centered around our own experience of reality versus that of those surrounding us.

So for example, an American (typing with broad strokes here) middle manager may have a very different view of how one should build a career in a productive manner than an American retail worker playing music with his band on the weekends. This perspective on careers will appear to be a strong belief they both have because it may clash when they interact with each other, and the intense interactions may end up crystallizing these beliefs into what you'd call "strong beliefs", which then become an important part of a person's ideas when evaluating potential social relationships. But these beliefs about professional undertakings are actually very marginal compared to topics such as whether or not everyone can or should be happy, or whether or not people are generally trustworthy due to their nature. Human nature is perceived (wrongly) as something static by many, many people (especially in the US) and it affects policy-making, charity-giving, business practices, etc. The idea that human nature is static will change how we see redemption, how we see economic policies, how we even see intimate relationships. The belief that people hold free will will affect how we judge criminals, how we judge people who wronged us (I won't start on the topic of betrayal but god that word irks me), etc.

Now how we build our personal worldview and beliefs (strong or otherwise) is complex, so might as well take the time to suggest further reading on the matter:

Conrad Phillip Kottak's introductory book on Anthropology is well-respected, and I would recommend it to have a better overview of how different societies view the world quite differently, and how the local culture's worldview easily becomes one's own without actually realizing that it's happening. It's called enculturation - the learning of one's culture by living through it and interacting with others in it - and tends to be invisible to most people, despite its impact on a large amount of our beliefs.

As a small example of this but one I find rather valuable, there is a documentary on India's Ladakh region, called Ancient Futures - Learning from Ladakh, in which you can see the anthropologist interacting with women from the local communiy, and talking about how she can't really sew. And the women are just surprised because to them, you learn by practice, simply. There's no acceptance that someone can't learn to use the techniques they're using because they literally don't know anyone who can't sew. As long as you practice and sit with someone who knows how, you'll learn. And it's fascinating because in our culture, there is a prevalent belief that some people just can't learn functional understanding of certain things. Seems obvious, right? Not everyone can be an astrophysicist, not everyone can be a competent engineer. But what if that was wrong? And there's actually ridiculously interesting research on how this worldview can affect women in math classes, as well as young blacks in academic grading. People take all of this for granted but it is a massive component in how we view social policies.

Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett's researches in social epidemiology have done wonders in exploring the impacts of socioeconomic inequality on a massive amount of social factors, such as criminality, self-esteem, academic performance, etc. And this is only for one (albeit an important) factor in societies; how unequal the distribution of income is. 400 scientific articles later, one finds a clear trend; socioeconomic inequality has massive impact on things that you would never think of. They affect how people trust each other within a given society, because larger differences in socioeconomic circumstances lead to more conflict and different subcultures having trouble interacting with each other because their reality is so different. This seems beside the point but it really isn't; it strongly affects how the average person thinks others around him/her are worthy of trust. It has consequences on how we relate to each other and how we see the average stranger. This is not something we can inspect easily without knowing about it firsthand, so it's a "hidden" belief that is crazy in its impact on our lives.

And these factors all relate to general beliefs about others and the world, in an external manner. We also have trouble understanding a lot of what goes on inside our own decision-making process, which most people think does belong to them. Some researches have shown that you can impact someone's perspective on a stranger they just met by priming them with negative words or unpleasant experiences prior to the meeting, or by making them suffer through prolonged mental problem-solving. A paper studying the chances of getting paroled by parole judges observed that you had the most chance right after they had eaten, and the least before noon because they became more impatient towards inmates when their blood sugar was low. Other studies have shown that if you test cognitive reflexes for racism, most people who do not think that they are indeed racist will find that they have a ton more prejudice than they originally thought. This doesn't register as much when thinking about how you consciously view the world but it shows when writing or interacting with others without being focused on your own thoughts. This is probably one of the biggest reasons why you see minorities struggling so much to be represented in mainstream culture, except for the token black guy or the "faire-valoir" woman.

I'm written too much already but I strongly recommend Daniel Kahnemann's book Thinking, Fast and Slow to better understand what cognitive sciences have taught us about how our thoughts are affected by our brain's physiology and our prior experiences. I am serious in saying this; there is no way this book will not be useful to you in some way, no matter what kind of life you lead. If you have limited time or money, he gives this lecture which is kind of alright to summarize his book. I stress this man particularly because he is a legend. The man is reasonable, intelligent, and has more than three decades of solid research to back what he says.

I wanted to mention questions of free will more because they kinda relate to this whole thing but I'm gonna stop here and just recommend you check out Sam Harris' lecture on Free Will on youtube. I don't agree with much of what the guy says on other topics but he summarizes things well in that specific lecture.

Sorry again for writing such a wall of text. I hope that was worth the time to read it.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/canada
  1. You should know better than this. An ideology is a shortcut to making policy decisions used by voters who don't have time to look into the issues themselves, which have a greater depth than can be answered simply on a blind partisan basis. I'm not even going to argue with the suggestion that "if everyone looks after themselves, everyone who isn't incompetent will be fine," because it's a) highlighting ignorance b) ignoring those who are incompetent by no fault of their own c) clear evidence you have not studied statistics, a good, enjoyable overview of which is : drunkards walk (http://www.amazon.ca/Drunkards-Walk-Randomness-Rules-Lives/dp/0375424040) which I read in my third year of poli sci. If you're at UBC, you'll have to do this anyways for POLI380. Let me know if "everyone looks after themselves," and justifying a lack of a social safety net by merit-based assessment seems logically coherent after reading that book.

  2. This depends far too much on the individual. I agree, in general, but politically this isn't an issue I think is worth voting on, in the least because it won't be solved simply by increasing or decreasing funding. Education in general is one of those policy areas I see as having structural issues rather than funding issues, and it's going to take intelligent policy reform, not partisan, to fix the problem.

    >Also, it's worth noting that in my home province of B.C, the provincial liberals have really fucked things up. (I know the federal liberals and B.C liberals aren't technically related, but still.)

    For a Poli Sci major, you clearly need to study more. The Wikipedia page of the Conservative Party of Canada states:

    >there are other small "c" conservative parties which the federal Conservative Party has close ties with, such as the Saskatchewan Party, the Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ), and the British Columbia Liberal Party (not related to the federal Liberal Party of Canada).


    I also explain the influence of the Federal Conservatives, with a quote from Stephen Harper advocating it, here:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/gayjb/if_you_want_a_different_government_you_must_vote/c1m97eo


    You know what bothers me about the HST? I'm far from pro-business, but I like to think I'm rational, and I admit I don't see why HST is such an issue because it's a policy that makes sense to me despite being completely the opposite of policies I most support; it seems intuitive, and it has credible mechanisms by which it improves efficiency, what's not to like? Pretty much the only part I dislike is that the Provincial Liberals EXPLICITLY STATED they would not implement it.. As I explain in that reddit comment link, if anything, the shitshow they faced from the provincial NDP and Vander Zalm is the fault of the Federal Conservatives.. the BC Liberals as well, but assigning accountability to the Federal Liberals? Utterly ridiculous.

    Nice to see a manifestation of Contamination between the levels of government, though. I had to do a presentation on that.. http://cps.sagepub.com/content/32/7/835.abstract
u/calbear_77 · 3 pointsr/PublicPolicy

Speaking as an entry level analyst in the US, college internships with government or policy nonprofits/think tanks/advocacy groups are a good pathway to get basic experience and start making a network. Some of these positions will be paid, but many won’t. Public policy is definitely not as rigged as other fields when it comes to your credentials, so most social science degrees at the bachelors level will be considered the same for entry level. At higher levels, they start wanting you to have an MPP although it can occasionally be substituted for some similar practical social science masters degree. I can’t think of any specific non-degree credentials though that would really give you a leg up or be widely recognized in the field.

You should focus more on getting a bit of relevant experience under your belt so you can talk about how you’ll apply that experience to whatever task you’ll have in the job you’re applying for. Also, skills like being a good writer and statistics data analysis are really valued. Have a few public policy-style memos you can share as a portfolio, and take a few classes on how to do statistical data analysis (at college or even just an online class). Public policy writing is very different than academic writing, as your audience is totally different. I really recommend this book is you haven’t even taken a class on public policy as it explains how to write public policy really well and a lot of theory and methods commonly employed in the field.

u/Mosetsfire84 · 1 pointr/AdviceAnimals

I recommend reading http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555 to all of you.

"The Nobel economist points out that “in a predictable world, the stronger CEO would be found to lead the more successful firm 100% of the time.” In a world in which random external factors determine success, the more successful firms would be led by stronger CEOs only 50% of the time. In other words, the effect of top talent might be said to be random. In reality, stronger CEOs lead stronger companies only 60% of the time."

u/BigglesB · 4 pointsr/LibDem

I think:

  1. Different messages appeal to different people.
  2. Cool-headed arguments will appeal to some voters, but emotionally engaging & snappy communication will appeal to others more strongly.
  3. You're right that we need to be careful to ensure that any messages we make can't backfire now or in the future.

    In particular, I'd encourage you to read a book called "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Nobel-prize-winning-psychologist Daniel Kahneman. In it he goes into great depth about the way that our brains often substitute difficult decisions (like "who should I vote for") subconsciously with easier ones (like "who do I have a better general impression of") and I feel that's the playground we should be operating in.
u/ColloquialInternet · 0 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

Ideas are damn near worth nothing unless they're in the pure areas like mathematics and such. Execution is everything.

Luckily for you, executing is arguably easier than it has ever been in human history. A few things come to mind.

  1. Start a Kickstarter. Or one of the many clones of Kickstarter such as LocalLift http://blog.ycombinator.com/local-lift-yc-s14-is-a-kickstarter-for-local-businesses

  2. Pick up a copy of http://www.amazon.com/The-Startup-Owners-Manual-Step-By-Step/dp/0984999302. Even if you're not doing a startup, it has a lot of great advice. It isn't just another get-rich-quick book, but instead a book by professors and successful entrepreneurs on how to exploit the long tail of needs. It might be true that you're not Google, but with 6 billion people on the planet you don't have to be Google. (There are 10 million women aged 25 to 30 in the US alone. If you have a product that you can make $1 in revenue from 10% of those you have a a $1million revenue company)

  3. Hire folks to build prototypes if you can. Search and ask questions over at http://www.reddit.com/r/Entrepreneur for places to build prototypes for cheap

  4. Don't be afraid to talk about your idea and don't worry about your competitors at first. Just try to grow the idea and with it grow your customers. Digg already existed when Reddit was made. The creators of Breaking Bad said they wouldn't have done it had they known about Weeds.

  5. If the idea has legs, like you could maybe see a company with 5->7% growth per week, then you're in "startup territory" and you should also consider taking on venture capital of some sorts. Something like maybe $20K (or more depending on where you live) in seed funding for 5-10% preferred stock. Is it the sort of idea that you could grow quickly and turn into a life-time thing? Would your competition find it easier to acquire your company than compete with you?






u/hardciderguy · 14 pointsr/Entrepreneur

You seem to be focused well on taking better care of the customers you do have, and as we all know, they're the cheapest and most effective advertising you can possibly get. That to me would be the absolute core of my marketing plan.

Also glad to see you're leaning on measurable marketing channels - Especially email. Email is your best converting tool (aside from word of mouth), period.

  • How many people on your list? If you're marketing effectively, you should average roughly $3 per person on your list per month average, so a 1000 person list you should expect $3,000 in revenue if you're doing things right.

  • How frequently do you e-mail?

  • What are your open rates?

  • What are your clickthrough rates?

  • What call to action do you present customers in your emails? Open promotions like X% off or $Y off your next visit are not good enough, you must put a time limit on redeeming those promotions. By doing this, you tap into loss psychology, and make people take action instead of forgetting about you. This book, [Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior] (http://www.amazon.com/Sway-Irresistible-Pull-Irrational-Behavior/dp/0385530609/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426305301&sr=8-1&keywords=sway+the+irresistible+pull+of+irrational+behavior) is a fantastic insight into why we do what we do, and can help steer your marketing in a huge way.

    Have you thought about offering referral incentives to your customers? E.G. refer a new customer to us this month and receive <Y benefit> - again - there's that time limit worked in there.

    Some Concerns:

    "Too Good To Be True" massage price: This is a marketing mistake. You'd do much, much better to have the most expensive massage rates, but have some extra things added to them to make them just a little cooler and more luxurious than anyone else around. You'll never benefit being less expensive.

    60 days is tight, but it does give you some time to test out some ideas on a smaller basis rather than trying to blanket everything with anything. I've recently helped a client start thinking of marketing in a lean fashion. They roast & sell coffee. First, I told them to assume nothing about their customers, because we're going to listen to them and learn about them. Second, (as you did) build that email list. Third, every marketing push is an experiment. Test it out, review it, and then refine it. Fourth, find excuses to communicate with your clients - what might seem trivial internally might be a great excuse to engage your customers and ultimately get them to spend money with you. Small marketing pushes are less costly, more manageable, measurable, and present a lower hurdle to short attention spans.
u/thisisaoeu · 3 pointsr/GetStudying

I used to have this issue as well. I was experimenting tree-like structures (file systems), wiki-like structures (like wikipedia), tag-like structures (like evernote). I was experimenting with different formats like text, physical hand written notes in folders, scanned hand written notes, hand written notes using a wacom...



