10 Skills You Need to Succeed at almost Anything.
lifehack.org
lifehack.org
1. Public Speaking
Join a ToastMasters, where you will make prepared or impromptu speeches, evaluate other's speeches, and generally just learn how to do public speaking. A lot of them will let you sit there and "audit" a few weeks before joining in the more active roles.
2. Writing
Write something that requires you to explain your logic flow clearly. Then take it to a friend who's a good writer and/or Enlish major or reads alot. Watch him tear your paper apart and tell you which logical points need to be linked better, or why certain annecdotes are out of place or generally why your thoughts can or cannot be easily followed. Writing isn't enough, you need to be critiqued to see the difference between yourself and Tolkien or other really good writers. If you don't have a friend, read a short story analytically and read as many commentaries on it as you can find. You'll see how well-written pieces are constructed together as carefully as beautiful code: their logic flow is good, the comments are helpful, witty and to the point without being redundant, and every idea (object) or plot device (function) is used on purpose, executed at exactly the right time. You cannot write well until you know how to recognize why good writing is good.
3. Self-management
Stop reading HN, or at least use noprocrast. A really good thing I heard from somewhere on the internet is to represent yourself as your own business, even when you don't have one: you don't work for "the man", you work for yourself. Your business is merely in partnership with the company that hired you. They don't own your work, you provide a service for them that they purchase. You represent yourself, you work for yourself, you sell your product/services yourself. In short : you manage yourself.
Actually I rewrote my comment to make it not sound sarcastic as the v0.9 did sound that way to me. Looks like I didn't do a very good job of v1.0 either. ;) But believe me.
[edit: folks, if you're going to mod down a joke, at least tell me why it isn't funny...]
I guess subtle humor is just an epic fail on this site.
2) Voting on individual and particular comments on HN is arbitrary and capricious. You win some and you lose some for no fault of your own, or for that matter, for any particular cleverness on your part on a particular comment you made.
3) Only when the votes on many comments are aggregated that we can elucidate a particular trend.
2) See point 1
C) According to the following (silly) patent by Channel Intelligence (oxymoron?), it is a list that is stored in a database on a computer - you might be increasing PG's liability - http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6917941
100) 0111001101100101011001010010000001110000011011110110100101101110011101000010000000110001
v) Lists in general are less well thought out than an article yet are more readable. Combined, I think this takes away from the "stickiness" of an article, because I can quickly skim through it, get the point of an list and move on - with that information barely registering.
re-iterate, the principle of learning
Y'see, lists aren't inherently bad in and of themselves. If essays (like pg essays) are programs, list articles are like pseudo-code: they're bite-sized tidbits that give you an outline of what the author thinks the major points of his writing is about.
The problem with lists is usually two-fold:
If the list lists trivial and common-sense ideas without telling you why or how that works, it has very little value. This type work best as an element inside of an essay or as supporting arguments for another single central idea.
On the other hand the list items are non-trivial, the list format works against a full fleshing out of the non-trivial idea : the readers' focus is diluted by the other points and the points each get so long that the whole article is essentially a series of essays, boring the reader to tears.
Lists are powerful; use with caution.