I see what you mean, even though I haven't had this sensation yet. Good to note, and I tend to agree for indiscriminate tasks like "Hammer in a nail", "Somehow separate a board into two pieces". But do you think this still holds if you explicitly state the task more precisely as "Make a straight cut", "Puree something very finely", "Remove a precise shape from the top layer of the wood"? I.e. associate a quality with the task?
I agree, the InstantPot is able to do more things than the rice cooker, but it doesn't seem more versatile to me than a pot. This is mostly an intuition that I find hard to make into a clean argument, but the InstantPot, to me, looks to be specific, in more ways. There is a discrete (larger) set of particular functions it can do, while a pot is so simple, it doesn't have particular functions attached to it. Its function resides in the user.
I'm missing "Don't lie"
Fantastic, especially the bit about needing to write before understanding it fully, or else it becoming stale and boring (and obvious, all of a sudden).
Are all those things about the same concepts, or wildly different? If they are wildly different, I would advise consuming less, spending more time processing and sticking with one inquiry at a time.
At least in my experience, whenever I had too much to read, I actually was procrastinating. I wasn't really reading that stuff, I was only avoiding something else. So I would go ahead and close all those tabs and forget all those PDFs. Some you will remember, and then only do those, and process them a bit before going further (i.e. think about them in the shower).
Neat, thanks for the insight! Just wondering, the 0.51% should be 51%, right?