Of course, I was spending so much time on structuring information and finding the optimal solution that I was not getting any studies done.

Really, there is no best way to organize all information. Different kind of files relate to other files in complex ways, tags will always be kind of off. Different information lends itself to different kinds of visualization and representation. So you'll never reach optimality in this quest of yours.


My tip for you is this: let it go. Don't do it. A first approximation is all you need (drop stuff in a folder with course name, for example), further optimization will only lead to over-fitting.

Another way of putting this issue is in the context of a sort/search problem. The problem here is that sorting stuff is computationally expensive, and so if you can, you don't want to do a sort. Only if you need to search for something many times will sorting the data be computationally worth it. And here is the question for you: how much time are you spending on sorting compared to searching? Are you spending enough time on searching that you need to do a sort so that future searches are quicker?


Personally, I use a mix of dropbox, evernote, google keep and workflowy to organize my stuff.

I use google keep as a kind of "post-it" wall; "remember to buy this book", "this music album was pretty good, check it out", etc.

I write all my lecture notes and book notes on physical paper, then I'll scan them and push them to evernote, with the course tag attached. Old exams and the like also go into evernote.

Finally, labs and stuff that is "volatile", that I need to change often, goes into a Dropbox folder. When the lab is complete, it gets zipped up and sent into evernote as well, for future reference.


So this is how I personally do it. I think it works for me, but you know, everyone is different. :) Good luck.

Edit: The search/sort problem, and the problem of overfitting, and it's applicability to real life, is taken from the book "Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions" by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths. I love this book, definitely a recommendation from me!

u/brikis98 · 4 pointsr/programming

Supply and demand works if we are perfectly rational actors. But there is considerable evidence that we're not: see Predictably Irrational and Thinking, Fast and Slow. Salary in particular is known for irrational behavior. See the discussion of motivation in Drive or the short version in Daniel Pink's TED talk. Programmers are already fairly well paid and while I would certainly love to be paid more, I'm not convinced that alone would significantly increase the supply of developers.

The evidence for the talent gap is both anecdotal--every company I've worked at and many others I've interacted with complained extensively about lack of good developers--and some limited data (example 1, example 2), though it's not clear how to properly measure something like this.

Finally, I'm not sure that merely having 10x skill is enough to guarantee 10x pay. Perhaps in a perfect market with perfect knowledge and perfectly rational actors, it might be, but that's not how the real world works. You need not only 10x skill at your job, but also at turning that into money, which may be a completely different set of talents. For example, a 10x writer might make less money than an average writer if that average writer had their book turned into a popular teen movie. Similarly, the way for a programmer to make 10x the money is usually not to focus on salary (although there were some stories of Google and FB offering millions to retain some developers), but equity. And there, an exec-level programmer can get 10x the equity of a normal dev, though there is obviously a lot of luck as to whether the equity ends up paying off.

u/RobMagus · 5 pointsr/statistics

This is a fairly useful review that I believe is available via google scholar for free: Wainer, H., & Thissen, D. (1981). Graphical data analysis. Annual review of psychology, 32, 191–241.

Tufte is useful for a historical overview and for inspiration, but he has a particular style that doesn't necessarily match up with the way that you or your audience think.

Hadley Wickham developed ggplot2 and his site is a good place to start browsing for guides to using it.

There's a pretty good o'reilly book on visualization as well, and Stephen Few's book does a really good job of enumerating the various ways you can express trends in data.

u/mschley2 · 2 pointsr/nfl

You're putting value on memories and emotions. That's fine from a personal aspect, but as far as winning a football game, they're the same.

I took a behavioral economics class which is basically focused around all the reasons and ways we don't think logically/rationally/statistically. This book is really good if you're interested in that.

The first day of class, my professor asked us, "You need a new alarm clock. The campus bookstore has one for $40. Walmart (a few miles away) has the same alarm clock for $20. How many of you would go to WalMart?" About 90% of the class raised their hands. He followed it up with this: "You need a new computer. The campus bookstore has one for $350. WalMart has the same one for $330. How many of you would go to WalMart?" Only about 20% of the class raised their hands.... Why? You're saving $20 each way. It's illogical to go to WalMart for one of those things but not the other. But people think it's better to do it for the alarm clock because they're saving a larger percentage, even though that's irrelevant. You're doing the same thing. Early game, late game, it doesn't matter, it's still the same amount of points, but it feels better if it happens at the end of the game just like it feels better to get a bigger percentage off.

u/vendorsi · 3 pointsr/AskMarketing
  • Start with pretty much anything Seth Godin has written. Especially Purple Cow.

  • I'm a big fan of understanding cognitive issues, so Thinking Fast and Slow can help you understand how minds work.

  • to understand what CRM was really intended to be, read The One to One Future

  • Given your interest in digital check out these books on lean methodology: The Lean Startup and Ash Maurya's brilliant compliment, Running Lean

    In general, when it comes to things like SEO, SEM, etc you are better off sticking with blogs and content sites like SEOMoz, Marketing Sherpa, and Danny Sullivan/Search Engine World. By the time a book is written it's usually out of date in these fields.
u/owenshen24 · 4 pointsr/rational

Good and Real by Gary Drescher. Covers a similar philosophical stance to that of Yudkowsky in the Sequences, but with more academic rigor. A fun read that goes over computation, decision theory, morality, and Newcomb's Problem (among other things.)

Thinking Fast and Slow Daniel Kahneman's lifetime of research in heuristics and cognitive biases condensed into one epic volume. Highly engaging and 100% recommended if you aren't well-versed in this area.

A Mind for Numbers by Barbara Oakley. A scientific approach to studying, looking at good memory tricks, ways to learn better, and some interesting ideas on procrastination (including characterizing it as a malign reward loop).

u/narakhan · 9 pointsr/rational

Don't know specifics of what you're after, so I'll shotgun you with links:

u/drMorkson · 7 pointsr/booksuggestions

Thinking, Fast and Slow by nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman.

It is an amazing book and I have recommended it to almost everyone I know. It is really thoroughly researched.

from wikipedia:
>Thinking, Fast and Slow is a 2011 book by Nobel Memorial Prize winner in Economics Daniel Kahneman which summarizes research that he conducted over decades, often in collaboration with Amos Tversky. It covers all three phases of his career: his early days working on cognitive bias, his work on prospect theory, and his later work on happiness.

>The book's central thesis is a dichotomy between two modes of thought: "System 1" is fast, instinctive and emotional; "System 2" is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The book delineates cognitive biases associated with each type of thinking, starting with Kahneman's own research on loss aversion. From framing choices to substitution, the book highlights several decades of academic research to suggest that people place too much confidence in human judgment.

u/Alivia_Madrigal · 5 pointsr/LSD

Sorry to derail your post. It's Thinking Fast and Slow. The author won a noble prize for his discovery on how the mind works and this book summarizes his thought experiments. A fair warning however, I have never seen the world the same way again after that book.

>In the international bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, the renowned psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think. System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation—each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.

>Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives—and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble.

u/AmaDaden · 5 pointsr/compsci

It depends on what I'm reading. 20 for the average book is about what I can read. I've had things like What Every Programmer Should Know About Memory that I could only do 5 pages at best and things like Head First Design Patterns where I could do 40 or 50

An interesting side note is that I've also been reading books like Thinking, Fast and Slow that basically say that we have a finite amount of mental will power. We can only focus on a difficult task for so long before we run out of steam. The only way we know to improve focus this is by maintaining decent glucose levels. So you might be able to improve your limit by having a snack or breaking for something to eat.

I've also been reading Seach inside yourself. It's book on meditation written by a programmer at Google. I'm hoping to improve my focus with meditation. It might also let you bump up your number number of pages per-day or at least let you settle in to reading faster

u/Darsint · 6 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

To quote Thinking, Fast and Slow:

"success = talent + luck. great success = a little more talent + a lot of luck"

I have no doubts that you worked hard for your degree and that you have quite a bit of talent. But don't knock the fact that quite a bit of luck was involved in you getting the job you wanted straight out of college and that it was high paying enough to let you pay off your loans right away. My girlfriend has been a teacher for several years and she's been working with the school system since she got out of college. She finished her Master's degree in 2010. She still has at least a decade of payments left before she pays it off.

While you are right that the degree you choose can influence whether you can successfully pay them off in a reasonable time frame, it is by no means the only factor. Painting all of them as stupid crybabies is a disservice to them.

u/JamesNoff · 1 pointr/DebateAChristian

I say we must choose because that's what our brain is going to do anyways. Our brain, with it's fast, automatic, gut reactions always takes a stance. We can intellectually say that we don't have a high enough certainty of knowledge to form a belief, but on a lower level we've already taken a stance.^1

Now that doesn't mean we need to be closed minded to the alternative or pretend that we have knowledge we don't. A belief is what we think is true based on the knowledge we have, so our beliefs can change just as quickly as we get new knowledge or perspectives.

---
^1 This is taken from reading Thinking Fast and Slow, a fantastic book on how our brain works and how the shortcuts our brain takes can lead to things like optical illusions, biases, and cognitive illusions. Highly recommend.

---

Consider this: Would you be surprised to find out that God exists? We are surprised when reality doesn't match our expectations. If we expect to never find out that God exists, that indicates that we already believe that He doesn't.

u/BrusqueWillis · 7 pointsr/IncelTears

>no one tried to tell my that my thinking is wrong

It's a difficult task, because the way our brains work makes personal experience supersede external information that contradict it, even when scientifically, objectively, our experience is... not "wrong" per se, but so incomplete that it veers into "wrong" teritory. I teach people how to get along with people, which is mainly applied psichology and neurology (specifically social neurology), so I come against this feature (it's not a bug, it's a feature) every time. For reference: Daniel Kahnemann's work. For reference: Chris Niebauer's book.

Your brain dupes you (it meakes you wrong, giving you the impression you're right) in several key areas relevant to our discussion here:

  1. What You See Is All There Is: our brains operate on the assupmtion they have all the info needed to make good decisions and reach true conclusions, neglecting that there are swathes of information that might be / are relevant and that finally change the outlook completely.
  2. Our Left-Brain Intepreter has the task to keep the story in our heads logically consistent, not correct. As such, it will gladly add to reality, or substract from it, only to keep the story. Please see this and this.
  3. To accomplish this task, the LBI resorts to cognitive biases like overgeneralization, personalization, confirmation bias etc.
  4. Its work is so powerful and so well hidden from conscience that most people, when confronted with science, will readily deny science ("well, that might be true but not for me") than accepting our thinking might be flawed.

    In your case, in order to examine what biases are in play and what is their result, I'd start questioning the hidden meaning of your use of notions like "chad", "betabux" and such. It speaks to overgeneralization (with a heavy serving of dehumanization) and confirmation bias.

    Humans are unique. There are, of course, trends (sociology doesn't exist for nothing) but so far no human being looks and act exactly like another human being always and in all aspects; more, humans change over time: experience, opinions, world views and behavior shift as time passes. That would be the first step I'd take if I were you: stop working with archetypes and start looking for tiny differences. The world will get extremely rich if you do that.

    TL;DR: you're wrong, but your brains won't let you see that and you have to voluntarily challenge it to improve your life quality.

    Edited to add: and I didn't even touch the issue of cultural and social norms and conditioning, learned helplesness and many other phenomena that interfere and change all the stuff above.
u/null000 · 3 pointsr/urbanplanning

> Peoples lives are made best by being allowed to make their own decisions and decide what they want themselves

Holy shit no they aren't. Example: If the "donate my organs on death" checkbox is an opt-out affair, most people will opt out. If it's an opt-in affair, many many more people will opt-in. In this case, a relatively minor barrier to "making their own decisions" results in a huge quality of life improvement for anyone on a wait list for organs.

Read this for citation

For other examples of where the government desperately needs to intervene in markets, see forced arbitration clauses between companies and citizens, non-compete clauses in fast food workers' employment agreements, the fiduciary rule for financial advisers, the hole in the ozone, literally every false advertisement law, multi-level marketing schemes, copyright/trademark/patent law (although maybe not as much as is currently exhibited in the US), Dumping laws (e.g. don't throw sofas on the side of the highway), public intoxication laws, anti-trespassing laws, (the lack of) vaccination laws, literally all of public education, FDA drug safety regulations, global warming (and, honestly, most environmental causes), and the list goes on.

I'd argue that the government should be in charge of making sure that consumer expectations actually reflect reality and normally externalized costs are felt by the individual[s] inflicting them, as well as ensuring that life is mostly pleasant for most people and at least tolerable for the lowest rungs of society. People expect that traffic won't be shit, but suburbia inflicts traffic on city centers, thus increasing commute times and lowering standard of living for those who live furthest from city centers, so maybe suburbia should be discouraged.

