Hi,
How’s your health? Are you doing any physical exercises?
I have a mild fever as I write this. Probably it's because of the changing weather. Or perhaps more stress and overthinking.
Anyway, I really wanted to talk about research and tinkering this week, but I am going to push that to the upcoming weeks.
On that note: (Again) I've been trying hard to refactor my learning processes, especially putting out my thoughts coherently in my blog posts. It does seem many things are scattered here and there. But then… that is my original goal to start this newsletter - connecting the dots.
Everything is in bits and pieces. And sometimes my thoughts might fluctuate here and there (hence paradox). But the core itself strives to have coherent views of the world. Lately, I've procrastinating to do that also. Oh! regarding procrastination, Bijay has a good post on his Things of Note 16. Do check that out. Or well…you can procrastinate on that…
On that matter, it does seem life’s all about hacks, stitching things together hoping that something will work out.
I have been pondering a lot about the information bubbles we are living in; they overlap so much. For instance, I share things that interest me. And, in doing so, you are also getting a taste of that. This is good in general because they provide a certain amount of compression. ("Good" not in a sense of ethical way but more towards preference and incomplete understanding of the topic). But sometimes, they might not resonate with you. Perhaps, they might be too abstract. So, digging deeper into the topics might help in reinforcing your mental models too.
What does that mean?
I think of my life as fragments of knowledge and personal philosophy. This undeniably pushes me towards a conundrum of going in-depth to a particular topic or widening my knowledge on multiple domains.
(Figure: My knowledge graph from Roam, viewed using Obsidian. It doesn’t mean anything. But still, it’s satisfying to watch the clusters.)
Just last week I watched Grant's video on Group Theory and I am mind-blown how he seamlessly relates abstract concepts of Groups to more relatable “geometric transformations”.
This made me recall my childhood times when I was a fanatic of euclidean geometry. I was so much obsessed that I used to try solving problems even when I didn’t have papers. Haha. My hands used to be covered with geometrical figures. There were so many moments where I had discovered new geometrical properties all by myself. It was such a good feeling. During weekends I used to go to cyber and read (and download) Euclid's Elements. It profoundly changed my view of mathematics.
Like, the idea that there are certain sets of axioms upon which whole mathematics is built. Euclid's Elements starts with some definitions of a point, a line, a plane, and such…
Being a math enthusiast (an overstatement), I've always felt that math should be taught in an artistic way. The way I contemplate about it now is the dichotomy of whether children should only be taught concepts that are useful in real life or also abstract (theoretical) concepts. I think both sides are relevant. There should be a good balance.
Teach children to solve logic problems, puzzles. Make them question everything. In doing so, teach them about abstract thinking too. Like, why having an assumption of X helps to solve the problem Y.
Another instance where I had a sense of first existential crisis was when I discovered Quantum Mechanics during grade 4 (I think). I was so thrilled to realize that we are all a universe of atoms, which are again made of quarks, that I stole Quantum Electrodynamics magazine from the school library. I also learned about Richard Feynman from there. And hence, a source of inspiration to this day.
Similarly, I realized about life's impermanency when my maternal uncle (Mom's brother) died when I was in class 2/3 (not sure exactly). I still remember the day when I was taken to the hospital to see his body for the last time. And that was it. I felt dreaded for weeks. As a child, it was scary. Now, it doesn’t matter I guess.
I believe this knowing of mortality provides profound meanings to life.
So yeah! That's that. I am not flexing anything here.
I think the general lesson from this reflection for me is that as we mature those childhood enthusiasms and curiosities fade away slowly. (Related: Idea Attenuation)
Now, it's more like “do this to achieve that” monologue. Mundane things.
Especially, with COVID-19 situations we are moresoever anxious to waldenpond (into the wild narration?).
I can keep this train of thought indefinitely. And they’ll still be revolving around the same philosophy: we are a dot in a dot.
#Reading
How to not fear death
Sam Dresser | psyche | 14 min
We all have a fear of death. Surely, it might not be frequent, but sometimes we get bombarded by the existential crisis of seeing life as a tiny point in time. (See: spans of life)
One day there will be a world without us; we will simply be memories. And beyond that, there will not be any trace of our existence, even in memories.
While Epicurus argues strongly that this fear is irrelevant -- "Death is nothing to us" -- Lucretius provides us with the Symmetry Argument that we should treat this fear with similar emotions as that of when we weren't even born.
