All of mxshn's Comments + Replies

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 can cook my Black rice with my InstantPot either in the same time it would take with a standard pot or rice cooker or I can cook it in half the time. This means I have more choices. I can't think of anything I can do witha  normal pot that I can't do with my InstantPot.  half the ti

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).

with hindsight, I can say with some confidence that this was roughly the right advice. Whilst I did need to read most of the university content (and fast), 'slow' is definitely the right way to engage with the most content on LessWrong. Thanks!
Well around half of them are sources I'm currently using to write a paper, and some of the rest I'm reading in preparation for next year of university. But I think I probably could benefit from a little of what you outlined.

Neat, thanks for the insight! Just wondering, the 0.51% should be 51%, right?

I believe not. The point was that even if a referenda gains a majority of 1% of the population, it is still a successful referenda. Thus 0.51% when turnout is 1% is adequate to change law.