> Are you actually comparing workplace safety regulations to you deciding that no one actually really likes suburbia and thus you should run their lives.

Yes?

  1. Not being able to live in suburbia does not ruin lives. That's just silly. You're not entitled as a human to being able to live in a 1 acre lot with a 4bed, 3 bath home and a 10 minute drive to the nearest grocery store. Be realistic - disincentivizing a decision != running your life, especially in a democratic society.

  2. Sure, there's a difference of scale, but it's still the same basic idea. The employee is "choosing" to be employed by the corporation that may end their life early, usually due to lack of other realistic employment opportunities (e.g. coal-based company town in this situation) or a lack of education limiting employment opportunities. The government manipulates the decisions available to the worker and the company to make the world a better place. If you don't agree with me, where's the line? Social security? Workplace safety? Minimum wage? Anti-discrimination laws? I acknowledge that there is a line, but saying that people should be disbarred from public office for putting that line somewhere you disagree with is pretty extreme.

    If you don't want to have such arguments levied against you, don't make such absolutist statements like "If you think that the government should be setting the objective of reducing suburbia you should not be involved in government"
u/windchaser89 · 3 pointsr/startups

Hello, I'm an entrepreneur too and I code things for myself and for friends' projects. There is no "good rule of thumb", it depends on how willing are you to accept that the more you share about the idea, the better the feedback you get. Better feedback = faster iteration from a crap idea to one that works. I advice you to read this book called the startup owner's manual. It has helped me understand this idea better - http://www.amazon.com/The-Startup-Owners-Manual-Step-By-Step/dp/0984999302

Regarding the developer... A potential hire can't understand what you want to build, and won't bother dropping everything he is doing (most likely exciting projects too) to help you if you can't share the intimate details of how you are going to change the world. Just go ahead and tell him what you are trying to do and how he can help. Show him why you two can make good money together.

u/TechnicalExample · 2 pointsr/sysadmin

Not necessarily workshops but the following books helped me out with my career significantly.

When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing - Talks about the importances of time and how you can be the most effective. Very good if you have a problem with burning out constantly and not good at taking breaks. Also good if you're looking for information on what times of the day are best for certain activities.

Stealing the Corner Office - A little more corporate BS but a good way to check yourself to find out why you keep getting passed on promotions and why being a "go-to-guy" is a very bad idea for your career.

u/freezoneandproud · 2 pointsr/scientology

> the requirement to have statistics that are always higher each week than they were the week before is literally impossible to do. Even very successful staff members are therefore eventually regarded as unsuccessful.

This was among the stupidest things Hubbard every came up with.

The initial idea was fine, and to his credit Hubbard was early in the practice of using statistics. Because yes, it's far better to measure work contributions with dispassionate numbers than emotional responses (like, "You aren't a team player"). And some things can be turned into useful statistics relatively easily, such as sales dollars and number-of-auditing-hours delivered. And "number of hotel rooms cleaned."

But in other cases, the statistic is meaningless. And since in most cases the statistic valued number and not quality, the use of stats did not encourage production. When people are measured on numbers, they deliver numbers without regard to quality. The best example is a public one that we all find unfathomable: hand-written letters that say, "Hi how is it going?" and are sent to people who bought a book 30 years ago. The person who works in Central Files has a stat of "number of letters sent out" and so is motivated to create lots of "letters." It would be far more useful to find a statistic that measures the result you want, such as "number of people who respond to letters," because that might encourage people to do a job so well that recipients write back.

And when your production is measured on your job's statistics, it does not make it valuable to help other people.

The only place where quality is part of the statistic is in auditing, where there's a distinction between "well done auditing hours delivered" and "very well done auditing hours delivered." (IMO the best of his management practices had to do with Auditing and Qual. That's not too surprising because it was the heart of what was delivered, and he actually knew those workflows.)

But the dumbest part of the "management by statistics" theory was the idea that it should be measured on a weekly basis, and the graph should always be "up and to the right." That's patently ridiculous, on an individual level. There are finite number of hours in a week in which anyone can deliver auditing for instance; and "hotel rooms cleaned" has a hard stop when a hotel has a fixed number of rooms.

More importantly, quality results have ebbs and flows. In most professional endeavors, someone can spends 3 weeks or 6 months on a task before it becomes a visible, measurable statistic. There are healthy trends that are more visible when looked at on a monthly or quarterly basis -- but that's not part of Scn stats. And there are yearly trends, such as "lots of sales before Christmas" which, in a week-to-week measure, suggests that every Org's stats will crash in January. But they never looked at "How did we do in December this year compared to previous Decembers" the way that retail businesses did.

And then there's the whole notion of using stats only up to a point, and rather to focus on improving quality. It was quite a head trip when I read the works of W. Edwards Deming and learned about his "red bead rule." If you spent any time on staff working on a stats-based mindset, I highly recommend reading one of Deming's books.

I've long wondered what would have happened if Hubbard discovered Deming. A lot of things might have been quite different.

u/Gordon_ramaswamy · 1 pointr/CGPGrey

I think the explanation Grey is looking for is something that a lot of people are grappling with today. One of the best explanations I have found for the same is in the book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. I am sure Grey has probably already read this book before though it is beneficial to look at it in the context of social media and our brains today. For example, the book talks about Systems 1 and 2 of thinking. While system 1 primarily involves our instinctive reaction, system 2 tries to invoke our brain to try to think. The social media today, including reddit etc are all examples of systems trying exploit our system 1 just to get a visceral reaction without us really using our critical thinking. The fact that there are so many podcasts out there can mean that sometimes even long podcasts can be analysed by our system 1s. I most definitely have been guilty of the same in the past.

One of the reasons Facebook is being blamed for elections today can also come out to this. Its not like people haven't had access to information in the past. Nonetheless, the fact that news today is much more instant and dependent on getting us to click or grab our attention means we really don't critically analyse it as much as we should, leading to the rise of fake news and headlines. Another helpful albeit short book about the same which I can recommend is The People VS Tech which is much more recent and gives a much better context to the ideas of system 1 and 2. This is probably one of the context that can help people think about what Grey is doing in a better manner.

​

Clearly, using more of System 1 can deeply affect the way we think, as that is most definitely more comfortable and doesn't easily challenge our brains.

u/rbathplatinum · 3 pointsr/InteriorDesign

Definitely look into bussiness management books as well. if you are going down this road, there is a chance you will want to start doing it on your own and having proper business skills will help tremendously in securing work, and balancing costs, and making money doing it! I am sure some people on this sub can recommend some great books on this topic as well.

Here are a couple books,

https://www.amazon.ca/Business-Model-Generation-Visionaries-Challengers/dp/0470876417/ref=sr_1_1?gclid=Cj0KCQjw5MLrBRClARIsAPG0WGxuwhyo-18J3-xPOVP8bXeTJ4zbGZHkpO4GqIGKlz-WCRxt3aUroqQaApECEALw_wcB&hvadid=229992601126&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9000745&hvnetw=g&hvpos=1t1&hvqmt=e&hvrand=4412519744533501821&hvtargid=aud-748919244907%3Akwd-297504215686&hydadcr=16960_10238137&keywords=business+model+generation&qid=1567691052&s=gateway&sr=8-1

https://www.amazon.ca/Lean-Startup-Entrepreneurs-Continuous-Innovation/dp/0307887898/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_3/141-1005106-2495725?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0307887898&pd_rd_r=3ef234c3-168a-4156-bb6b-32f1e4f1ecca&pd_rd_w=PEqJa&pd_rd_wg=P882W&pf_rd_p=a62e2918-d998-4bbb-8337-35aac776e851&pf_rd_r=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H&psc=1&refRID=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H

https://www.amazon.ca/Startup-Owners-Manual-Step-Step/dp/0984999302/ref=pd_sbs_14_3/141-1005106-2495725?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0984999302&pd_rd_r=3ef234c3-168a-4156-bb6b-32f1e4f1ecca&pd_rd_w=Oruqz&pd_rd_wg=P882W&pf_rd_p=f7748194-d8e0-4460-84c0-2789668108bc&pf_rd_r=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H&psc=1&refRID=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H

https://www.amazon.ca/Business-Model-You-One-Page-Reinventing/dp/1118156315/ref=pd_sbs_14_4/141-1005106-2495725?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1118156315&pd_rd_r=3ef234c3-168a-4156-bb6b-32f1e4f1ecca&pd_rd_w=Oruqz&pd_rd_wg=P882W&pf_rd_p=f7748194-d8e0-4460-84c0-2789668108bc&pf_rd_r=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H&psc=1&refRID=RMAX7VQZE9TKPTQ2SM8H

u/smekas · 3 pointsr/TrueReddit

This is my issue with Gladwell and Lehrer:

>In works of less than 500 pages, Gladwell and Lehrer attempt to enlighten the reader on How the World Works, What People are Really Like, and How Greatness Happens without getting into any of the technical details that would absolutely overwhelm the majority of the readers traipsing through airport book shop before grabbing their flight home.

They set out to achieve something that's nearly impossible and people are willing to suspend disbelief just because they don't want to expend the energy required to become truly informed on a given subject.

Also this:
>More than actionable insights, this kind of popular analysis gives the reader something far more immediately valuable – the feeling that they have a sophisticated view of the world.

I'm still reading the article, but I fell in love with the following sentence:
>America splits its valuable time between blowing an enormously obvious housing bubble, demanding Master’s degrees for entry-level positions, and badly managing the bloodbaths of Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is an excellent article. If I may suggest a couple of anti-dotes to the Gladwell/Lehrer pop-science oversimplification, two books with excellent science and research on how we think, decide and react to stress are Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow and Choke, by Sian Beilock.

u/Kavec · 3 pointsr/worldnews

I read your comment. Then I look at the username of the comment above you. My head explodes.

Seriously though: you are 100% right in what you are saying, but I hope people is not thinking "yeah exactly people are dumb... they just need to be told off, they will wake up, and everything will be fixed". This is as efficient as "fixing" mass shootings by giving weapons to the teacher.

It is all about how the human brain rewards our actions, and how that influences how we act and think. We are designed to prioritize an easy chuckle (low effort, high reward) over a "computationally expensive" thought (source: Thinking Fast And Slow).

You want to convince someone? Be short, be precise, know how the human brain works and don't fight against it.

u/Ojisan1 · 3 pointsr/RedPillWomen

>Our fighting hasn't stopped because I haven't stopped fighting for control.

>I don't trust my fiance. There, I said it. I want to. I'm working on it. But I don't, right now.

I am not sure that I believe this, actually. I think you do trust him. The issue is, I think, the difference between an unconscious response (what you've trained yourself to do your whole life) and your conscious response (what you desire your reaction to be).

The unconscious responses are created in a part of the brain that is more instinctual - some people call it the "lizard brain". This response, to fight your fiance, or to act in a way that is mistrustful, happens in milliseconds. It is not under conscious control, it is by force of habit.

The conscious response, which happens in the parts of the brain that evolved later, takes longer to happen. The key is you have to re-train yourself, and it takes time and effort. You only have milliseconds to intercept the unconscious mind's response (mistrust) and replace it with your conscious mind's desire (trust).

So the first step is to recognize the unconscious response, be more aware of it, and at least try to stop yourself from reacting that way outwardly, or realize when it's happening and stop as soon as you realize that's what you're doing (which is sort of what happened with the airport story - you realized it, but after a few minutes, not in milliseconds.) Then you replace the instinctual response with your desired conscious response - instead of not trusting him you act as though you do trust him.

After you do this enough, your instinctual, unconscious reaction will change, and trust will become your new default.

An excellent book on this subject, if you're interested, is "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Kahneman.

edit: typo

u/drinkallthecoffee · 2 pointsr/gifs

Like I said in another comment, most of my work was on reading comprehension and assessment. My work on automatic behavior was actually much more low-level than stuff like leaving a child in the car. My automatic behaviors would be changing how people perceive distances, and then in turn whether this could change how quickly people walk when they don't know they are being observed.

That being said, Thinking Fast and Slow is a pop psychology book written by a leading psychologist on these topics. It's more broad than what we're talking about here and is more focused on thinking than doing, but it's a great read.

The article I linked above, The Unbearable Automaticity of Being is a great summary of how automatic behaviors affect our daily lives. My unpublished research on automatic behaviors was largely inspired by this article. I read it as an undergrad and designed an experiment with my professor, and then started running it and replicating the experiments in grad school.

u/The_Biggest_Monkey · 8 pointsr/AskReddit

Hi! Psych major + bookworm over here. Some well written and accessible books that I've enjoyed reading are:

Thinking Fast and Slow from Kahneman http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375192703&sr=8-1&keywords=kahneman+thinking+fast+and+slow

Willpower: discovering the greatest human strength by Baumeister http://www.amazon.com/Willpower-Rediscovering-Greatest-Human-Strength/dp/0143122231/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375192853&sr=1-1&keywords=willpower

And Outliers by Gladwell http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017930/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375192928&sr=1-2&keywords=10000+hours

Baumeister and Kahneman are the leading figures on the research done within their particalur fields and these books show a glimpse inside of the kitchen, so to speak. (Iḿ not 100% sure about Gladwell, Iḿ on my phone atm). The books are well written, accessible, entertaining and fascinating.

u/groundhogcakeday · 1 pointr/Parenting

12-13 is a major time of transition. It is too early to know who and what he will be when he comes out on the other side of it, but it is certainly not too early to worry about it. And there is still room for parental guidance. Teens are complicated, so it's a good time to refresh your parenting library.

