This is a fascinating theory of the role of music in human evolution. I never thought about this, which made reading this all the more pleasurable.
Lots of gems in here. My favourites: Visualise, and don’t just solve a problem once.
An excellent SlateStarCodex piece on top-down and bottom-up processing: A model for how our brains work. The model doesn’t work everywhere, but I love the parts it does explain, like seeing faces in clouds!
It’s a web archive link because the website is down right now, mired in the New York Times Controversy.
This is an excellent categorisation of stories. What’s cool to me is that everything that is based on a story would have the same categories! This piece explores just three of them, and it made the generalisation click for me.
This is an excellent history of time. Why we started keeping time, the benefits that arose out of it, and how technology - the mechanical clock - became an arbiter for human disputes.
This NewYorkTimes piece put operant conditioning into a new perspective for me. Of course it can work on humans, too!
I’ve started keeping a pack of M&M’s handy, so I can condition myself. Haven’t had a chance to use them, yet. It’s not all about the M&M’s though: I’ve started noticing when I mentally kick myself for not having thought of something. I’m not sure if this is sending the right signal - I always want to know if I made a mistake. Correcting it comes later. If my brain shuts down to feedback, that’s much worse!
It’s been one year since I started The Idea Muse, and I just wanted to thank you for sticking around - it’s been a lot of fun.
In honour of the anniversary, here’s 4 of my favourite ideas from past issues of the Idea Muse, and connections I’ve made between them and everything else.
I enjoyed this short piece, specially the section on listening. How well can you pick up clues about what’s really driving someone? Once you do, how well can you align what they want with what you want?
Not the company, but the concept. This is an excellent post diving into how important slack can be to you. I came across this concept first in the Theory of Constraints: if everyone is busy all the time, your company is terribly inefficient.
“No, my worry is that, especially now that you’re out of college, you won’t put enough really excellent stuff into your brain. I’m talking about what you might call the “theory of maximum taste.” This theory is based on the idea that exposure to genius has the power to expand your consciousness. If you spend a lot of time with genius, your mind will end up bigger and broader than if you spend your time only with run-of-the-mill stuff.”
This one’s for everyone, not just “kids” just graduating college. More often than not, it’s the adults who are less interesting than the kids.
This scared me, which is why a big part of “growing up” for me was nourishing my childish virtues: curiosity and life long learning. That’s one big reason why this newsletter exists, too: to find excellent stuff to put in my brain.
Over the past few weeks (and for the next few) I’m diving deep into Rationality. This post is an excellent model for how social interactions take place and how to think about society.
The comments, specially those titled Review 2018 are worth exploring, too.
Fair warning: This one’s hard to digest.
Not every change is an improvement, but every improvement is necessarily a change. If we only admit small local errors, we will only make small local changes. The motivation for a big change comes from acknowledging a big mistake.
This week, one from the archives! An exploration on bundling, and how counterintuitively, bundling can benefit both sellers and buyers. There’s also common gotchas where bundling can’t work.
This is an excellent summary about Ventilators, how they work, and why we don’t have enough right now.
I rarely share time-relevant posts, since they lose significance quickly, but this one’s close enough to the coronavirus while being general enough to be useful after the pandemic.
.. If you’re wondering why I’ve suddenly pivoted to fiction, don’t worry, I haven’t for the most part. I found yet another missing piece of the puzzle. Stories prime intuition. They substitute for experience. I hinted at this with my last post, on Vocabulary as a Meta Mental Model.
But here’s the general idea: read the fan-fiction above to understand better the triggers for putting your rational brain to work. And in the end, stay for the story.
It’s 2,000 pages long, took me two weeks to finish, but it was very well worth it!
P.s: Apologies about not sending last week’s issue. Working from home whacked all my routines out of place (and I was distracted by this book ;) )
Book review by Scott Alexander
The comment section is worth going through, too. The author posits that cereal grains were born out of a necessity: they were easier to tax, and had the highest calorific output. Imaginably, others are skeptical.
In other news, I wrote a new blog post this week about using the vocabulary to organise and find mental models: Vocabulary as a Meta Mental Model. You’ll find something actionable in here. It made it to Page 1 on Hacker News last night!
