58 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2023
    1. one of the problems of the double 00:44:14 bind is that you are often so caught in the extreme drama of the situation that it becomes very difficult to see beyond it
      • for: double bind - difficulty, insight - double bind

      • insight: double bind

        • one of the problems of the double bind is that you are often so caught in the extreme drama of the situation that it becomes very difficult to see beyond it
  2. Aug 2023
    1. “In an experiment revealing the importance of having friendships, social psychologists have found that perceptions of task difficulty are significantly shaped by the proximity of a friend. In their experimental design, the researchers asked college students to stand at the base of a hill while carrying a weighted backpack and to estimate the steepness of a hill. Some participants stood next to close friends whom they had known a long time, some stood next to friends they had not known for long, and the rest stood alone during the exercise. The students who stood with friends gave significantly lower estimates of the steepness of the hill than those who stood alone. Furthermore, the longer the close friends had known each other, the less steep the hill appeared to the participants involved in the study. In other words, the world looks less difficult when standing next to a close friend.”
  3. Sep 2022
  4. Jul 2022
    1. The effortinvolved in writing a note in their own words, whichinstructional designers like to call a “desirable difficulty”helps shift the idea from short-term to long-termmemory (this is the same reason many note-makers areshifting back to hand-writing on cards rather thandepending on automated apps)

      The work of writing things down or transforming them into pictures, diagrams, song, art, other creates a context shift in the material which requires greater engagement within the brain and may help to improve understanding.

      Compare/contrast the ideas of context shifting with desirable difficulty.

      Note that this use of "context shifting" (within the pedagogy space) is dramatically different to that used by people like Cal Newport and others (within the productivity space).

  5. bafybeibbaxootewsjtggkv7vpuu5yluatzsk6l7x5yzmko6rivxzh6qna4.ipfs.dweb.link bafybeibbaxootewsjtggkv7vpuu5yluatzsk6l7x5yzmko6rivxzh6qna4.ipfs.dweb.link
    1. boredom, as it does not fully engage the attention, while a too difficult one produces anxiety, as theperson becomes afraid to fail. Only a task that is challenging enough will engender the level ofintense, but tranquil, concentration that characterizes flow. There are two ways to control thebalance between challenges and skills: changing the intrinsic difficulty of the task, and changing theperson’s ability to cope with the task. At first sight, balance could be achieved by proposing arelatively easy task at which the person is not particularly skilled. But a more advanced model seesflow as emerging from high skills applied to difficult challenges (Fig. 1). In this more complexmodel (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002), limited skills applied to limited challenges merelyproduce apathy, as there is not much to create interest.This means that a good mobilization system not only should present goals that are difficultto reach, but provide the additional abilities necessary to handle that difficulty. This is the “newskills” feature that characterizes a truly compelling technology: you will feel most stimulated to usea tool if it allows you to tackle challenges that you could not tackle without it—albeit in such a waythat its use is fully intuitive and transparent. Eventually, a good tool should start to feel like anaugmentation or extension of yourself—the way a stick extends the reach of your arm, a telescopeextends your vision, and a notebook extends your memory.

      Balance between difficulty of task and level of skills Task that is too easy produces boredom, too difficult produces anxiety. Flow state exists when the difficulty is balanced with the skill level.

      New technologies and processes are new tools that are exciting to learn because they allow us to engage old problems in novel new ways. When we innovate and solve problems using novel techniques, it increases our level of engagement and satisfaction.

  6. Apr 2022
    1. You might find that reviewing in Anki is harder than normal study. This means it’s working – Anki’s goal is to show you mostly the material you’re struggling with and the material you’re most likely to forget, so it will feel harder than an average study session where you study hard and easy material in more equal amounts. However, the difficulty and the number of cards you appear to be forgetting might make you feel like it’s not working. Give spaced repetition a few weeks and see how well you remember your content then; that’s the only way to really know how well it’s going. (This phenomenon is well-known and has a name, desirable difficulty.)

      Desirable difficulty is a learning task which one has a desire to know, but which is sufficiently difficult enough to be challenging. Spaced repetition systems, if properly filled with topics in which one has an interest, will surface the least well known material for revision and should provide a sufficient level of difficulty for learning.