The first book that your post brought to my mind was this one by Paul Tough: "How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character" http://www.amazon.com/How-Children-Succeed-Curiosity-Character/dp/0544104404 I'll haven't finished it, however; it didn't seem relevant to my kids. But it's popular and may be worth checking out. I also like Madeline Levine's books, which are along similar lines but fit my family a bit better.

The book that influenced my parenting the most is Alfie Kohn's "Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other Bribes" But I read this when my kids were very young, and I suspect it is why we didn't need Paul Tough's book at 12.

u/ehaaland · 10 pointsr/psychology

It depends on what types of things you're interested in!

Over time, you'll come to know certain people who research in different areas and you can go to their personal webpages and access their Curriculum Vitae. Through that, you can find all the work they've done and many times they link to PDF copies of their papers.

But psychology is a very broad field. Here are some suggestions I can come up with:

For dealings with moral political psychology (the psychology of how people on the right and people on the left feel about moral decisions - includes religions and other aspects to our deeply-rooted conceptions of 'self'), see Jonathan Haidt - He just wrote a new book called The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion

For dealings with the extent and limits of human rationality, I'd suggest Daniel Kahneman. He also just wrote a new book called Thinking Fast and Slow.

Stuffisnice suggested William James. James' Principles of Psychology is remarkable and very fun to read. It's quite dated both in science and in language, but his writing is impeccable.


In fact, James didn't just do psychology. He did philosophy as well. His later philosophy was at odds with the picture provided by most mainstream psychology that takes the brain as the source of our mental experience. These philosophical aspects have recently been brought into the empirical realm in the branch of Ecological psychology. This is my personal preference for psychology reading as I feel it is much more willing to ask harder questions than traditional psychology; it is willing to do away with assumptions and premises that are generally taken for granted.

This ecological framework deals more with perception and the role of the animal's action in perception. Instead of the traditional way of looking at perception (cells react to stimuli in the environment, feed this encoded stimuli into the brain, the brain processes things and makes sense of them, recreating a picture of the world through its activity, and finally sending out directions to the body to move), the ecological perspective focuses more on how the animal perceives the world directly and does not require internal processing to make sense of the world. It's much cleaner and much simpler. The brain is still crucial for the lived experience, but it is not the whole story.

For readings in ecological psychology, I would recommend Ed Reed's Encountering the World and Eleanor Gibson's An Ecological Approach to Perceptual Learning and Development.

After you get your bearings, then you can get into some really deep stuff that tries to synthesize biology, psychology, and the essence of human/animal experience (phenomenology). For that, Evan Thompson is my go to guy. His work is heavily philosophical and is sometimes overly dense, but you may find it interesting.

PM me if you have any questions!

u/oblique63 · 1 pointr/INTP

That reminds me, there's a similar video summary of the Brain Rules book over here: http://vimeo.com/10954540

(and more info here)

Totally forgot about that one. It's cool, but you can pretty much get the whole gist of it just from those links.

And if anybody's craving more psych-y books, Subliminal is also pretty cool (it's like the diet version of Thinking Fast and Slow, which is good but long), though, the Willpower Instinct one already kinda touches on a bit of material from both those anyway.

u/djk29a_ · 20 pointsr/devops

I'll take a hard left on the reading recommendations because the usual recommendations have been covered.

A lot of people going through these transformations do not understand nor internalize something more fundamental about how they work and misuse their most precious resource of all - time. So I recommend Tom Limoncelli's Time Management for System Administrators frequently for engineers that seem to get overwhelmed a lot at work. All companies are trying to do a lot more with a lot less than they used to only 9 years ago, and this means it is very, very common for people to be doing the jobs of what used to be 1-3 other people in the 90s or early 2000s. Additionally, look into some of the articles and events from http://www.humanops.com/

You may also want to read books from W Edwards Deming, one of the most commonly cited forefathers of Agile before they even made the term. This book should be a good introduction to improving quality output of products
and perhaps services if an organization is experiencing issues with declining quality of product https://www.amazon.com/Essential-Deming-Leadership-Principles-Business/dp/0071790225/

You may also want to read High Output Management by the late Andy Grove as well as Ben Horowitz's the Hard Thing About Hard Things. These are management books but if you're talking about methodologies and cultural transformations (forget devops for a moment), you're basically doing management consulting IMO rather than engineering consulting. And because there is no company cultural transformation that has succeeded without executive oversight, you should be trying to think more like a manager to succeed here as well. If your clients do not respect and understand the principles of successful technology company managers (I've never heard of anyone trying to do "devops" as a culture that wasn't also coinciding with trying to make a non-technology company more of a technology product company - this also includes software vendors that are fundamentally sales and marketing in core competency and culture), it is difficult to imagine that they will achieve something other than by following average / mediocre managers outside technology.

u/Marmun-King · 1 pointr/videos

I initially followed the principles of Stoicism, which is a philosophy that's very close to the principles of CBT. So my first resource was /r/Stoicism, where you can find things like this and this that have direct correlation with CBT principles. Greek and Roman literature might be hard to get into, but there are very readable translations and the principles are applicable.

Of course, not everyone is interested in philosophy, so my recommendation would be to find something along the lines of Judith Beck's Cognitive Therapy, or other similar resources that are based on research. I can't really recommend else because I haven't read much from other authors.

But in general I would recommend reading about cognitive biases in general, along the lines of this, this, this, or this. Being conscious of how everybody thinks might help you see some negative spirals in your life, and can help you change the environment that might lead you to that negativity.

But again, professional help can be very useful, so definitely consult a professional who is maybe better for you. Good luck!

u/Baeocystin · 2 pointsr/AskMenOver30

Read Rosling's Factfulness. The book format is nice, but the .pdf is everywhere. Watch Hans' TED talks, too. They're the core ideas, condensed. Here's one of his earlier ones, but I think it's one of his best, too.

The data is real. When your cynicism pushes back, tell it to get bent and accept the factual truth that it falsely proclaims it has sole access to. That's what I did to mine, and it was pretty effective, too.

u/drwicked · 6 pointsr/hsp

You are not alone in feeling this way. The way I think of it is I feel like I have the wrong kind of interpersonal Velcro for most people, so they just don’t stick like I perceive most other people stick to each other. It’s understandable for this to make one feel defective, and very alone.

I try to twist it and think of it as an advantage, I think the upside to this means that you can be capable of tremendous self-sufficiency. Invest in you. Take care of yourself even when you want more than anything for someone else to take care of you.

I’m also prone to beating myself over the head with painful facts like “everyone always leaves me”, “nobody loves me like I love people”, etc. these feel so true because you might not have instances to contradict these “facts”. But in truth this is a fallacy summed up as “what you see is all there is” by Daniel Kahneman in Thinking, Fast and Slow link. Just because everyone has left doesn’t mean everyone will always leave. There are billions of humans and we happen to be a tiny percentage who have this sensitivity, there are still millions of us and millions more who have the empathy and imagination to understand us to some extent. Don’t give up. Good luck.

u/llama111 · 1 pointr/getdisciplined

There is a great book called “When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing” by Daniel Pink that has a chapter discussing this exact idea. He talks about the importance of recognizing where you fall as an early riser, night owl, or somewhere in the middle and how to capitalize on your type. He has a quote that’s something like he believes “the modern schedule was created to make night owls miserable” which seems pretty true at times.

https://www.amazon.com/When-Scientific-Secrets-Perfect-Timing/dp/0735210624/ref=nodl_

u/soupydreck · 1 pointr/statistics

Aside from Tufte, you might find Cleveland's Visualizing Data worthwhile. I'm reading Stephen Few's Now You See It: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis now.

Also, try following some related blogs, like Nathan Yau's Flowing Data or Kaiser Fung's Junk Charts. You can get a sense of some appropriate and/or inappropriate ways of visualizing data from these.

Finally, once you get more familiar, get something like Murrell's R Graphics. This will help you understand the basics of the base R graphics capabilities so you can make what you want, exactly how you want. ggplot2 is awesome, too, but understanding the basics is really helpful. Hope that helps.

u/hey_look_its_shiny · 3 pointsr/userexperience

I'm not a UX designer, but I have a psych background and have dabbled in UX as a business owner/developer.

As others have mentioned, it can definitely be a good fit. A psych education will help you more intuitively understand the cognitive and emotional processes that users go through when interacting with a product, and it also gives you a leg up on the research side.

A UX designer that I worked with recommended reading up on Google's design methodology. Specifically, he recommended the book Sprint which outlines their framework in detail.

u/CoolCole · 6 pointsr/tableau

Here's an "Intro to Tableau" Evernote link that has the detail below, but this is what I've put together for our teams when new folks join and want to know more about it.

http://www.evernote.com/l/AKBV30_85-ZEFbF0lNaDxgSMuG9Mq0xpmUM/

What is Tableau?

u/andrewff · 5 pointsr/boardgames

I do for two reasons. First, for the competition and challenge of it. I love developing a strategy and seeing how well I can execute it.

Second, its to improve my ways of thinking about problems. Board games are very fixed problems with strong rules. In particular, board games are helpful in identifying cognitive biases in ways I think about problems.

One direct application of this is what is known as the Gambler's Fallacy. I think this obviously shows up in social deduction games. For instance, he can't be a werewolf three games in a row.

A second application of this way of thought is Anchoring. In Anchoring we get fixed on the first line of thinking we see. This comes up in games all the time, but I think its most obvious in word games. We find one word we like and we build off of that, we rarely consider other words. If you've ever played Paperback, you have probably seen your group do this as you open up the table for assistance.

Selective perception is another example. In this case we see a strategy that worked for us in the past and we fixate on moves related to that strategy. We don't think outside the box.

I'm going to write up a full article on this, but if anyone is interested, Thinking Fast and Slow is a fantastic book on this topic.

u/freireib · 3 pointsr/math

Disclaimer: I'm an engineer, not a mathematician, so take my advice with a grain of salt.

Early in my grad degree I wanted to master probability and improve my understanding of statistics. The books I used, and loved, are

DeGroot, Probability and Statistics

Rozanov, Probability Theory: A Concise Course

The first is organized very well, with ever increasing difficulty and a good number of solved problems. I also appreciate that as things start to get complicated, he also always bridges everything back to earlier concepts. The books also basically does everything Bayesian and Frequentist side by side, so you get a really good idea of the comparison and arbitraryness.

The second is a good cheap short book basically full of examples. It has just enough math flavor to be mathier, without proofing me to death.

Also, if you're really just jumping into the subject, I would recommend some pop culture math books too, e.g.,

Paulos, Innumeracy

Mlodinow, The Drunkards Walk

Have fun!

u/daniu · 5 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

The advice to "sleep on it" is not to be able to think about it at night, but to give yourself time to calm down from short term emotions that might be connected with a decision.

There is a book about decision making called ["Thinking Fast and Slow"] (http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555) with an explanation of how decisions can be made in those two ways, fast - intuitively, pretty much - and slow - using rational thought.

Both those approaches have their advantages and drawbacks, so you often can make a correct "fast" decision, but doing so will prevent you from checking back with the other thought process. So allowing you to do that is pretty much the value of "sleep on it".

u/IRodeAnR-2000 · 2 pointsr/AskEngineers

All decisions have an emotional component, and research has shown that people who claim to care exclusively about 'the facts' are often more driven by emotion than the people they see as 'emotional.'

Daniel Kahneman actually won a Nobel Prize in Economics for the research and application of what he discusses (at lenght) in the book below.

It's an absolutely awesome read, and I recommend every engineer and especially project managers read it at least every couple of years.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555&ved=2ahUKEwiV4tLcpYjiAhXshOAKHaKxABsQFjAYegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw3lAZqqPHlaSgKWv4V33dGs

u/rafaelspecta · 3 pointsr/startups

Exactly. That is the idea.

Problem Fit => Solution Fit => Product Fit => Market Fit
Each step teaches us very important details and you engage your early-adopters in the process. When you have the actual product you already have customers, and sometimes paying customers.

And there are books around this that EVERYONE SHOULD READ.