This is more a repository of ideas than one specific idea. It’s a list of the best beginner books on almost every subject.
I started thinking about how cascades work a year ago. This is everything I’ve discovered, researched, and created.
It’s a roller coaster, starting with examples of cascades, to creating a categorization for them, to learning how to influence them, and then leveraging them in your personal life.
To me, this feels a lot like the process of ongoing improvement. Find the limiting factors, and work on those. This explores the same using the idea of the meta: The game about the game. It hints at what’s missing and areas to improve in - aka a way to find limiting factors.
I’m going through this process in public for the first time: I’m learning bouldering. I’ve done this process a few times before (not publicly though): learning a language, how to juggle, and swimming. Hope you find something interesting here!
This is an excellent summary of how iron came to be used everywhere. Very interesting, and now I can explain the difference between iron, steel, and stainless steel.
This is a treasure-trove of wisdom. It’s the participant handbook used in Center For Applied Rationality’s 4 day seminar. Everything in here is excellent.
I probably would’ve sent something else this week, but I also came across this excellent presentation by Benedict Evans: Standing on the shoulders of giants. There’s a reason it’s just the slides: you don’t need the video to understand what’s going on.
Together, they helped me understand how to make an interesting presentation.
This is a wonderfully written introduction to Rene Girard and his ideas surrounding memetic theory. I found his books inaccessible, so reading this gave me a lot of context to his ideas.
And now, I understand Peter Thiel better, too.
P.s: The first things I did in the middle of this long introduction was to google the criticisms to Mimetic theory. Sure enough, there are quite a few. So, I need to be wary of where I try and apply this. But that will come with practice and becoming intimately familiar with this idea.
Brace yourself for some arcane mathematics.
I’ve tried to wrestle with Godel, Escher, Bach before, but it seemed too unwieldy. I didn’t get anything. It was a slog, and I stopped reading.
This video by the author looks at Godel’s incompleteness theorem, and what it means for maths.
My favourite generalised insight: A system with self-referencing statements can never be complete. That is, if you believe if something is true for a system, it must be provable - including claims the system can make about itself.
Godel proves that isn’t possible. There will some things that are true, but UNPROVABLE. This blows my mind. And now I understand why this is such a big deal for maths.
I deliberately use system instead of “math”. Where else can this apply?
This is an interesting explorable explanation of how connections between people affect crowds.
The most surprising insight: In a world with 33% of drinkers (minority), you can convince everyone that majority of their friends are drinkers.
There’s more nuances to it, but I’d let you figure that out via the link!
I’ve long been trying to formulate why specific fiction is great for learning. This does it extremely well:
Most “soft skills” books are not trying to add explicit statements to your store of “trusted explicit/verbal statements”. Instead, they are trying to evoke experiments to try out in your inner simulator – bits that you can then keep, or not, according to whether they feel promising when you imagine trying them out.
As promised, here are the best things I learned in 2019. I had lots of fun writing this - it’s an artefact putting together everything I learned in 2019. Tell me what you think about this :)
I’d recommend doing your own, there are how-to tips sprinkled everywhere, and in the end!
I spent the entire week reading and mulling over this. I’m sending this email a day late, because I wanted to say: “It keeps getting better”, and indeed it does.
This is a series of ten posts (more probably to come) that Tim Urban spent the last 3 years researching. There’s proof of work right there. Books are information dense and great because they are hard - they take much longer to write than a simple blog post.
This is on the same level.
A beautiful look at how network systems interact. Why are cities a cultural hub compared to villages? Why is Silicon Valley the hub for tech? Why fashion takes root in high school students vs parents?
Yep, it covers all those cases. I loved reading this.
If you’re engrossed by systems after that, pair it up with this: How to see Systems
It’s an interesting take on what all your idea management system needs to have. I’ve been looking for an alternative to Evernote, since the 1000s of ideas I’ve captured over the past year have now become .. unwieldy.
But, Roam Research seems promising. I hopped on a call with the founder this week, and I’m excited where things will go with this app. So far, I love it!
It’s a new LessWrong sequence that explores a superpower - being specific. The part I link to above is the best.
Warning: This video can be scary. It involves a live dissection, and I was debating whether I should send this around or not.