      see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desirable_difficulty

  7. Jun 2021
  8. Apr 2021
    1. Secondly, the difficulty ramps up very quickly - once I'd got a handle on things and started getting in to it, it threw me off that the Novice level 7 is just WAY TOO HARD - it's not a game centered on difficulty so it's not like that's an excuse, nor is this a later on level where you'd except difficulty, but having just 15 seconds to do that lap, that needs to be changed to 20 at least!
    1. If you like puzzle games, this is certainly a game for you. Well designed level progression that helps you build a good understanding of the underlying rules of the world
    1. this game is - well not exactly bad, but it also isn't a very good game of the genre - there are some riddles and puzzles that can give you quite the headache. I like hard puzzles, I like games where all isn't quite obvious - but I also like a barrier-free gaming experience.
    1. these events can break the flow of the game and force the player to repeat sections until they master the event, adding false difficulty to the game.
    1. Motivation is provided by an ever-escalating difficulty, though not to the point where you feel frustrated.
    1. There were a few times I felt like making notes, but never ended up needing to because the scale of the puzzles is kept manageable throughout.
  9. Mar 2021
  10. Feb 2021
  11. Sep 2020
  12. Aug 2020
  13. Jul 2020
  14. Jun 2020
  15. May 2020
  16. Apr 2020
  17. Dec 2019
    1. An ssh public key in a ~/.ssh/authorized_keys file can have a command="" option which forces a particular command to be executed when the key is used to authenticate an ssh connection. This is a security control that mitigates against private key compromise. This is great when you only need to execute a single command. But if you need to perform multiple tasks, you would normally need to create and install a separate key pair for each command, or just not bother making use of forced commands and allow the key to be used to execute any command.
  18. Oct 2019
    1. “often difficult language in poems accompanies difficult thought, so that the difficulty of language is part of the whole structure and activity of poetic composition”
    1. We are difficult. Human beings are difficult. We’re difficult to ourselves, we’re difficult to each other. And we are mysteries to ourselves, we are mysteries to each other. One encounters in any ordinary day far more real difficulty than one confronts in the most “intellectual” piece of work. Why is it believed that poetry, prose, painting, music should be less than we are? Why does music, why does poetry have to address us in simplified terms, when if such simplification were applied to a description of our own inner selves we would find it demeaning? I think art has a right—not an obligation—to be difficult if it wishes. And, since people generally go on from this to talk about elitism versus democracy, I would add that genuinely difficult art is truly democratic. And that tyranny requires simplification.

      cf. Prynne

  19. Sep 2019
    1. The Rationality of Perception focuses on theroutetoperceptual experience from other psychological states of the per-ceiver.

      Useful clarification--there is no such thing as a perceptual experience that is totally uninfluenced by previously-held beliefs. It's more like an unending chain of beliefs influencing experiences creating further beliefs, etc.

    2. If perceptual experiences can arise from infer-ence, then the Rationality of Perception is true

      This is a bit beyond me, honestly. I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how perceptual experiences (rather than perceptual judgments) can arise from inference, despite reading this whole section.

    3. Perceptual experiences that arose from this kind of reasoning wouldbe rational, in a broader sense that encompasses both good and badoutcomes: they are evaluable as rationally better or worse.

      "Rational" just means "rationally (epistemically) appraisable," as in, it can be shown to be better or worse in terms of rationality. So it can be "rational" even if it is evaluated as being rationally worse.

    4. They all assume that thephenomena they govern are epistemically appraisable. They are normsthat purport to describe how a specific aspect of a properly rationalsubject’s mental life would be. The kind of rationality thatfigures inthe Rationality of Perception hypothesis is located at this high level ofabstraction.

      Rationality is tied to a phenomena's epistemic appraisability. The Rationality of Perception holds that perceptual experiences themselves are epistemically appraisable.

      But what does it mean to be epistemically appraisable? Does it just mean that it is concerned with what is rational/what rationality looks like? Is that not circular?



  20. Dec 2018
  21. Sep 2018
    1. evolutionary methods

      What does evolutionary methods mean in terms of tracing origins of diseases? What does this look like? Does this mean they're testing diseases on animals or are they extracting viral DNA to do analysis and comparing to other viral DNA? Confuzzed.

    2. ff the tails of mice for many generations and showed that this mutilation had no effect on the tail length of their descendan

      Felt like this paragraph didn't fully explain what Neo-Lamarckism is.

      Found online that neo-lamarckists thought that Lamarckian mechanisms (inheritance of acquired characteristics) were more likely to be the chief cause of evolution than natural selection (Darwinism).

    3. but that a feature such as body size gradually evolves to become more and more different because new, slightly more extreme, advantageous variants continue to arise.

      Not understanding how these more extreme variants have to do with body size evolving to become more different within a population.

      Are these new, extreme variants unrelated to body size?

  22. Aug 2018
    1. Motoo Kimura was right! They didn't know about genetic drift and just thought that species adapted in ways that were negative towards their chance at survival.

      Difficulty- I had to reread this because I thought they were still mentioning scientists who had the wrong ideas of evolution.

      How did he find out about genetic drift? Doesn't this usually occur in very small populations.

      --I will look into this further.

  23. Jan 2018
    1. Or if there is, after all, a way in which it is analytic that experiences are unlocated, that way is irrelevant: perhaps in our presystematic thought we regard only concreta as located in a primary sense, and abstracta as located in a merely derivative sense by their inherence in located conereta.

      Is there a way in which it is analytic that experiences are unlocated? How is this possibility prejudiced? To say it is irrelevant is not to conclude it could be something else non-physically. If there is a location, it would seem there is an analytic necessity. The word abstract almost seems misleading, as if their is some source or derivative (such as a location) for the conclusion of effect. What if these experiences are phenomena with no definitive characteristics and cannot be known based on being "together with the sense of expressions by which they are referred to as things of that kind" (19). That would leave unlocated phenomena that is potentially unique to each first-person experience, subjective and indescribable.

    2. But we materialists believe that these causal roles which belong by analytic necessity to experiences be- long in fact to certain physical states.

