HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

scandinavegan

311 karma · joined March 20, 2017

submissionscomments
scandinavegan··on Why Children Aren't Behaving and What We Can Do About It
Yes, that sounds very similar.

One thing I didn't mention was that when my daughter finally started swimming, she would swim underwater until she ran out of air and then stand up. The traditional school would never have allowed this, as you were supposed to breaststroke with your head above water at all times. Since she started to swim some distance underwater, it wasn't that much of a stretch for her to stay at the surface to swim longer distances.

The transition from dolphin to swimming underwater to swimming at the surface was very quick and seamless. Perhaps she was still helped by being drilled in the traditional school's proper technique, but I think we could have used the new school's methods from the start.

scandinavegan··on Why Children Aren't Behaving and What We Can Do About It
My parents have five siblings each, but I only have a sister. I know it sounds bad, but I wonder if having less kids makes you worry more about keeping them safe. Perhaps my parents just sort of continued with how they grew up, but limited me and my sister a bit more, and I'm limiting my kids even more? Or it could have to do with media, where my grandparents wouldn't get news about abductions in the US and walk around worrying about that in their small Scandinavian village. Or it could be a time thing, where my grandparents just didn't have time to supervise the kids full time, so the older siblings had to guard the younger. Now, me and my wife will take turns to bring them to the park, and if we don't have time, the kids (at least the 5-year old) will have to stay indoors.

I try to give my kids more freedom than I'm comfortable with, but I just know that if something happens, people around me will think I'm a neglectful parent if I let my 9-year old stay out until 8 PM on her own. I want to give her the opportunity to explore the neighborhood on her own, and learn how to navigate the world. I mostly worry about cars hitting her, because I've almost been run over a couple of times where cars should have stopped, but she has to learn to look out for herself.

scandinavegan··on Why Children Aren't Behaving and What We Can Do About It
We vacationed in Berlin last summer with two kids, and that place is famous for its fantastic playgrounds. It was rare to see the same designs repeated over and over as you do in other cities, and each playground was more or less unique.

As you say, stuff where you balance quite high up, but usually with a softer material on the ground than asphalt so that a fall isn't lethal. I never saw kids fall and hurt themselves, so I don't know what would happen if they fell from the maximum height, but they wouldn't die.

scandinavegan··on Why Children Aren't Behaving and What We Can Do About It
Both my kids have been sure that they know how to swim when too young to have even tried. We signed them up for swimming lessons to make them respect water a bit more, and of course learn how to swim. They don't need to figure out that they can't swim when they're unsupervised, as that's a bit too dangerous.

My oldest started in a school that used very traditional methods (first learn legs then add arms, start by dry swimming on land and move to water, and so on), and she took the course over and over without progressing. For unrelated reasons, we switched schools, and the new school focused on just spending time in water, running in shallow water, floating, dipping your head under water as part of games, and so on.

They had something they called "playing dolphins" where they would stand in waist-deep water, jump forward, and glide as far as they could before standing up again. She only needed one round of that course before she could advance to swimming for real. I suggest spending time just getting them used to water, getting splashed in the face, or playing with floating or sinking toys in waist-deep water, to quickly get over any blocking fear of water. I liked how the new school didn't even attempt to introduce real strokes at the beginner level, but instead gave the kids confidence in their own abilities to move in water.

scandinavegan··on A Universal Law of Procrastination (2016)
> I've never understood the second type, to be honest. If you have a deadline, why not just do it quickly, so you're done with it?

I listened to this podcast recently, which was very good:

https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/beat-procrastination...

There are two psychologists being interviewed, and they talk about different reasons people procrastinate:

* Fear of failure: If you think you will fail outright or, more probable, not meet your own standards of perfection, you put off working on this uncomfortable item. It's easier to flee to something else. If you don't even try, you can tell yourself the day before the deadline that you could've done it, had you just started earlier, and so on, tricking yourself into feeling more competent than you are.

* Fear of success: If you're known as the person who gets things done, you'll be handed more difficult tasks. You might be promoted into a position of more responsibility, closer to where the decisions are made, which might not suit you. You might get people to supervise, which you're not interested in. You might make you're colleagues, or family, or friends jealous of your success, which is why you self sabotage your tasks and don't perform to your full potential. They talk about someone being the first from their family going to the university: if they succeed, they won't be able to get advice from their parents on how to finish a report, their brother might not think that problems in academia are real problems compared to being a construction worker, and so on.