"The Lean Startup: How Today's Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses" (Eric Reis) - 2011
https://www.amazon.com/Lean-Startup-Entrepreneurs-Continuous-Innovation/dp/0307887898/

"Running Lean: Iterate from Plan A to a Plan That Works" (Ash Maurya) - 2010
https://www.amazon.com/Running-Lean-Iterate-Plan-Works/dp/1449305172

"Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days" (Jake Knapp - Google Ventures) - 2016
https://www.amazon.com/Sprint-Solve-Problems-Test-Ideas/dp/150112174X/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1550802301&s=gateway&sr=8-1

u/codepreneur · 2 pointsr/startups

I'd recommend you spend a small portion of that $40k on:

http://www.amazon.com/Running-Lean-Iterate-Works-Series/dp/1449305172

http://www.amazon.com/Startup-Owners-Manual-Step---Step/dp/0984999302/

http://www.amazon.com/The-Lean-Startup-Entrepreneurs-Continuous/dp/0307887898

Then get creative and figure out how to validate your idea without writing a single line of code (validation = get customers willing to sign up and/or pre-purchase).

My favorite example of getting 70k users without building a thing: http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/19/dropbox-minimal-viable-product/

If you could generate that kind of buzz without a line of code written, you could get the investment required to build your MVP.

Feel free to PM me, btw. I love the SaaS space and I have 17 years software development experience.

u/BenInEden · 3 pointsr/SecurityAnalysis

How much do you know about Ray or Bridgewater? I ask in a friendly conversational way so please don't take that as being smug.

While I don't claim to be an expert I've had a bit of a fascination with him and the cult of personality that is Bridgewater. I've read their publically available white papers, his book and I follow his posts on LinkedIn.

Generally speaking he/they are hyper-realists, hyper-adaptable, and hyper algo/data driven. Which means ... so goes the data ... so goes Ray/Bridgewater. They are pretty non-dogmatic ... sorta. Data is their dogma. So yes. I expect him to basically change as data changes. I was a bit surprised by the shift in just a week. But tbh there is definitely a change in the wind. We all sense it. We're all trying to forecast what it means. Get a feel for its intensity and direction.

u/Sams_Big_Balls_Dance · 4 pointsr/bodybuilding

Some ideas from self-help books might resonate with certain people, so in that sense, they're not a scam. Personally, I've gotten more from books that aren't specifically "self-help," but focus more on a certain topic and help shine a light on why we think the way we do and some potential ways to change that way of thinking. A few examples:

The Power of Habit

Thinking Fast and Slow

The Like Switch

I also read The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck and got nothing out of it, but I see lots of glowing reviews for it, so some people must have enjoyed it.

u/carlh999 · 1 pointr/Entrepreneur

Check out;

  • Sprint: How to solve big problems and test new ideas in just five days" by Jake Knapp


    This book really is great and helped me to create a startup in 24 hours. Below is my startup;


  • Desert Storm


    It really gets you to think of speed and tests your idea without investing too much into something that might not work.


    Ideally, management will be learnt on the way and shouldn't be too much of the focus when starting up a business. You need to focus on getting your product out to the market asap and prove your business model works. From this point, everything else will follow.


    I hope this book helps you out and wish you all the best of luck! Let me know if you need any other advise.
u/McCourt · 2 pointsr/DnD

"The Drunkards Walk: how randomness rules our lives" by Leonard Mlodinow : http://www.amazon.ca/The-Drunkards-Walk-Randomness-Rules/dp/0375424040 ... Stephen Hawking calls the book "a wonderfully readable guide to how the laws of randomness affect our lives."

Are you going to argue AGAINST Stephen Hawking? Me neither...

From the Amazon review:

"In this irreverent and illuminating book, acclaimed writer and scientist Leonard Mlodinow shows us how randomness, change, and probability reveal a tremendous amount about our daily lives, and how we misunderstand the significance of everything from a casual conversation to a major financial setback. As a result, successes and failures in life are often attributed to clear and obvious cases, when in actuality they are more profoundly influenced by chance.

The rise and fall of your favorite movie star of the most reviled CEO--in fact, of all our destinies--reflects as much as planning and innate abilities. Even the legendary Roger Maris, who beat Babe Ruth's single-season home run record, was in all likelihood not great but just lucky. And it might be shocking to realize that you are twice as likely to be killed in a car accident on your way to buying a lottery ticket than you are to win the lottery.

How could it have happened that a wine was given five out of five stars, the highest rating, in one journal and in another it was called the worst wine of the decade? Mlodinow vividly demonstrates how wine ratings, school grades, political polls, and many other things in daily life are less reliable than we believe. By showing us the true nature of change and revealing the psychological illusions that cause us to misjudge the world around us, Mlodinow gives fresh insight into what is really meaningful and how we can make decisions based on a deeper truth. From the classroom to the courtroom, from financial markets to supermarkets, from the doctor's office to the Oval Office, Mlodinow's insights will intrigue, awe, and inspire.

Offering readers not only a tour of randomness, chance, and probability but also a new way of looking at the world, this original, unexpected journey reminds us that much in our lives is about as predictable as the steps of a stumbling man fresh from a night at the bar."

u/chiggynugitz · 7 pointsr/beyondthebump

The book cribsheets by Emily Ostler goes into the data on a lot of parenting issues including breastfeeding. A lot of the benefits they claim that breastfeeding gives are actually not backed by good studies. It helped me see that the whole breast is best is over exaggerated and that fed is what really is best.

Cribsheet: A Data-Driven Guide to Better, More Relaxed Parenting, from Birth to Preschool https://www.amazon.com/dp/0525559256/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_q72KDbZ3HJWD0

u/bandofgypsies · 4 pointsr/worldnews

You're not wrong. The timeframes vary based on what societal dimension you're discussing at a given point, but many aspects of global society are significantly better today than in the recent and distant past. Education levels, equality, access to food, mortality rates, life expectancies, literacy, and so on.

I'd you're not familiar with it, I'd recommend the book Factfulness. Pretty good book on this topic of perspective vs reality.

(Edit - fixed link)

u/259tim · 2 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

This stuff is not easy, I'm not expecting to change your way of thinking with this one comment.
But maybe it could help you with exploring a different angle and realising that not all things are bad and that there's also a lot of good in the world.

I'd say:

Yes there is a lot of dumb and awful things in the world, but it is easier to focus on the bad than the good, there's also many amazing advancements humans are making every day by working at it diligently:

Worldwide poverty is lower than it has ever been in history and keeps dropping.

People are finding cures for awful diseases all the time.

Nations are becoming more and more developed, child deaths and births are dropping, there's no endless growth happening, it's all dropping off to a stable level.

Companies have always done shady shit, but we are getting better at calling them out and improving people's lives.

More people have the right to live happily, to marry who they love.

There's no widespread slavery anymore, there's not even a real war between nation states, just some terrorist dudes in a desert somewhere, and yes that is in the news all the time but compared to even the balkan wars in the 90s there's nowhere near as much suffering in today's world.

For every "bought" artist there's lots of people and groups making their own music and having success with it, it's easy to look at most listened to lists on youtube or spotify and dismiss all of those artists but take a look at smaller artists, browse bandcamp or something to find people that do what they love and support them with it.

There's a great book that puts a lot of these fallacies of thinking the world is getting worse to the test but I forgot the name of it, you'll have to take my word until I can find it again.

Edit: found it, check it out for another perspective on things if you wish:

link

u/codedface · 2 pointsr/exjw

Thanks for sharing. Great story. I recently read a great book on the subject on facts of modern time that I highly recommend to this group called
Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Th... https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250107814/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_i_ouisDbFCXZSAN

u/MoreAccurate · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

I mostly have a lot of books that helped me, but here are the most influential ones that I've read recently:

u/DashingLeech · 2 pointsr/technology

See, this to me is the wrong way to think about business.

RIM was leader in enterprise systems until late last year and is still second. They have huge market share. They also hold niche markets like secure smart phones and tablets. From a business perspective, they are in an enviable position.

The problem isn't with their position; it is with their trend. If they had been on an upward trend to the position they are currently in, everyone would be screaming about how great they are. In business it is position that matters more than trend. A trend can change, and effort can be put in to change the trend if you understand it. Many companies have done this. Apple is a prime example of a failed company that turned it around and became a market leader. Twelve years ago everyone thought of Apple the way people think of RIM today.

RIM is in a good position right now, and if they make the right moves they can reverse that trend. iPhones/iPads are fine, but they aren't perfect. They became fashionable and trendy and possibly overhyped. Steve Jobs was part of that trendiness. With him gone, and iPhone losing its "newness", it seems to me the time is ripe to move to change those trends.

I don't know what the right moves are. The question is whether RIM can figure it out, or gamble correctly, to change those trends. They definitely have the makings for it with top notch hardware and OS software, key differentiators and niches, and potential (such as Android apps working on PlayBook and soon phones).

The over-reliance of investors (and "trendy" consumers) on trends is fairly well documented. (My favorite book on the subject right now is The Drunkards Walk, though a A Random Walk Down Wall Street is probably the better known classic.) It's what causes bubbles on the upswing, and undervalued stocks on the downswing. It's also why investors who ignore those trends and invest via risk management principles tend to do much better than trend followers.

I'm keeping an eye on RIM to see what they do. I certainly won't write them off yet.

u/ProctoKopf · 1 pointr/The_Mueller

I know it's easy to feel poorly about the world, and our own lives, but the reality is quite positive. I recommend the book Factfulness. The times we live in are actually quite spectacular...and they're getting better.

https://www.amazon.com/Factfulness-Reasons-World-Things-Better/dp/1250107814/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1538738715&sr=8-2&keywords=factfulness&dpID=51tvugRSHKL&preST=_SY344_BO1,204,203,200_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

u/Zephryl · 3 pointsr/Futurology

You won't find a great lay book about all of psychology, but there are many good books in specific areas. For instance, Thinking, Fast and Slow is a wonderful book by Nobel prize-winning cognitive psychologist Daniel Kahneman. The Person and the Situation is a classic and lay-accessible primer on social psychology. And anything by Oliver Sacks is great for neuropsych / neurology.

*edit to fix formatting

u/xbhaskarx · 1 pointr/MLS

Seems like a lot of effort to show something that should be completely obvious to anyone with half a brain...

>Wikipedia cites this famous logical illusion as the best illustration of what cognitive scientists call "The Conjunction Fallacy."

> Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations.

> Which is more probable?

> Linda is a bank teller.
> Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.

This is from Thinking, Fast and Slow

u/rhythmtastic · 3 pointsr/nonmonogamy

The answer to the first question is yes. I/we are non-monogomous which means I have had many experiences with women other than my wife. Sometimes these experiences are with my wife in the room with us getting in on the fun. ;)

As to the second part of your statement about women being more irrational than men. I don't know how to put this any more plainly than to just say that you are stereotyping. What you said is the definition of stereotyping. I appreciate that you're trying to look out for me but you probably want to get over that idea if you want to be with women who are into non-monogamy. Human beings are irrational all the time regardless of gender. If you're noticing irrationality in women more than you are noticing it in men then it's likely a result of your lack of self awareness. Read up on irrationality and you'll see what I mean. We're meat computers driving a hairless ape-robot that evolved through a haphazard and inefficient process. None of us are capable of being truly rational. That said Juno is a pretty thoughtful person and it's clear to me what her motivations are.

here's a couple of great books on human irrationality to get you started if you're interested in wiping out your biased viewpoint:

Start with You are not so smart

Then move on to Thinking fast and slow

u/Private_Mandella · 3 pointsr/exchristian

Thinking Fast and Slow. Starting reading it and I love it. Written by a Nobel Prize winner, he actually includes the papers in the back that much of the book is based on. He goes over the cognitive biases of humans. Definitely worth a look.

u/Liebo · 2 pointsr/books

I have always found Malcolm Gladwell's books to be immensely entertaining. He can be a bit repetitive in pounding his major theses home and I wouldn't advocate for treating any of his theories as the gospel but he is a gifted storyteller and many of his stories regard psychological research.

The Psychopath Test Fascinating look at psychopaths by one of my favorite journalists. Well researched as has some scientific depth but is certainly geared towards the layman.

The Invisible Gorilla Very readable tour through some of our cognitive flaws and blind spots by two psychologists.

Thinking, Fast and Slow Very comprehensive account of how people make decisions by the father of behavioral economics.

u/BearlyBreathing · 1 pointr/worldnews

Like I said, weird psychology. I know it sounds crazy, but it happens, and, actually, people are capable of even more counterintuitive behavior than that.

If you're interested, I highly recommend this book. The human brain is not really wired to be all that rational or consistent. As long as things are coherent at a given moment in time, the brain is just fine with that.

This is why stuff like the big lie work.

u/rfurman · 12 pointsr/math

First, consistently solving A1 and B1 is a great start! Puts you well above the typical. Be sure to pay attention to how you write it up: Putnam graders are very strict and solutions most often get 0, 1, 9, or 10 points. Be also aware of what your goals are and don’t get anxious, you’re not looking to solve everything, so it's good to fully solve one problem before moving on. Putnam problems in particular often have short clean solutions that are really satisfying to find.

You also can't beat just working through problems. Putnam 1985-2000 by Vakil, Kedlaya, Poonen is fantastic as it gives many ways of solving or approaching each of the problems. It also gives just the right level of hints. This way you can learn both by working through the problem and by seeing the different perspectives. For example, with a single problem there may be a long brute-force solution, a quick but hard to discover solution, and a quick solution based on advanced math (you can use most things that come up in an undergrad math curriculum, even elliptic curves).