But in the end, this newsletter is about things I find remarkably interesting, and this is without a doubt one of them. It’s one of four videos in a series exploring movement, circulation, digestion, and reproduction. All the videos blew me away.
Did you know there are blood vessels inside our bones? And when you make a claw with your hands, the “lines” that show up on the back aren’t bones, but tendons. Or that a muscle always connects two different bones. There will be no movement if it’s connected to the same bone. And finally, muscles only work in one direction, which is why you always need a corresponding pair on the other side to bring your bones back in position (e.g: biceps and triceps)
This is beautiful.
PG is back to writing essays, which is awesome.
Key takeaway for me here: If this theory is true, we can cultivate genius by cultivating interest.
There’s two important components to things -
- Learning to see what matters (what Joel calls clean)
- Learning to make it clean / make it look unclean so you can then clean it.
It’s exciting because it doesn’t just apply to code, or a bakery, but something much more powerful: your habits.
Triggers for habits come from your environment. If you’ve never paid attention to what triggers you (for ex: couch and TV in direct line of sight when entering your home) - you can’t distinguish a “clean” from an “unclean” environment.
But once you do, you can think about how to clean it, or how to make it look unclean so you know you have to clean it sometime.
This seems an interesting thread to pull on. Where else can you apply this idea?
“The fact that we are still discovering biology doesn’t mean that we can’t design. We can engineer the tools we use to manage biology.”
This is a really exciting piece about how we can figure out a Moore’s law for Biology.
“When you are solving a difficult problem re-ask the problem so that your solution helps you learn faster. Find a faster way to fail, recover, and try again. If the problem you are trying to solve involves creating a magnum opus, you are solving the wrong problem.”
I love this. It’s a fun rehash on my belief that “accelerating feedback loops is a cheat code”
An executives’ job is not to set the strategy, but to get the people one level lower to figure it out and implement it. What they do get to set are the values which then drive the appropriate strategy.
There’s probably more nuance to it, but I loved getting this insight into what people above me really do.
This is an exciting exploration of putting mental models to practice. I haven’t yet made up my mind about whether it’s accurate, but as Cedric says, it’s a helpful framework for thinking about mental models and their application.
Here’s a particularly frightful example: Driver’s education courses, particularly those aimed at handling emergency maneuvers, tend to increase, rather than decrease, accident rates. They do so because training people to handle, say, snow and ice leaves them with the lasting impression that they’re permanent experts on the subject. In fact, their skills usually erode rapidly after they leave the course. And so, months or even decades later, they have confidence but little leftover competence when their wheels begin to spin.
I uncovered this as a result of research for this article: Everything about the Dunning Kruger effect.
There’s this genius who has been working on a theory for human-agents. A theory that might just make Isaac Asimov’s Psychohistory possible. Reading this gave me goosebumps.
This article, although a super interesting introduction, doesn’t really go into the nitty gritty. The Wikipedia page was too daunting, too. So, I’ve settled with digesting Scott Alexander’s notes on the same!
Life advice from Sam Altman.
- Have clear goals for yourself every day, year and decade.
- One of the benefits of working hard is that good opportunities will come along, but it’s still up to you to jump on them when they do.
- Ask for what you want. (I can never do enough of this)
- Go out of your way to be around smart, interesting, ambitious people.
#4 is my main focus this year and I haven’t been doing great. Are you someone smart, interesting, or ambitious? Do you know someone smart, interesting, or ambitious? Are you in London? Please reach out, I’d love to talk / meet you.
(Did you see what I did there? I used #3 to get #4.)
I love Patrick’s blog - guiding people from leveraging their time to leveraging their assets. This is step 1: At the end of the week, what do you have to show for your work?
.. It took me seven tries over 2 years to read this. Everyone told me it was great, but I just couldn’t get myself past the poem in the beginning. It’s just like Season 1, episode 1 of Game of Thrones. Took me a while to get started, but once I did, I just couldn’t stop reading! I hope this serves as one of many pushes you might need.
Why is Prisoner’s Dilemma a dilemma? This essay provides intuition about that, then goes on to list several multipolar traps, which finally end with Nature’s god - and why our project as a civilization must necessarily be to control it.