* Fear of loss of control: If your manager or spouse tells you to do something and you do it, you hand over control of your time to someone else. By procrastinating, you're saying "I decide when and if this gets done", which is a confidence boost. Not doing something is a way of asserting control in a passive aggressive way.

* You may come from a family that over and over told you that you suck and is a failure, so why even try doing anything that's hard?

* Or you were teased as a kid when you were successful in school or in sports, so you sabotage you're own work to avoid imagined further abuse.

* Or you might have been praised as being super smart and competent, so as soon as something requires any effort, you avoid it to not look stupid or incompetent. Perhaps you don't know enough about the task you're supposed to do, or you don't know why you're supposed to do it, but instead of acknowledging that and asking for help, you put the task off.

* Or you might be really bad at predict how long things will take. Perhaps you have an idealized view that a task shouldn't take a competent person more than 30 minutes, so when you're still not done after 3 hours, the task has suddenly become a huge burden and pushes other tasks into the future. Or you might have a weakness (writing clear emails, making phone calls looking for information, and so on) that you don't acknowledge to yourself, so that it gets you into trouble because you put off that email or phone call instead of approaching the problem in a different way that utilizes your strengths or by asking for help.

They also talk about the difference between procrastinators who wait until the very last second and then work furiously (this is me), pulling all nighters (like last night) to finish doing stuff for work that they were supposed to do a long time ago. Since you don't have enough time to do a perfect job, you just have to deliver something, usually the first draft, but since that's accepted by your boss and colleagues, you keep doing it. Another type of procrastinator is the one who sees the deadline pass and still do nothing. These people might have bills that go unpaid for no real reason, and will pay unnecessary late fees on stuff. They might even put off filling out forms that will get them money back for taxes, and other beneficial stuff, even though it's hard from the outside to understand why someone would do that.

So that are a bunch of reasons why someone might procrastinate even though a deadline is fixed. In the podcast they talk about the difference between procrastinating and putting things off, where the latter might be a good thing to do, but procrastination that ends up hurting you or making your life difficult is something to try to look into and fix. Interestingly enough, they talked about how no pomodoros or GTD systems can help you if you procrastinate for deep psychological reasons, because you'll just ignore the systems anyway. For me, these system only work for a day or two, never long term.

In the podcast, they talk about facing your fear. When you say that tasks appear to big, or perhaps are too undefined, there's fear connected with facing the task since you don't know what is required of you and if you can do it. Divide and conquer sounds like a good approach, also giving yourself just 5 minutes to really think about the problem without making any judgments on your own capacity or worth. I usually avoid thinking about tasks because I'm afraid that I've already put it off for too long, so now it might be too late. I might have to involve other people to help me out, which I'd have to do close to the deadline, which is embarrassing because I would have to admit I've put it off when I should have been working on it. But spending 5 minutes to clarify the task and write some notes about what I already know and what kind of output I have to produce usually helps make the task feel a lot more manageable and less scary. Another option is to tell yourself you're going to work on finishing the task for 10 minutes, and then you stop and evaluate how you feel. If you've put something off, you expect to feel horrible, but usually you're instead invigorated by finally having started on the task and will keep on going.

What has helped me is the idea of 3 MITs, Most Important Tasks, that you identify each morning. I write down three things I want to achieve that I think I can manage during that day, even if it's less than what I would like to finish. If I do them, I let myself procrastinate by reading Hacker News or Reddit with a lot better conscience, because I've usually delivered some tangible result to a colleague that day. This is also very nice when working from home, and I'm usually more productive from a task perspective when I work from home and can focus on my MITs without interruptions instead of being at the office with my colleagues.

scandinavegan··on Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies
I've read that predictions on the future made by pessimists end up closer to reality than by optimists. It might make sense to plan for the worst from a practical perspective, to limit unnecessary risks. But on the other hand, people with really low expectations are usually not super happy when something turns out better than expected, they just find something else to complain about.

Being optimistic, without setting expectations so high that you're constantly disappointed, seems to be a more pleasurable way to live your life. Also, the consequences of failure to meet whatever high standards self-critical people put on themselves are rarely as bad as you think before it happens.

I like your way of finding some balance between being pessimistic and optimistic.

scandinavegan··on Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies
Thank you for this perspective. I think it's very important to seek outside help.

I've recently started therapy (four sessions so far), and I really struggle with self-criticism and self-worth in that I question if I should take up the therapist's time when there are people out there with bigger problems than me. People lose their spouses to suicide and their kids in car accidents, and I make enough money to spend it on complaining about not being happy enough for 45 minutes a week.