The Art and Craft of Problem Solving is a great read for general strategies and practice, and will remain relevant throughout any later work.

Mathematical Olympiad Challenges by Andreescu and Gelca shows off a few major problem solving styles and has a great selection of problems. I studied it in high school and it ended up being very important for me getting Putnam Fellow.

Earlier I had also studied Problem-Solving Strategies but that may be too big and not as focused on Putnam type of problems

u/lakai42 · 20 pointsr/AskReddit

You have to practice. Communication is a subconscious skill. You can't consciously plan your way through an entire conversation because there isn't enough time. It's possible to think of a few things that are good conversation starters, but that's about it.

In order to train any subconscious skill, you have to practice. When you practice your brain starts by trying to make the neural connections necessary to create the movement you want. At first the brain uses a lot of neurons. After more practice the brain finds more efficient ways of creating the movement and uses less neurons. That's how musicians look like they can effortlessly play an instrument the more they practice.

The biggest mistake people make about communication is that they don't approach learning it like they would approach learning a new sport or musical instrument. That's why nerds who like to be analytical about everything suck at communicating, because you have to learn communication by practice; the same way you learn a sport, which is another thing nerds suck at. You can't ride a bike by thinking every time before you move the pedals or handles. You can't make your way through a conversation that way either for the same reason - there's no time.

Practice keeping eye contact and saying what's on your mind without any hesitation. You'll find that after a few conversations you'll be able to do this more easily because your brain has gotten used to the skills. A good rule of thumb is to be yourself, but if you happen to be an asshole, you'll have to change.

If you can't find the courage to talk to random people right away, then start small. Talk to people you've been avoiding, like neighbors, coworkers, or classmates. Come up with a few prepared conversations and see what happens. If things don't go too well, know that you won't be that nervous and awkward during the next talk.

The neuroscience in this comment comes from The Brain That Changes Itself by Norman Doidge, and Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

u/whys_wise · 5 pointsr/userexperience

I've talked with more than 100 companies (startups, dev/design shops, and enterprise cos) about how they do user research/testing (even started working on a startup related to it). There are 2 types of companies:

  • Those with someone mostly dedicated to doing testing and user research (usually a startup founder)
  • Those who think its too much of a hassle, which is the vast majority of those I spoke to
    The companies who do it best right now have week long sprints where the last couple of days (or early days the following week) are dedicated to testing with users. Jake Knapp at Google Ventures wrote an awesome how-to (http://www.amazon.com/Sprint-Solve-Problems-Test-Ideas/dp/150112174X).
    Basically the summary of my research is this: either dedicate a day or two exclusively to talking to users, or its not going to be a part of the process.
u/Wolander · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

I agree with you 100%, because soft skills or "non-cognitive skills" are often more indicative of future success rather than intelligence. See Walter Mischel's research. He is most famous for the Marsmellow Test:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Marshmallow-Test-Mastering-Self-Control/dp/1469249081

Also, I highly recommend:http://www.amazon.com/How-Children-Succeed-Curiosity-Character/dp/0544104404

I am glad your wife could help you despite your upbringing.

u/Bewtstraps · 4 pointsr/Entrepreneur

Steve Blank's The Startup Owner's Manual is pretty darn good in my opinion.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Startup-Owners-Manual-Step-By-Step/dp/0984999302

Soon though I hope you'll be able to use our product at http://bootstra.ps

If you want to sign up to get a notification when we go live we would love to hear how your experience is trying to make this happen. Our primary goal is to try to help lower the barriers to entry for others into entrepreneurship.

u/mhornberger · 6 pointsr/DebateReligion

>If you're programmed to accept an idea, you don't have any objective way of telling whether it's true

I don't think it's that black and white. Consider System 1 vs System 2 thinking, in the book Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. Our intuition can predispose us to certain types of thinking, and we can still be capable to rationally examining these beliefs. Education on our susceptibility to cognitive biases, and education on statistical thinking, can improve our ability to compensate for the weaknesses in our intuition and force our minds to shift to more rigorous decision making.

On a broader level, evolution predisposes us to racism and tribalism. But our capacity for abstract thought and language enables us to improve, to present and entertain arguments and shift beyond a merely instinct-driven existence. Which is why humans are capable of moral improvement, yet chimps and dolphins remain the same. We have culture and philosophy and the capacity for moral progress.

>once you accept that one or more ideas were implanted in you, it's not clear to me how you would tell which subsequent ideas you arrived at based on evidence and which ideas you are programmed to accept

Critical thinking, examine your beliefs and the arguments by which you can support your beliefs. That's the entire purpose of Socratic dialectic, making people explicate arguments so they are forced to more closely examine what they believe and why. We aren't "programmed" in a fatalistic, deterministic sense, rather we have propensities and biases. We still have the capacity for improvement, the capacity to change our minds. As you must recognize at some level, otherwise you wouldn't be trying to persuade anyone of anything.

u/honeybadger-IAN · 1 pointr/explainlikeimfive

Daniel Kahneman wrote an excellent book called Thinking, Fast and Slow, which deals with this very issue.

Kahneman purports that the human mind operates according to two distinct systems. One is fast: instinctive, automatic, habitual, subconscious. The other is slow: deliberate, takes effort, concentrated. Some things we do instinctively or subconsciously because that is what it means to be a living human: breathing, for example. Some things we do instinctively because we have done them so many times that concentrated effort, though possible, is deemed unnecessary by our minds. When our minds determines that concentrated effort is not required, we begin to operate without thinking. This is the difference between driving home, which you've done many times, and driving to an unfamiliar destination.

These are the basics of what Kahneman explains far more brilliantly in his book, which I highly recommend.

Please correct any contextual errors :)

u/ticktocktoe · 3 pointsr/bikecommuting

Getting a bit off topic here - but despite the many things that are wrong with the US, its still a pretty great place to live - far from a dystopia. Highly recommend the book Factfulness, which although is really about the world as a whole - it can certainly be scaled to ones views of the US.

u/joejance · 1 pointr/snowboarding

I recently read The Rise of Superman: Decoding the Science of Ultimate Human Performance, which covers a lot of the neuroscience around this type of flow state. It also has a number of awesome stories about 'extreme' athletes including a number of names you will probably recognize.

Edit: Also you might finding Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow interesting. It talks about how flow state happens in what is often referred to as System 1, which is your intuitive, 'non-thinking' state.

I highly recommend both books.

Edit 2: Here is the Wikipedia article about Dual process theory. The idea is that flow mostly happens in process or system 1, which is stuff you are good at. In snowboarding speak, if you already have a ton of experience making turns and handling steep terrain then you may head into flow state when you head down a chute, when you 'quit thinking and start doing'.

u/redct · 2 pointsr/RedditDayOf

Hey, cool, this is what I study (shoutout to the social and decision sciences at Carnegie Mellon). Kahneman and Tversky were insanely prolific researchers (and Kahneman still is to an extent) and their findings practically invented the fields of behavioral economics and decision science. Crazy cool people.

For a good read and an "outsider's" introduction, I'd recommend Thinking Fast and Slow by Kahneman. If you're more comfortable reading academic texts, their papers are pretty widely available too.

u/TheMaskBeckons · 3 pointsr/BehavioralEconomics

If you're just starting to dive into it, I think it'd be best to read a book that walks you through the main themes and concepts, or listen to podcasts such as EconTalk (you'd have to look for the interviews of behavioral economists). I think it's always good to have an introduction before going into the weeds. I agree with SbShula, Thinking Fast & Slow and Misbehaving are great for starting off.

In any case, here are some of the key papers. I used behavioralEconomics.com's "Introduction to Behavioral Economics" as an outline, and found links to the main papers (and books) that are freely available so you can download them. Of course, I recommend reading the website before starting to read the hundreds (thousands?) of pages in papers.

Prospect Theory

Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk - Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky

Bounded Rationality

A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice - Herbert A. Simon (On the bounds of rationality)

Maps of Bounded Rationality - Daniel Kahneman

Mental Accounting Matters - Richard H. Thaler

Nudge - Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (Technically not a paper, but papers tend to focus on specific examples intead of the general idea that people's decisions are affected by "nudges")

Dual System Theory

Thinking, Fast and Slow - Daniel Kahneman (Again, not a paper, but sums up a body of research in the same vein)

Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases - Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman

The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits - Finucane, Alhakami, Slovic, and Johnson

The Psychology of Preference - Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman

Status Quo Bias in Decision Making - William Samuelson and Richard Zeckhauser

Temporal Dimensions

Diversification bias: Explaining the discrepancy in variety seeking between combined and separated choices - Daniel Read and George Loewenstein

Hot-cold empathy gaps and medical decision-making - George Loewenstein

Exploring the causes of comparative optimism - James A. Shepperd, Patrick Carroll, Jodi Grace and Meredith Terry

Social Dimensions

Dishonesty in Everyday Life and Its Policy Implications - Nina Mazar and Dan Ariely

A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation - Ernst Fehr And Klaus Schmidt

Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity - Ernst Fehr and Simon Gächter

MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour through public policy - Dolan, Hallsworth, Halpern, King, and Vlaev

Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. - James March

Thanks for the opportunity to look into all this. I just added a bunch of these to my bucket list.

u/greatmoonzini · 227 pointsr/Showerthoughts

You’re not wrong. Even in developing countries it’s better than at any time in history. Check out the book Factfullness if you like to read. It’s pretty amazing.

u/tiglionabbit · 1 pointr/Music

You have discovered the explore/exploit dilemma, also known as the multi-armed bandit problem. Should you search for new things you on the chance you will like them, or continue to listen to the things you know you like?

I do the same thing with Spotify. I have a large list of "saved" music on there that I often come back to and shuffle when I need something familiar. But every so often I like to branch out and find something new, either with the weekly discover playlists, or by going to a song I like and playing the rest of that artist's songs or switching to radio mode so it will suggest more. With this method I gradually build up more songs for my list. Also every so often I remember a song I like and search for it, and then I can explore that artist's other songs. But the vast majority of the time I want the sure thing, so I go to my saved songs list and hit shuffle.

Btw, I learned about the multi-armed bandit problem from the book Algorithms to Live By.

u/Oliver_BM · 1 pointr/PublicPolicy

I can also strongly recommend Cairney.

If you're interested in how we make policy I recommend reading Eugene Bardach's Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving, which offers an intuitive analysis of policymaking that's beginner friendly.

If you want something more academic and detailed, I'd suggest picking up a secondhand copy of The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy.

u/KAL_WHSPhysics · 1 pointr/PhascinatingPhysics

This video has some great brain teasers that were quite revealing and informative! The manner in which these two distinct brain systems interact and shape our worldly perceptions is quite astounding. It goes to show that reaction time and immediate judgement are mere results of our brain doing its job. I wonder how harnessing these two systems for good (i.e. putting more focus on System 2 when making logical decisions) could benefit us all. That book the video mentions is of particular interest...

u/Kandoore · 2 pointsr/math

This is good, with respect to learning tips and tricks for competitions, I think you're best off getting a book.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Craft-Problem-Solving/dp/0471789011

Is good

u/HappyAssassin · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

The mind loves cognitive ease. Thinking requires energy from the body -- your heart rate increases, pupils dilate, etc.

Psychologist Daniel Kahneman covers this in depth in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow

http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555

u/Redrot · 3 pointsr/math

Read How Not to be Wrong a bit ago and am currently reading Thinking Fast and Slow. Both lighter reads, Thinking Fast and Slow is a bit thicker, but both cover ways of using basic logic, quantitative reasoning, and probability.

Thinking Fast and Slow does an incredible job of explaining how the mind can work both for and against you without getting too technical, definitely recommend that. How Not to be Wrong is a bit lighter.

edit: lol both of the recommendations have already showed up in the thread

u/elbekay · 2 pointsr/tableau

I personally like Learning Tableau as a great primer and refresher on understanding how Tableau works: http://www.amazon.com/Learning-Tableau-Visualization-Business-Intelligence/dp/1784391166 -- follow along with the book where you can.

If you haven't already walk through the videos here: http://www.tableau.com/learn/training -- and by walk-through I mean use Tableau and follow along.

Visualisation in general I need to do more reading but I like:
Stephen Few : Show me the Numbers http://www.amazon.com/Show-Me-Numbers-Designing-Enlighten/dp/0970601972
Accidental Analyst: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1477432264/

There's a few more books recommended here: http://www.tableau.com/about/blog/2013/7/list-books-about-data-visualisation-24182

edit: and for blogs I currently like http://flowingdata.com/

u/veRGe1421 · 23 pointsr/GlobalOffensive

> I have a theory that your brain tries to "automate" processes and to do them subconsciously when it feels confident enough about it.

You should read the book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman - excellent read that I would highly recommend. I think you'd find the book interesting, and it discusses this topic in depth.

u/spyder4 · 1 pointr/IAmA

Have you read this book??