The symmetrical part of the argument, of course, is that you have the very same difficulty in imagining what it is like to be dead. Indeed, according to Lucretius, you-pre-existence is the same thing as death or post-existence: both involve the absence of you.
Modern culture abstracts death away by convincing us that we are living a meaningful universe and who individually contributes to that universe in a significant way seems to postpone the fear. It's almost like we're cheating the fear through quotidian tasks.
For me, this fear gives me a chilling sensation. But then, it entirely depends on my mood. Most of those anxious thoughts arise from the awareness of how little of the world I'll experience.
The Lesson to unlearn
Paul Graham | 18 min
From an early age, we are made to believe that getting good grades or passing tests is a good indicator of our learning. This is dangerous because it doesn't teach us the value of learning (and the learning processes) but rather shortcuts to make ourselves appear better.
For instance, we choose to read class notes, without giving proper thoughts on the topics, for achieving good scores. Similarly, we engulf whole syllabus overnight for the test next day…
PG observes this hackable-ness mindset in new startup founders too.
The (most of) wannabe founders think that if they could find the answer to "how to make people invest in my startup”, it'd make their startup perfect. However, the answer is straightforward which they don't realize right away; focus on growth. Make good and usable products.
They make it more complicated by treating startup as hackable entity.
If the startup has good growth, people would naturally want to invest in it.
I think the hardest part of this is unlearning itself. A general way to mitigate, or possibly reinforce the process, is to be aware if we are using the right hacks.
Say, when you are simply starting out on the startup journey, one hack might be to do things that don't scale. Like, instead of automating the tasks right away, you could try doing them manually at first, to pick up the growth. And later move to automation slowly.
For exams, right hacks might be to solving a problem intuitively rather than rote-learning the solutions.
Why design
Julie Zhuo | 7 min
I absolutely loved this. Here, Julie talks about how technology (and design) has impacted her life. She shares one such story about her childhood times when she was fascinated by the design of a Sony Walkman.
It was the most magnificent thing I’ve ever owned, and not just because it played my recorded-from-the-radio mix tapes. Its every detail was, in my mind, flawless.
The main takeaway is that the design of an object can significantly affect how people use it.
For instance, there's Norman Door where its design tells you to do the opposite of what you're actually supposed to do. That is, the door has a U-shaped handle but is labeled with the word PUSH. People's natural instinct is to pull without reading, since the handle is sticking out.
These Norman-Door-like objects are the sign of bad design. They make people stressed out. On the contrary, good design makes people happy and connected.
Are there any principles to govern the “goodness” of any design?
There are two basic principles::
Discoverability
When you look at something, you should be able to discover what operation you can do.
Feedback
When you use it, there's a response that the task has succeeded or failed.
Although the world is moving towards Human-Centered Design, there are certain areas where designs cannot be changed because of standards. Like, you cannot go to a new apartment and fix the Norman door right away, can you?
On a similar note, I recommend this interesting essay: “why Figma wins”. It has some great insights, like how Figma operates and how it is impacting product designs.
If You’re Good, You Need to Talk More
David Laing | 6 min
In our quotidian lives, communication within our circle seems inherent, without forcing its juice, because we share a lot of (self-implied) understanding with those people.
We say something on X. Chances are another person in the circle understands our opinions about X.
This is one of the prominent features of human language - negotiation.
Even if it's not inherent, we yearn for the common understanding (of beliefs).
However, that's also an idealistic view of communication. Misinformation spreads rapidly. And if you don't talk about it, there will be an imbalance in the communication itself; it skews towards bad actors.
For instance, when your friend starts to believe on a certain fake news, you should be able to talk more openly (and strongly) about it with them.
That's the only way to maintain a healthy knowledge (and understanding) between people.
A general emotion that I found resonating in this essay is that we don't talk much openly regarding a topic someone disagrees with. I find it rampant, especially at workplaces. Like, when there is a long discussion on anything, it ends with long weird silences. This has made me feel that people (including me) accept things at face value.
That’s legit. It takes time to think clearly on a topic. Hurried conclusions aren’t really good either. It's good to not actually talk much on those topics you aren't confident about.
As a slow-thinker, I tend to talk about only the things I know. When I feel confident later, I try to convey my opinions on the matter through direct messaging or an email.