      What is the significance of saying that the causal roles "belong by analytic necessity" to our experiences? In terms of language, an analytic statement is (loosely) one where the truth of the statement can be known merely by knowing the meaning of all of its parts; it is not necessary to have any additional knowledge of the way the world actually is. That's the only definition with which I'm familiar. In this context, does "analytic necessity" maybe mean that the cause of an experience is logically integral to its definition?

    1. w. I say that "This is red" means something roughly like "A normal percipient would not easily pick this out of a clump of geranium petals though he would pick it out of a clump of lettuce leave

      I struggle with this. The idea seems clear: Smart wants to analyze colors as abilities (or powers, as he notes below) to make discriminations. To say that something is red is to say that a "normal percipient" would not be able to distinguish it from another red thing (geraniums), but would from non-red things (lettuce leaves). This is clever, but seems to miss important features of how we talk about color, namely that there is a what-it-is-likeness of it. Seeing red has a certain phenomenology above and beyond my ability to categorize objects similar to it.

  24. Mar 2017
    1. Marcin and Laura joined me on Thursday to talk about translating CLAVIER into their local cultures. They helped me, we are helping each other attempt to make that translation.

      translation respect of context finding common ground difficulty

  25. Jan 2017
    1. substitute “the present King of France” for “x,” and then deny theresult, the occurrence of “the present King of France” is secondaryand our proposition is true; but if we are to take “xis not bald” andsubstitute “the present King of France” for “x,” then “the presentKing of France” has a primary occurrence and the proposition is false

      I'm not clear on this. Does the designation of a description as primary or secondary depend on the truth of the proposition of which it is a part?

    2. which we could not doif “Homer” were a name

      Must a name refer to a thing that exists? If so, what is the name of a fictional character? Is Homer a description?

    3. . It is false that the present Kingof France is the present King of France, or that the round squareis the round square. When we substitute a description for a name,propositional functions which are “always true” may become false,if the description describes nothing. There is no mystery in this assoon as we realise (what was proved in the preceding paragraph)that when we substitute a description the result is not a value of thepropositional function in question

      So, "the present King of France is the present King of France" is logically sound, however it has potential to be false if there is no present King of France?

    4. If, as may bethe case, whateverseemsto be an “individual” is really capable offurther analysis, we shall have to content ourselves with what may becalled “relative individuals,” which will be terms that, throughout thecontext in question, are never analysed and never occu

      Is Russell here saying that "relative individual" refers to "what can be considered an individual for our purposes"? unsure on this.

    5. proposition “Socrates is a man” is no doubtequivalentto “Socrates ishuman,” but it is not the very same proposition. Theisof “Socratesis human” expresses the relation of subject and predicate; theisof“Socrates is a man” expresses identity.

      I'm not sure I'm parsing this claim correctly. I think Russell is saying that "human" in "Socrates is human" subtly differs from "a man" in "Socrates is a man" in that "human" is an adjective attributing the quality of "human" to "Socrates" while the second sentence is making the proposition that Socrates is an instance of humanness.

      In other words the difference between (Hs) and (There is sometimes h such that h=s) with H being human as a predicate, h being human as a constant (a man) and s being Socrates as a constant.

      Is this how others interpreted this?

    6. Now theproposition that “a so-and-so” has the propertyisnota propositionof the form “ x.” If it were, “a so-and-so” would have to be identicalwithxfor a suitablex; and although (in a sense) this may be true insome cases, it is certainly not true in such a case as “a unicorn.”

      I don't quite follow his reasoning here.

    7. but is always significant andsometimes true

      So to clarify, "x is unreal" and "x does not exist" are significant as propositions but "an x" or "some x" cannot be significant as parts of a proposition if x does not refer to something that actually exists? Is this right?

    8. “The function ‘I metxandxis human’ is sometimes true.”

      It seems to me that the statement "I met Jones" isn't really any different in form, as Russell says it is. Doesn't it "make explicit" "the function 'I met x and x is Jones' is sometimes true," just as "I met a man" makes explicit "the function ‘I met x and x is human’ is sometimes true”? I'm not clear on the difference

    9. In the case of “unicorn,” for example,there is only the concept: there is not also, somewhere among theshades, something unreal which may be called “a unicorn.” Therefore,since it is significant (though false) to say “I met a unicorn,” it is clearthat this proposition, rightly analysed, does not contain a constituent“a unicorn,” though it does contain the concept “unicorn.

      I'm having some trouble with this passage. By concept, I presume, Russell means the 'idea' of thing or the the set of characteristics that qualify something as that thing, independent of any actual instance of the thing. Preceding with this definition I'm not sure what he means by "...there is not also, somewhere among the shades, something unreal which may be called “a unicorn.”" What I think he might mean is that because the statement is false (assuming that unicorns do not exist and that it is therefore impossible to meet one) it can be seen as containing the abstract idea, or concept, of "unicorn" but, by virtue of its falsity, not positing any actual instance of "a unicorn" in the way that a statement like "I met a man" does. Not quite sure about this though. Is knowing the truth or falsity of a statement required for determining the "constituents" it contains?