If you get lost in the weeds, learning about Gnon, here’s a primer (the link in the original article is broken) : Capturing Gnon. However, come here only after reading about Moloch.
If you do end up reading this rollercoaster, let me know!
What if going against tradition isn’t as smart as you thought? This piece by Scott Alexander ruffled too many feathers for me. When there are really good arguments for both sides, which side do you follow?
This essay poses the question, and the following essays in the sequence answer it. Reading this has given me newfound respect for culture. I need to be much more cautious when I go against it.
This is by me.
It’s surprising how misinformed I was about climate change. This one’s to disperse some of those ideas.
Morgan Housel explores laws from diverse fields that hold universal truth. My favourite is Dollo’s law: In evolution, organisms can’t re-evolve to a former state because the path that led to its former state was so complicated that the odds of retracing that exact path round to zero.
This fits into my model of how dinosaurs didn’t evolve again after the asteroid hit. Or how, who we call homo sapiens won’t come back if we mess up this time.
Slack’s story about understanding their product. When building something people don’t know they want, you need to execute to perfection.
When a definition encompasses 100% of the people in the world, the word stops being useful. Makes sense, right? This piece by Scott Alexander goes into where we (un)knowingly do this in everyday life.
It’s a Paul Graham classic ( Don’t know how I never saw this before! ). 3 small paragraphs that make perfect sense. I was blown away by the elegant framing.
In other news, here’s what I wrote this week: Where do analogies break down? It’s an exploration of how to understand concepts better by leveraging analogies, and their breaking point. Further, “blunders” in the business world that happened because of taking an analogy too far.
It’s an explanation of Simpson’s Paradox - making a point using a new media. Our maps ought to aid our intuition.
It’s an interesting idea of how organisations evolve - it ties in nicely with last weeks idea! Taking together the “hacks”, a new model emerges which this essay portrays.
In other news, here’s an interactive summary of Sapiens I wrote this week - Sapiens. I’m really happy how this turned out.
It’s an interesting idea of how complex organisations fail - and how can we keep the current one (us), alive.
It’s a behind the scenes look of how Amazon Prime came to be. Very revealing. I wonder what gave Jeff Bezos the confidence that he was right?
It’s a brilliant look into Bezos mindset.
“I’m going to change the psychology of people not looking at the pennies differences between buying on Amazon versus buying somewhere else.” Golden.
It’s a guide to Bayesian Thinking.
I learnt Bayes Theorem in school. After reading this ( and working through a few examples from my life ), I realised, I never really understood it. All I had was a formula. I never generated the intuition needed to use it in everyday life.
This solves that, and it blew me away.
Sadly, the website is very janky. (Wait a few minutes for it to load. It made me cry too). My highlights are on the “deep learning” path - it changes the url, hence Highly doesn’t show highlights on all the pages.
Here’s an alternate that works well.
It’s about building an interactive medium to drive intuition and creativity when trying to understand a system.
“There are often multiple ways of abstracting over a parameter, and the more ways we can abstract things out, the more ways we can find of looking at the system.”
The father of information theory, Claude Shannon on how he solves problems.
“If you don’t have questions, you won’t find the answers.”
“Everytime we get into deep flow, we adapt. It gets easier the next time.”
It’s an interesting deep dive into biohacking. It’s not about drugs (mostly), but everything else you can do to hack intelligence.
I found some sections helpful - and I’ve begun an experiment to see if it works for me.
Regarding Highly, I made a noob mistake here: Highlighting on the parametrized link instead of the original. That’s why you’ll notice an extra parameter in the url. Ugh!
Do you have a biohacking system? I’ve written about mine earlier.
“When you have an infinite amount of money, you can enslave a population with no violence at all.”
I recommend the sub link as well. It explains how rare, big stones were this tribes money - and how they developed a credit system around them, instead of lifting and moving those big stones.
It reminds me of how similar fiat and crypto ( and the stones) are.
It has a lot of gems - Compounding knowledge through a multidisciplinary framework is an individual’s greatest enduring advantage. Most geniuses—especially those who lead others—prosper not by deconstructing intricate complexities but by exploiting unrecognized simplicities.