However, a general rule of thumb is to give a sneak-peek of your thoughts, even if it's about disagreement so that everyone can think about it. In doing so you are adding more values (and perspectives) to the discussions. The end result should be a healthy connection.
Beyond these norms, I also think it's good to talk about things you know. Sometimes sharing your knowledge (how irrelevant it seems) can help bring significant "positive" changes.
A more general conclusion I’ve drawn is that you should speak up more (confidently) when your intentions are not wrong. Don’t be silent!
#Watching
The problem with banning TikTok
Vox | 8 min
(Normally, I stay away from these politics as far as possible. But with recent news about TikTok, I don’t have any choice but to study more on the topic…)
With the recent TikTok ban over India and the US trying desperately to do something with the platform, it's inevitable that technologies get tangled with weird politics.
Technologies today are getting influenced by bad politics. Restriction of usages. Restriction of free speech. And what not?
Like here in Nepal, there are a number of cases where talking bad about the government (like creating memes about politicians), has resulted in the government being offended and taking actions against it. It’s not a healthy democracy when the government gets offended easily.
Surely, there are cases where the government should act, in any manner to restrict information flow, like controlling activities such as the spread of fake news.
Going beyond that, the conversation is not only about TikTok, but also about internet censorship in general.
How much information should be controlled? There are some countries that are trying to privatize internet within their regions to restrict the spread of information.
This also got me thinking about the dispute Facebook had over India a few years back. Basically, Facebook had offered a free internet service with a premise that people will only be able to surf Facebook. Nothing else. It backfired because of net neutrality. (I am not going deeper here).
Anyway, I am still reading more about this TikTok dispute. Few recommended reads are:
Fred & Ginger: Too Hot to Handle
4 min
Mesmerizing.
Last week, I had watched Fred Astaire's Famous Ceiling Dance (1951) that put me in a rabbit hole. In this video, Fred and Ginger communicate (and convey their emotions) with amazing foot-works.
Another video I found fascinating is Swing Time - Rogers and Astaire. I loved the outro part here. Wholesome. :D
The Flying Train, 1902
2 min
This depicts a ride on a suspended railway in Germany in 1902.
It feels so surreal to watch. More than a century ago...and here we are peeking into the past... This made me ponder about the technological progress we have made so far. It's unreal, inspiring.
Also, I loved this upscaled and colorized version too: 60 fps The Flying Train, Germany, 1902
Life in life
1 min 30 sec
Although John Conway is particularly known for the game of life, there are so many interesting contributions he has made to mathematics, especially Monster Group.
Nevertheless, this rendering of Conway’s Game of Life is epic.
Here we see a group of cells, acting as a single cell (metapixels)form complex patterns. Bizarre.
#Fascinating
awesome-gpt3
This GitHub repository is a collection of demos and articles about the OpenAI GPT-3 API.
Also, I found this tweet fascinating:
Here, GPT-3 is being used for invoice extraction. This is intriguing for me because at Docsumo we are also working in the same domain. And we are yearning to get our hands on the GPT-3 API. :/
Learning library
A library with links to resources about:
Learning-Psychology, Note-Taking, Spaced Repetition, Memory, Visual Learning, Machine Learning, Attention, Creative thinking, Mental Models, Knowledge Representation, Reading, Connected Thought, Edtech, Learning-journey, and more.
#Music
I've been listening to a lot of music from the 1950s-60s era, especially Jazz.
I loved this 1965 1-hour jazz session by Wes Montgomery’s band:
Wes Montgomery was an American jazz guitarist. He was a musical genius who didn't have any official tutoring. He learned everything by himself. What amazed me the most was despite Montgomery's complex polyphonic playing, the pianist Pim Jacobs and rest of the members were able to harmonize seamlessly.
Another interesting discovery was Blowing In the Wind cover by Bee Gees (1963). This is so surreal and good to listen to. No fancy instrument. Only vocals. All the 3 vocals are in perfect harmony. Amazing.
Oh also, I found The Bee Gees - New York Mining Disaster 1941 (1967) profoundly moving.
#Ending-Thoughts
That's all. I hope you found something interesting
Signing Off!
Nish
PS: I am currently reading a 25-page essay (book?) titled “A Mathematician’s Lament” by Paul Lockhart. Seems like a good read. :)