I am reading it at the moment, and it is a fantastic read, with a lot of great real life examples. Someone such as yourself is probably at, or above, this level, but I recommend it for others who are interested in the topic!

u/-t-o-n-y- · 2 pointsr/userexperience

If she's interacting with a lot of users I would suggest reading Practical Empathy. Observing the User Experience is another great resource for learning about user research. User experience is all about people so it's always a good idea to read up on human behavior, psychology, cognition, perception, learning and memory etc. e.g. books like Hooked, Bottlenecks, Design for the mind, Designing with the mind in mind, 100 things every designer needs to know about people, 100 more things every designer needs to know about people, Thinking fast and slow, Predictably Irrational and I would also recommend Articulating design decisions and Friction.

u/kajEbrA3 · 3 pointsr/MGTOW

I'm reading The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone by dr. dan ariely .

Basically everybody lies and rationalizes it one way or another.

There is another book Principles: Life and Work by Ray Dio that covers hiring the right people for the job. Basically the best thing you can do is interview at least 3 professionals for the job and choose the one that gives you the most information and the best course of action.

Simply because of the fact that we are all biased one way or another, there will always be knowledge gaps. So, it's important to find the right person and ask the right questions.

u/switchcase · 1 pointr/AskReddit

> The law of large numbers has literally no implications here.

Then you don't understand it, because it has everything to do with gambling. It's even right there in the Wikipedia article on the Law of Large Numbers:

> For example, while a casino may lose money in a single spin of the roulette wheel, its earnings will tend towards a predictable percentage over a large number of spins. Any winning streak by a player will eventually be overcome by the parameters of the game.

So obviously each spin is independent of the last spin's result, however, when you average out the results (which does include past results, that's where your mistake is), you get a percentage carefully calculated to give a house edge.

Now, what this statistics relies on is that all the money is being gambled with. So this winner, if he's clever, can bank most of the money and only gamble with a small subset of it or, even better, quit entirely.

That's why it makes sense for the casino to be giving him free stuff. The more of it he gambles with, the more likely the casino is to win it back.

If you're still not understanding, I recommend you pick up a book on statistics. It's not very intuitive stuff. The Drunkard's Walk is a nice non-technical book that explores just how bad human brains are at dealing with probabilities; it's one of my favourites.

u/mathent · 2 pointsr/atheism

Consciousness is...tricky. From what I've studied, all we are really confident in saying about it now is that it's entirely dependent on the brain. If you change the brain, it directly effects consciousness. How consciousness, a non-physical entity, can arise from exclusively physical attributes is still under discussion. What Dennett is offering in the video is a re-characterization of the entire discussion. People seem to be looking for a "real" magic trick to explain consciousness. Dennett is making the case that just as there really is no "real" magic, there's only illusions to make you believe there's magic, that there's no "real" magic to consciousness. It's an illusion, in a non-deceptive sense. Consciousness is what happens when the extremely complex systems in your brain interact in the way they do.

If you want some books to read about the mind and brain, check out Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (NY Times Bestseller List 2011) and Connectome by Sebastian Seung. Kaheman will change the way you think about the way you think. He outlines the to "systems" that operated the way you think, and then outlines the biases he's discovered that causes the way you think to be wrong. Connectome outlines the processes of the brain and how the brain is wired to give a somewhat speculative look into Connectome science (mapping all the neurons in the brain and their connections to eachother) and makes claims that once we do this we will better understand the brain and consciousness because the physical structure of the brain is hypothesized to matter a great deal.

As a moderately related point to consciousness, you may want to ask that if consciousness is dependent on the brain, what does that mean for free-will. You should check out Free Will by Sam Harris. It's extremly short--more of an essay. Then look at what Dennett says about free-will. They very strongly disagree, and Sam has said that he hopes to sit down with Dennett and discuss it. When that happens it will be really interesting, and worth having at least a small background on the issue.

u/nura2011 · 1 pointr/cscareerquestions

Here are a couple of suggestions:

  • Take up competitive programming. Go to http://uva.onlinejudge.org/ and do the problems from there (they have a few book suggestions as well). Aim to participate one day in ACM-ICPC or Google CodeJam.

  • Go deeper into Mathematical areas relevant to programming such as graph theory, number theory, combinatorics, etc. Rudiments of most of these can be picked up at your level. Go through a book like The Art and Craft of Problem Solving

  • Explore functional programming languages (read this: Advanced Programming Languages ) to improve your programming range.

    I am not an especially good problem solver, but I have done fairly OK financially. These are suggestions that I wish someone had given me when I was your age - it would have made my career slightly more fun!
u/DancingEngie · 2 pointsr/books

Thinking Fast and Slow - Daniel Kahneman

9/10

Physiology

A beautiful, sightful summery of Kahneman's research about the way we think, which led to him and his partner, Amos, to win a Nobel Prize in economics in 2002.

Amazon

u/gfody · 11 pointsr/programming

The best advice I've found about interviewing and hiring was in Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman and it's not specific to engineering/programming at all. Basically decide on what aspects you will measure up front and calibrate your interviewers on what good/bad/great looks like. Then have your interviewers meet and grade each candidate on each aspect independently without sharing notes until it's all over. Tally up the scores and hire the winner.

If you do that then you'll have more successful hires than if you don't. Virtually everything else programmers tend to do while interviewing is either a waste of time or hurting your success rate.

The other big problem with technical interviews is the emphasis on making perfect hires or screening bad engineers. It's simply way too complicated to do reliably and you end up wasting a lot of time interviewing and going without the help you desperately need. It's better to put more emphasis on actually making the hires you need, and if they struggle with the engineering work then give them feedback and help them improve, if they can't improve then fire them and hire someone else.

u/Palmsiepoo · 3 pointsr/AskSocialScience

I think you're going to have to find a balance between accuracy and ease. most academic books are dense because 50 years of theoretical work went into understanding a very minute phenomenon. For example, there are books (Locke & Latham, 1990) written on just goal setting and how important it is to set a difficult goal. On the other hand, you have books written by folks like Malcolm Gladwell, while easy to read, are often incorrect because they omit many important nuances in academic literature.

Your best bet is to find books written by academics but made for laymen, two I recommend are:

You are not so smart

Thinking fast and slow

u/CactusSmackedus · 2 pointsr/OkCupid

Depends on the cost and how many times I get to make the decision.

For a taco, I'll be happy to search to find one of the better taco places that is convenient to go to.

If I buy an expensive camera, I'm going to find the best camera in my price/feature range.

But for dating, I don't see the point to exhaustively searching the population to find an optimal match.

For starters, you'd need a very large sample of the population to identify what the best match is, and once you've passed on a person (sampled and moved on) you're not really able to go back and say "now I'm ready for a second date". Alternatively, you could spend ages browsing and filtering profiles, but that's even less effective since you're going to be dating a person, not a profile.

For dating the appropriate strategy is to "Look then leap" -- spend a period examining the options (learning the distribution), then "leap" for the next best/sufficient/outstanding candidate.

^* [
^Algorithms ^to ^Live ^By*](https://www.amazon.com/Algorithms-Live-Computer-Science-Decisions/dp/1250118360/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1511970494&sr=8-1&keywords=algorithms+to+live+by)

u/mythealias · 1 pointr/Frugal

Knowing the trick is definitely a big step forward but I wonder if it is all that easy.

Our mind is much easier to fool than we imagine.
I recommend reading Thinking Fast and Slow (wiki). It is a slow read but highlights how easily our judgements can lead us astray.

u/PantherHeel93 · 2 pointsr/Android

No, I'm saying they're ignorant in the word's truest sense. As in, if they knew better, they would know that replaceable batteries are a huge pro (battery will never be an issue) with a miniscule con (phone is not as rigid).

Unfortunately, people make decisions primarily based on emotion, so what looks slightly better and feels slightly more solid wins when it's competing with something that looks less good but functions significantly better.

u/UMich22 · 5 pointsr/investing

Check out Thinking, Fast and Slow by the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman. It may not be what you're looking for since the investing/markets aspect is not the entire focus of the book. However, I think it would definitely be worth your time.

u/common_currency · 13 pointsr/neuroscience

Algoriths to Live By by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths. Written for the lay person so very accessible, by a brilliant cognitive scientist at Princeton (though at Berkeley when the book was written).

Vision by David Marr. One of the first and most important books that anyone interested in cognition and computation will ever read. Absolute must if you want to understand why the field began looking at the mind more or less like a computer.

u/humble_braggart · 1 pointr/dataisbeautiful

Stephen Few has some pretty decent, up-to-date books that make healthy reference to the past half-century's well-known sources such as Tufte, Bertin and others. It uses well-made examples produced with fairly modern tools.

I have enjoyed Show Me the Numbers and Now You See It and would say they are worth the read.

u/GLIDRPilotJim · 11 pointsr/Entrepreneur

you don't need a business school to experience the core of this class ...

Here's a link to Steve Blank's HBR article on The Lean Startup. Also a series of free lectures that Steve Blank put up on  Udacity, called "How to Build a Startup" a course that over 500,000 people have viewed.    These lectures are supported by a book that Steve Blank wrote with Bob Dorf called The Startup Owners Manual, as well as a best selling business book by Alexander Osterwalder called  Business Model Generation. You may also want to see Alexander's other book, Value Proposition Design for more input/insight.

u/christianonce · 1 pointr/StreetEpistemology

I think we may agree then. I agree that there is a ton of unrecognized bias and it's important to help people understand their own biases and how they affect their decisions.

Have you read the book Thinking Fast and Slow? I enjoyed it a lot.

u/kinderdemon · 40 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

It totally is: it applies through various principles, like priming or conditioning, that psychologists study.

For instance, an experiment was done in England. An office kitchen served as the site: the kitchen had a small donation box for leaving money if you used the kitchen supplies: milk, sugar, etc. Near the donation box there was a poster that changed weekly.

Sometimes it was images of nature and sometimes it was an image of a human face, only showing the eyes.

On weeks with the eye posters the donations jumped by a huge margin, nature days had level donations. The eye posters primed people into thinking they were being watched.

Another study tested altruism, both the experimental and control groups were lead into a classroom and had to take a multiple choice test. At some point during the test, the "teaching assistant" running the test would drop a big packet of pencils, scattering them across the classroom. The altruism test measured altruism by comparing how many pencils the test subjects would pick up to help the "teaching assistant", the multiple choice test itself was a red herring.

The only difference between the control and the experimental groups, was a screen saver on a computer sitting in the back of the classroom. The control screen saver was abstract patterns, while the experimental screen saver was floating dollar bills.

Surprisingly, even that small factor significantly decreased altruism: people were less likely to pick up pencils to help someone else when primed to think about money.

or another totally crazy one: this one was done on college students, and again asked them to take a test. The control test was very generic, while the experimental was all about old age, growing old and aging. Before and after the students took the test, their walking speed was measured and the students who took the aging exam dramatically slowed down walking afterwards: they were primed to act as thought they were old (!).

All of the above examples come from a very accessible book I highly recommend: Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555

u/imVINCE · 2 pointsr/MachineLearning

I read a lot of these as a neurophysiologist on my way to transitioning into an ML career! My favorites (which aren’t already listed by others here) are Algorithms to Live By by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths and How to Make a Mind by Ray Kurzweil. While it’s a bit tangential, I also loved The Smarter Screen by Jonah Lehrer and Shlomo Benartzi, which deals with human-computer interaction.

u/nikoma · 4 pointsr/math

Hi, here I will post some great books, some free (by Santos), some not (others).

Junior problem seminar: Santos

Number Theory for Mathematical contests: Santos

The Art and Craft of Problem solving: Zeitz

Problem-Solving Strategies: Engel

Mathematical Olympiad Treasures: Andreescu, Enescu

Mathematical Olympiad challenges: Andreescu, Gelca

Problems from the book: Andreescu

Those are more or less the "general" books, they always contain the main topics of mathematical olympiads, they usually aren't focused on just one topic, for one-topic books see here: http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=319&t=405377

u/Caplooey · 3 pointsr/ADHD

for learning/cognitive related i recommend checking out:
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman,

Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise by Anders Ericsson

and the various Cal Newport books (he also has a blog),

Thomas Frank from College Info Geek is also cool.

i personally prefer actionable coaching over talk therapy as it helps me get shit done rather than sit around and introspect which i already do enough of.

there is a /r/Stoicism

The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up: The Japanese Art of Decluttering and Organizing by Marie Kondo, check it out

Brene Brown for self compassion, talks on Youtube, you could check out.

The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life by Mark Manson is another good one.



u/molotovmimi · 3 pointsr/Fencesitter

They're two different books of hers that she talked about in a podcast I love.

Cribsheet is about raising a healthy human puppy and Expecting Better is about the actual pregnancy itself and all the conventional wisdom that doesn't seem to be backed up by any hard data.

u/username10983 · 2 pointsr/PersonalFinanceCanada

William Bernstein Four Pillars of Investing

Burton Malkiel Random Walk down wall street

I've thought some of the books by Rick Ferri (power of passive investing), Larry Swedroe, and John Bogle (common sense on investing) were good. I also recommend a book The Big Investment Lie by Michael Edesess.

