It’s easy to agree when no one is thinking.
~ Shane Parrish from, Opinions and Organizational Theory
slip:4ufooi1.
Having read that and done the thinking to evaluate it—yeup, I agree.
ɕ
Opinions →
Microphones and the human voice →
This is a well written article about the human voice, and how microphones really work in terms of capturing it. Even if you read this and plan to forget everything—you’ll come out *way* ahead when recording your and your guests’ voices.
Facts about speech intelligibility
slip:4udami1.
It’s full of insightful information, about the human voice:
…the voice changes spectrum in almost any other position than when we approach the speaking person with our ear – or microphone. Each position on the head or the chest has its’ own sound color – or timbre. For instance, the spectrum of speech recorded on the chest of a person normally lacks frequencies in the important range of 2-4 kHz. This results in reduced speech intelligibility. If the microphone does not compensate for this you should make corrections with an equalizer.
Important frequencies:
The important frequencies in non-tonal (Western) languages are illustrated by the diagram below. Here, the frequency band around 2 kHz is the most important frequency range regarding perceived intelligibility. Most consonants are found in this frequency band.
…and about what affects intelligibility in a reproduction of the voice:
A lot of research has been carried out in this area. In general, the results demonstrate that:
1. Optimum speech level is constant when background noise level is lower than 40 dB(A)
2. Optimum speech level appears to be the level that maintains around 15 dB(A) of S/N ratio when the background noise level is more than 40 dB(A)
3. Listening difficulty increases as speech level increases under the condition where S/N ratio is good enough to keep intelligibility near perfect
Furthermore, the 1-4 kHz frequency range should be “kept clear”. When, for instance, adding music as background for narration, a parametric equalizer cutting the music 5-10 dB in this frequency range will improve intelligibility.
ɕ
Responsibility →
In an increasingly interconnected world, finding focus and enabling time to do work is becoming harder and harder. Demands are outstripping our capacity at an alarming rate. It’s time to start thinking about how we work.
~ Shane Parrish from, The Most Important Change To Make In Your Working Habits
slip:4ufote3.
It’s not “time,” it’s far past time. But the key point of the article, (which is itself simply a pull-quote hyper-summary of a book I’ve not read,) is:
Personal responsibility.
That’s it. That’s the magic sauce. Where I’ve found success has only ever been where I took personal responsibility. And I’ve chosen my language carefully in that sentence. There are places where I took personal responsibility and still did not find success; in some cases I’ve found outright failure. But in absolutely no case was I ever successful without taking personal responsibility.
ɕ
Genius working alone →
The team must consist of three sorts of specialists, he says. Otherwise the revolution, whether in politics or the arts or the sciences or whatever, is sure to fail. The rarest of these specialists, he says, is an authentic genius — a person capable of having seemingly good ideas not in general circulation. “A genius working alone,” he says, “is invariably ignored as a lunatic.”
~ Kurt Vonnegut from, Bluebeard
Meta: Copy-paste-and-search if you want to read the entire, surrounding passage. As a creator of content myself, I decline to copy and paste the much longer passage as many others have.
This passage from Vonnegut is brilliant, but it makes me a little nervous. Am I the genius? …or more likely, the lunatic? Perhaps I’m one of the other two specialists. Or worse, I’m not any of the three.
Suddenly
I remember why I keep bourbon on hand.
ɕ
Nothing Fails Like Success →
There are internet companies (like Basecamp, or like Automattic, makers of WordPress.com, where I work) that charge money for their products and services, and use that money to grow their business. I wish more internet companies could follow that model, but it’s hard to retrofit a legitimate business model to a product that started its life as free.
~ Jeffrey Zeldman from, Nothing Fails Like Success – A List Apart
slip:4uaiai7.
ahahahahahahahahhahaahahhaaa! Sometimes I like to share stuff just because it makes me happy. (The stuff; not the sharing of said stuff, I mean.) I regularly talk about how this web site is a vehicle for my reflection—I’m quite often literally thinking through things. Writing, (tappity-tap-tapping on the keyboard here,) and writing, (scratchity-scritch-skratching with a pen on paper,) are two of the ways I figure out if the dross I regularly find in my head actually corresponds to reality.
When I read sentences like the ones I quoted above, I leap (sometimes literally) to my feet knocking over my chair in the process. It does my weary—deeply deeply weary it be—heart good just to read sentences like this. And I hope—not in the sense that I little value your ability to think and “hope” you’ll finally get what I’m saying; no. I only hope that sometimes, some of the things I share make you happier.
ɕ
Gaming the system →
Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.
~ Shane Parrish from, Gaming the System
slip:4ufoga1.
A long time ago, a social studies teacher had been giving the same multiple-choice, high school, final exam, every year, for [as I recall the story] decades. The catch was two-fold: First, each year he cut the exam into strips separating each question. Yes, by hand, with scissors. He then shuffled the strips, scotch taped them onto a new sheet which did have sequential numbers on it already, and then ran it through the mimeograph machine. There was no way to create a “cheat sheet” for this exam based on previous years (even if we could have gotten a previous test.) Second, the test was insanely long; hundreds and hundreds of questions long. In fact, it was—intentionally—impossibly long.
When he graded the exams, he noted the total number of questions each student attempted. To be clear: He’d note the number of the last question you answered. So if one skipped around, you’re doomed since you definitely get wrong, the ones you didn’t even try to answer. So the incentive is to start at the beginning and just work straight through; recall, they’re totally shuffled. He then computed the average number attempted, and that average was used as the total possible points on the test. If you scored above the possible points (unlikely, but possible,) the points got added to your semester’s total points. (So if you score +2 on the final, the first extra point, brought up your 9/10 quiz score to 10/10. That second extra point brought a homework up from 5/7 to 6/7.)
