Making information more accessible and approachable never harms society in the long run.
Your view is just a snobbish and rigid one, Sagan made science topics interesting for more people, from those people very likely many got inspired enough to pursue deeper science training.
Dumbing down is necessary to make it interesting for people who feel it's unapproachable, it breaks a barrier, I have no idea how you look at this and think "this is harming society"...
> I settle for a middle position, which is that the speed limit should be no less than 35 mph on most streets, with heavy mandated use of automated collision avoidance system.
Why does it need to be so contrived when there's empirical evidence from many other countries in the world about measures which do make traffic safer for everyone involved? Why can't the USA look at that and implement what has worked? It doesn't even need to do the heavy lifting, it's been done, just improve measures which have already saved countless lives in other countries...
Or don't and keep killing 30-50k people every year in traffic.
I much prefer reading on paper, something about screens never allow me to get into a deeper state that reading books take me to.
I read a lot on my old Kindles, had a gen 1 and gen 2, it was easier than on a computer but still not the same experience as a book. Years later I had read many books on Kindle that I'd mention to people and... I could never let them borrow them, having physical copies also lets you share your favourite books to people you like.
I agree with the cognitive premise unfortunately. But even so, I start to speculate about solving this by DIY book printing, or advances in digital reading technology (mostly I'm interested in the latter, for example, means of "spatializing" the flat screen experience, and reducing latency to a minimum)
In Brazil, for example, without WhatsApp you are an outcast of modern society there, businesses communicate with customers on WhatsApp, whole families and friend groups only use WhatsApp.
> WhatsApp only has value because of the network effect. Quit the platform and make your contacts find you elsewhere. Every platform dies eventually. The users just need to leave.
The network effect is exactly what makes it really hard for any single user to decide "I'm leaving" and tell every single person they need to be in touch to contact on another platform they don't use. What you are suggesting is simply impossible on an individual level, the only way it happens is if the platform has major issues that bleed users because it isn't working or the platform is made inaccessible by the government. Even a better competitor appearing will have a very hard time to crack the market share of a established network exactly due to network effects.
How is it an appeal to authority? He wasn't appointed to his position in life through bloodline or familial connections. He made insane wealth through business dealings, much of it through negotiations with sharks. Then he convinced half of the country to vote for him with no political experience against a dynasty.
Sure it's not my style and I don't quite understand how its effective, but to dismiss it outright as ineffective is naive.
It's the negotiation equivalent of rent-seeking, or parasitism. It requires deep relationships to have already been built, and it consumes those relationships in exchange for modest short term gain.
> He wasn't appointed to his position in life through bloodline or familial connections. He made insane wealth through business dealings, much of it through negotiations with sharks.
Uhm, no.
> Donald actually received $413 million from Fred over the years [1], [2]:
And as to whether he is any good at investing, he is literally worse than average S&P500 [3].
I abandoned LR a long time ago due to an issue with my Adobe subscription, and stuck with Capture One since then. To be honest I much prefer Capture One's workflow and tools, never felt I missed LR even though I had used it for 10 years prior.
Over there in the USA there's a culture of extreme deference to corporate leadership, probably stemming from the slavery and servitude past. It's very similar in Brazil as well, sharing from the same past.
It's funny that such a cognitive dissonance between freedoms and rights vs the absolutist tyranny of corporate life making a mockery of those freedoms can coexist in the same society with the same staying power.
You aren’t wrong, but having worked in China as well as the states (and a short stint in Switzerland), I think east Asia (china, Japan, Korea) has that even worse, probably due to Confucius. As China is looking more and more like the future, I fear that this gets worse before it gets better.
East Asia definitely has a similar flavour of this issue, Confucianism's filial piety forces unbounded respect to hierarchies, coupled with social harmony as a virtue and criticism of anyone "above" you is highly frowned upon.
I just think it's stranger for the USA's work culture to be so deferential to leadership while its societal values are outwardly quite loud about freedoms, it's more understandable to me for East Asia to be that way. For the USA case it's probably a mixture of the servitude/slavery past with still being quite religious compared to other Western peers.
It never made sense to me in the USA, I just took it as it being what it is. I think everyone knows corporate culture is kind of a farce, but no sustainable alternative has appeared to replace it.
I found the same worked very well for me, around lunch hour is the best time for me to train.
I managed to go to the gym after work for a few years when I was on my early 20s, I had to force myself many times but I liked the routine and was motivated enough with keeping consistency but over the years I got more drained of energy from work and I couldn't muster the motivation anymore.
I experimented with going early in the morning on my way to the office for almost a year, I realised I absolutely dreaded it since it felt I had to rush to not be late even when there was ample time for my routines, instead of enjoying the meditative state of lifting weights I was always preoccupied with time.
In the end the best approach/routine for me was to start the workday some 30 min earlier, take an extended lunch hour to go train, and extend another 30 min at the end of the day. It always gives me the feeling of living 2 days in one, I feel clear minded and refreshed after coming back from my lunch hour, I don't have to care about waking up much earlier than my usual nor juggle between social activities in the evening and my training, I can do both: train, and go out after work to meet friends without caring that I missed a gym session.
Also the bonus of the gym being mostly empty at these times is also great, I get very unmotivated if it's packed, having to wait for equipment, anything that extends my routines takes the joy of doing them away.
Your view is just a snobbish and rigid one, Sagan made science topics interesting for more people, from those people very likely many got inspired enough to pursue deeper science training.
Dumbing down is necessary to make it interesting for people who feel it's unapproachable, it breaks a barrier, I have no idea how you look at this and think "this is harming society"...
reply