I also enjoyed some books on money/behaviour:

https://www.amazon.com/Smart-People-Money-Mistakes-Correct/dp/1439163367

https://www.amazon.com/Your-Money-Brain-Science-Neuroeconomics/dp/0743276698/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1487679247&sr=1-1&keywords=zweig+money+brain

https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1487679263&sr=1-1&keywords=thinking+fast+and+slow

u/trobrock · 1 pointr/Entrepreneur

Upwork is a great place to start to sell your CAD skills as a freelancer, either to get cash flow to support your future plans or to be your primary source of income.

As far as resources goes on the how to start something. I found "The Startup Owner's Manual" (https://www.amazon.com/Startup-Step-Step-Building-Company/dp/0984999302/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1518503563&sr=8-2&keywords=startup+handbook) and "Business Model Generation" (https://www.amazon.com/Business-Model-Generation-Visionaries-Challengers/dp/0470876417) both have very boring titles, but great content and guided both myself and my co-founder down the road of finding our business idea and launching it. We are now a $5M a year business.

u/pastanomics · 1 pointr/books

Free your tastes from the cage of other people's opinions and pretensions. Try young adult fiction like Harry Potter and trashy romance novels. Try anything by E.L. Doctorow. Or try some nonfiction. Anything by Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Pinker...

http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1394322770&sr=1-12&keywords=blink
http://www.amazon.com/Spark-Revolutionary-Science-Exercise-Brain/dp/0316113514/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1394322814&sr=1-1&keywords=spark

u/doedskalle · 3 pointsr/coolguides

For anyone who is interested in learning more about this, I recommend the book Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman, who won the Swedish national banks prize in economics in memory of Alfred Nobel.

u/MetaCanvas · 5 pointsr/Entrepreneur

Besides Lean startup, I would go for:

Business Model Generation - to layout your ideas first and have a feeling of your to be business model (on their site you can get a sneak peek for free https://strategyzer.com/books/business-model-generation)

The startup owner's manual, from Steve Blank (https://www.amazon.com/Startup-Step-Step-Building-Company/dp/0984999302)

Disciplined Entrepreneurship: (https://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Entrepreneurship-Steps-Successful-Startup/dp/1118692284)


good luck

u/BronaldMcDonald · 2 pointsr/gaybros

Just started reading "Thinking Fast and Slow" - Kahneman - My brain is beginning to realize exactly how much of a mind-f*** this is about to be. :) No I'm not reading this because it's a Winner of anything or on any list, but because I love these kind of sociological trips, or books that just speak to you on the shelf about "the human condition" , otherwise I won't read it.

http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555

u/revgizmo · 56 pointsr/datascience

I can’t recommend highly enough 3 books on good visualizations in business (and everywhere else)

  1. Storytelling with Data: A Data Visualization Guide for Business Professionals buy this, use this

  2. The Wall Street Journal Guide to Information Graphics: The Dos and Don'ts of Presenting Data, Facts, and Figures

  3. Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten (the gold-standard usable textbook)

    Report format for abstract/methods/etc vs PowerPoint for salespeople varies dramatically from company to company, so I don’t have any good recommendations there. But in the “a picture is worth a thousand words” world, visualizations really matter.
u/renewalnotice · 65 pointsr/todayilearned

"Fairness" isn't a universal trait, it depends a lot on culture and this is a great example of it. They actually go further into this specific example in the book Sway, which is pretty cool and a super fast read.

u/AmishHomicide · 1 pointr/AskReddit

The Drunkard's Walk is a great one. Granted you have to enjoy statistics and discussions on probability and randomness.

u/hillsonghoods · 3 pointsr/askphilosophy

From a psychological perspective, there are a whole set of systematic biases in how we think (e.g., those catalogued in Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow). And the existence of visual illusions and so forth (e.g., The Dress) tends to suggest that our perceptual faculties are designed for efficiency rather than accuracy - they wouldn't fool us if we saw the world entirely accurately. It's clearly accurate to say that our minds are not entirely reliable, and you don't need to be an evolutionist or a philosophical naturalist to believe this (there are traditions in Christianity that would argue R is low, too). Thus believing that the probability that R is low is not contingent on believing N&E.

However, there is a big stretch between saying that our minds are not reliable and saying that our scientific theories about evolution are not reliable. Plantinga here effectively paints scientific beliefs as being the same as any beliefs, yes? But there's reason to believe that scientific beliefs are more likely to be true than other beliefs.

Much of science tries to use quantitative measurement instruments (e.g., rulers) to reduce human bias, and technology (microscopes, for example) to go beyond human perceptual limits; similarly, scientists replicate studies in order to reduce the likelihood of the original findings being in error. The general aim of science is to increase the likelihood that our theories about the world are correct. And in general, observed experience suggests that science has utility in terms of our ability to base functional technology on scientific theories - a whole swathe of scientific principles underlie the ability for you to read this text on the computer screen you're looking at, for example. This suggests that while our current scientific beliefs might still be inaccurate, they're still more likely to be accurate than other beliefs.

And so if you are trying to argue about the probability of a scientific theory from a Bayesian perspective, as Plantinga is doing in the EAAN, you therefore need to take into account a markedly increased probability of scientific theories being correct compared to other beliefs.

If a Plantingan then asserts that P(R|N&E) is still very low, even with science's error correction processes, then someone who believes N&E could argue that P(R|AG) - where AG stands for the idea that the Abrahamic God created us - is even more improbable.

u/lungsoftheocean_ · 4 pointsr/videos

There is a fascinating book called "Sprint" that was written by two of the heads of Google Ventures that talks about this little robot and how they worked with this startup to come up with the cute "yaye" noise. It's a really cool read.

u/Amp4All · 8 pointsr/AcademicPsychology

There are a few titles I really love. I hope you like a few things on the list, if you have any questions let me know.

u/frobnic8 · 2 pointsr/SRSGaming

I have good news. They aren't. Well, that implies there are worse people which isn't awesome but that's not the real point, wait here...let me try again:

I've been reading Thinking Fast and Slow which talks about a theory of how our brains are structured in terms of their thinking processes.

In particular, it focuses on how that affects the way we decided how probably things are.

The good news is that while it works pretty darn well, this is probably partly a spot where (among other stuff) it's more a question of what's easy to recall or What You See Is All There Is and other ideas it presents.

Basically, because it's EASY to remember gamers being assholes we sort of automatically default to thinking it's also really common. This works pretty well, except when you get things like global news and unpleasant things being more memorable.

So it's probably SOMEWHAT that we just more easily remember all the jerks than the no-impact-non-jerks and then we default to seeing them everywhere. (Like when you get a new car and then see that model EVERYWHERE a bit.)

C. G. P. Gray has a nice bit on how pissy things spread faster, as well, which makes it worse.

TL;DR: I don't understand rhetorical or purely emotive questions which weren't expecting an actual response.

Also, I don't know but they really are and I'm sick of all the assholes, too. It wears me out. :/

u/1see2eat · 4 pointsr/weightroom

There is a great book called Thinking, Fast and Slow by Nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman that lays out a description of the brain as having two systems.

Sytem one is fast and automatic, operating below the level of what we think of as 'consciousness.' This is what sets your walking pace, or interprets the facial expressions of others, or plays out a movement from muscle-memory. The type of information it deals in is things like 'really hard effort.'

System Two is slow, deliberate, and reflective. It's what you use to do complicated math problems, or cue a part of a lift you aren't automatic at yet. (Spread the floor!) It's also how your brain reflects on what it's doing. (I shouldn't be rude to my Mom.)

You have a finite amount of bandwidth and these systems are trading it back and forth all the time. What's likely happening when you 'blank out' during a tough set of DL is that your system one is so over-taxed that it's recruiting all the power from your system 2. When you 'came to' your System 2 turned back on.

The same thing happens when you're hiking on a trail, see a bear, run away, and only then 'feel scared' and have a chance to reflect and realize what happened. System 1 became the boss for a while during a period of extreme stress. Same as with deadlifting.

tl;dr - You are going full instinct.

u/owen800q · 1 pointr/learnjava

You are wrong, the only books to learn Java foundation is core Java..
Of course, you should read some books about algorithms but not necessarily related to Java,
I recommend
Algorithms to live

Also I don't think the book effective Java should be read at the beginning.. because this book is used to tidying up your knowledge....
The value of studying a CS program is they are not only programming, the more they are doing problem solving by building large project rather than continually doing exercises in books.

The books you have read are quite enough, just start building something..

u/TychoCelchuuu · 3 pointsr/askphilosophy

I think it's important to acquire the skills to evaluate various positions before worrying about what random yahoos on the Internet think about those positions. The impulse to run an opinion poll before you fully understand the issues you're polling people about is pretty much just an impulse to acquire a dataset that you can feed into the sorts of heuristics that (for instance) Kahneman has made a career out of evaluating, and as Kahneman has pointed out, some of these heuristics are not particularly good at getting the right answer. Rather than relying on these heuristics, I think it's better to make up one's own mind on the basis of careful consideration untainted by what others have to say, apart from what they have to say by way of giving you more information about what the various positions are committed to.

u/garblz · 2 pointsr/IWantToLearn

Very Special Relativity a simple explanation of a complex phenomena

Thinking, Fast and Slow explains why we actually do live in a Matrix, and how, focusing on statistics instead what your guts tell you, to be able to break the veil of lies sometimes.

Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid how music is connected with art and mathematics? Exploration of symmetries, where none are expected to be found.

Watch everything Richard P. Feynman related on YouTube, start with interviews and the rest will probably follow.


I seriously think you should start with science. Getting a glimpse of how world works at the quantum levels can surprisingly enlighten someone on topics one thought were philosophical. E.g. recent Reddit post asked whether true randomness exists, and the answer to read almost pointless kilograms of philosophy made me cringe. Quantum physics has tonnes more to say, and it's actually verifiable by experiment. So I guess my advice is, before going the way of philosophical banter about the existence of coffee shop around the corner, you can just walk the few steps and take a look yourself. Hence, science as a first suggestion.

u/nfmangano · 5 pointsr/startups

Have you guys validated your idea? Do you have hundreds or thousands of people who already gave you feedback that they would put down money for your idea?

If you don't have validation yet, that is the number one thing I would say you need to get. If I had to recommend three books for you to hold close by your side, they would be:

u/omaolligain · 16 pointsr/AskSocialScience

Nudge by Thaler (Nobel Prize in Economics) & Sunstein
A book which is unquestionably about Economics and Public Policy

​

I haven't read it yet but it's on my list:
Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics also by Thaler

​

Thinking Fast & Slow by Kahneman (Nobel Prize in Economics)
Not strictly about economics but Kahneman essentially created the field of "Behavioral Economics" and the implications for his theories about decision making bias are extensive in Economics. In many ways Kahneman and Tverski's work is the foundation of Thaler's in Nudge.

​

Also:
Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely
If you can't tell I like the Behavioral Econmics books...

u/Hart_Attack · 2 pointsr/TagProIRL

I'm really bad at reading through just one book at a time, so I'm in the middle of a few at the moment.

-A Walk in the Woods by Bill Bryson

-Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (admittedly, it's been a while since I've picked this one up)

-Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov

I just finished a great book called The Other Wes Moore, also. It was super interesting.

I'm a big fan of non-fiction books, in case that wasn't immediately apparent by the list.

u/ethics · -1 pointsr/Conservative

My full quote was:
>why the media is using a picture of a 12 year old vs. a more recent picture.

No need to look, it's my own hypothesis as he looks 12 vs. what he looked like more recently. Pictures available side by side here.


Finally, effective propaganda, especially in press and television will never be anything grandiose where people will have a GOTCHA moment. It's always subtle, hinting, nudging and anchoring. If you are really interested in that topic an excellent (and recent) book I highly recommend.

u/Booty_Poppin · 2 pointsr/AskWomen

You should read the book Factfulness.

Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Than You Think https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250107814/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_jyCYBbN7HD2TP

Bill Gates bought it for all graduating college seniors in the US. It's basically about how we have antiquated views of the world, and things are generally much better than we think. In other words, it's worth it to make the world a better place because it's actually helping.

u/contrarianism · -1 pointsr/Conservative

> the reason for this is that only idiots respond to emotional stimulus

Wow you are ill-informed my friend. Trying reading this to upgrade your thinking.

u/StrafeReddit · 5 pointsr/excel

The best advice I can give you is to start with this book by Steven Few: http://www.amazon.com/Show-Me-Numbers-Designing-Enlighten/dp/0970601972/ref=la_B001H6IQ5M_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369652567&sr=1-1. Excel CAN make professional looking charts and graphs. It just doesn't always by default. Steven Few is the authority on this.

u/NoTimeForInfinity · 1 pointr/math

This is mostly what I wanted to explore after reading about him in The Drunkard's Walk. I'm very interested in other cases like his. It fascinates me.