Have you spotted how you game this system?
Bonus question: I regret what we did, (there were 3 of us.) But, can you tell me why I regret it?
ɕ
Thomas Droge and Brenda Kahn: Story, history, and self-perception →
What are the ways in which personal narratives, self-perception, and mentorship influence an individual’s path to growth and transformation?
If you want to know someone, have a conversation with them. But if you want to know who they really are, have a conversation with their partner. Thomas Droge and Brenda Kahn share their story and how they’ve changed over the years. They explore the idea of our internal narratives and self-perceptions, finding your own way, and the human experience of time. Brenda and Thomas discuss ways to change the world and the importance of investigating your history.
I’ve been writing a memoir. And I had a really fascinating experience with it, because I got all the way through it, and realize that everything that I told myself about myself was totally not true. […] the stories we tell ourselves, literally, inform our lives in a way that have real consequences in the real world. And when you take a step back and look at yourself and decide, wait a second, you know, they actually did a lot of really cool things, you know— this was kind of amazing. So then I had to start the whole thing over again from this whole different slant.
~ Brenda Kan (38:24)
This conversation explores how personal stories and perceptions shape our lives and how reevaluating them can unlock growth. Brenda reflects on writing a memoir and discovering that her past achievements were much more significant than she initially believed, illustrating the transformative power of storytelling. Thomas complements this idea by discussing mentorship and the value of learning from both older and younger generations to stay connected with evolving perspectives.
And he said, for me, one of the things that I think people always miss in mentorship is that you need mentors who are younger than you, to share with you what’s changing in the world, and keep you connected to what’s happening. And mentorship is really a two way street, of the younger generation, connecting you with the world and what’s happening and showing you what’s changing from their point of view. To teach you so that you don’t get stuck in your static view of the world.
~ Thomas Droge (33:17)
The discussion also touches on movement practices, mindfulness, and self-discovery, connecting these to larger themes like time perception and narrative transformation. By examining personal experiences, they highlight the importance of self-awareness and adaptability in personal and professional contexts, as well as the role of mentors and shared knowledge in shaping these journeys.
(more…)Seneca on Social Media →
Over a billion people currently use Facebook — many at the cost of anxiety, lost honor, personal freedom, and certainly time. If asked why, however, many would reply, “why not?” The service is free, conventional wisdom tells us, so no matter how minor the benefits (which tend to orbit around a generalized fear of missing out), they’re still more substantial than the cost. But as Seneca points out, this assessment is misguided because it ignores the human toll of social media.
~ Cal Newport, from Seneca on Social Media – Cal Newport
slip:4ucabo33.
I generally try to suppress my urge to pounce on opportunities to talk about the well-known downsides of social networks. But a Seneca-CalNewport two-for-one is simply irrestible catnip for me. Here, Newport is referring to the value of one’s own time. That’s the human “toll” that so many people—as far as I can see at least—don’t factor in.
I think I am ready to give up fighting the fight; I’m done [or at least, I really should get a grip, and learn to be done] beating the drum about the evils of social networks. Know what I’m going to do instead? Double-down on creating things on the open web and let people decide what they want to do.
ɕ
Getting Less Done →
My touch-phrase for 2019 was, “no.” In terms of self-imposed stress and crippling depression, 2019 was the worst year ever; I’ve more than 10 years of journals and I’ve checked. 2018 was bad, but 2019—the year I set out specifically to reduce the problems—was definitely and significantly worse than 2018.
I remain convinced that it is not possible to optimize one’s way out of burn-out. If I have 500 things I want to get done and I’m burnt-out, the solution is to reduce the number of things, not get better at getting things done. I’m speaking from personal experience, not from theory.
2020 has to be the year of getting less done.
In 2019, the “no” touch-phrase was meant to guide me to developing the habit of saying no to things coming towards me. A huge amount of ideas and opportunities come at me, and I’ve gotten much better at saying, “no.” (I’m not quite ready to say I’ve gotten “good” at it; but I’ve definitely gotten better.) I’ve gotten better at evaluating Big Asks from the world, and saying, “no.” A textbook example of that is people/groups which reach out to me, asking for my input or participation.
“No, I do not have the time to do that well.”
“No, I cannot to do that the way it deserves to be done.”
…and so on. Note particularly the absence of the societal lubrication, (a.k.a., the usual lie,) “I’m sorry, but…” Because, I’m not sorry. I’m defending myself, and I’ve reached the point where if my candid, timely, and honest response feels like a wack on the head… Bummer. Life’s hard; get a helmet.
2020 has to be the year of getting less done.
In a previous post (on my personal blog) I mentioned the idea of leverage; positing that I should focus on asking myself, “how much leverage does this opportunity afford me?” This still doesn’t feel quite the right fit for 2020 because leverage per se isn’t a value I’m interested in maximizing.
So that leaves me where?
2020 has to be the year of getting less done.
GLD — Get less done.
Maybe that’s the touch-phrase for 2020?
ɕ
Meta: I had posted this in the Movers Mindset Forum early in 2020. But, for some reason I cannot fathom—perhaps it was simply an oversight—I didn’t post this here on the ‘ol blog in very-early 2020 when it was written. ;)
The honeybee conjecture →
More than 2,000 years ago, Marcus Terentius Varro, a roman citizen, proposed an answer, which ever since has been called “The Honeybee Conjecture.” He thought that if we better understood, there would be an elegant reason for what we see. “The Honeybee Conjecture” is an example of mathematics unlocking a mystery of nature.
~ Shane Parrish from, The Honeybee Conjecture: What Is It About Bees And Hexagons?
slip:4ufowa4.
Every once in a while, you will have the chance to be alive when a multi-thousand-year old mystery is solved. Humans are awesome. Mathematics for the win. *drops mic*
ɕ