I also question my therapist's motives, since they obviously want to sell this service and would probably put up with any of my nonsense for a quick buck, while shaking their head at how minor my issues are compared to their other clients. But it feels nice to be able to talk uninterrupted for a whole session, without a regular conversation's context switching back and forth, so there's that.

scandinavegan··on The ESA says preserving old online games isn't 'necessary'
Also nothing to do with the European Speedrunner Assembly, which coincidentally is streaming a week of video game speedrunning right now.

Link for the interested: https://esamarathon.com/

scandinavegan··on How the US Pushed Sweden to Take Down the Pirate Bay
At least a few years ago in Sweden, all cases where someone had payed a fine for downloading pirated material due to such letters was because the person admitted guilt. The anti-piracy organizations had no way of forcing someone to pay, because none of the evidence would hold up in court. They tried to submit screenshots of IP addresses, but since it's easy to spoof it wasn't enough to convict someone.

I don't know if this has changed in recent years, as I haven't heard anything about it recently.

scandinavegan··on How the US Pushed Sweden to Take Down the Pirate Bay
I read a great article years ago where a Disney executive argued that they had to view pirating as a competing business model, and provide a better experience instead of just trying to shut it down.

Disney and pirates compete on price, quality, availability, ease of use, and so on. Price is going to be hard to compete with since pirated stuff is free, and I guess they are attacking the availability of pirated material to increase their own by comparison, but what I wish they would focus on is to make it easier for the user to find the stuff they want. If I knew I could go somewhere for all of Disney's catalog of shorts and feature films, I'd be happy to pay a small amount per movie or subscribe for continuous access. Instead it's spread across multiple services, or you have to buy individual DVD boxes and try to assemble your own collection which is a lot of work. They could make it a lot easier for me to watch that specific short (now I go to YouTube and hope it's there) or movie (I check if it's on Netflix or another streaming service, and if not, I skip it).

My (limited) experience of NFL.com is that they've done great when it comes to making it easy to watch current and older games, with options to subscribe to all games or just one team. The English Premier League doesn't have the same centralized streaming service I know of and instead depends on selling the rights to TV channels to show games, which leads to consuming a lot of pirated material if you want to follow a specific team all season or want to watch all concurrent games.

If the content providers just compete in the areas they can affect, most people will pay to use it it's more convenient than the alternative.

scandinavegan··on Stephen Hawking's Ph.D. Thesis Crashes Cambridge Site After It's Posted Online
That's the good stuff! I recommend Satantango, and all of Bergman.
scandinavegan··on Please take care of my plant
I have an uncle who waters all his plants every Saturday. Those who survive stay, those who die are tossed. Survival of the fittest in action.
scandinavegan··on Pencil and Paper Games
I'm happy that Race Track is there (in Other)! It's like a super minimalistic version of Car Wars, but still very fun. You get the same realization of "Oh shit, I'm going too faaast!" when you're about to lose control.
scandinavegan··on Productive on six hours of sleep? You’re deluding yourself, expert says
> (commute, chores, eating, exercise etc.)

I agree with you completely, but you didn't even mention kids. The other stuff, chores, eating, exercise, and so on, can be moved around in time, but kids require constant attention in the moment even when they are a few years old. I'm lucky to get an hour in the evening for me time efter the kids go to sleep, not even enough to watch a full movie if I want 8 hours of sleep. This is every day of the week, since they don't sleep in on weekends but wake up even earlier.

If I don't get to to stuff I enjoy every day I'm miserable, so I usually play video games past bed time and pay for it by walking around in a fog at work. A day with doing something fun feels like a wasted day, like a day closer to the grave with nothing to show for it.

It's not healthy living like this, but the only way I see doing anything different is by skipping doing anything just for fun. I look forward to when the kids are teenagers and I can relax again. /s

scandinavegan··on Ask HN: How does Facebook know what I buy on Amazon or vice versa?
I'm pretty sure I read here on Hacker News that one idea to advertise the exact same product that you just bought (I had that with a basketball I got for my daughter) is that they want you to feel good about the purchase. If you see it in ads after you bought it, you'll start thinking it's a popular product and will feel that your choice to buy is being validated.

And they of course get to repeat the name of the store for you so that you're more likely to think of them the next time you need a related product, even if it's not a basketball. You'll remember that you've seen the name of store X in multiple places, so they must be popular.

scandinavegan··on The Dying Art of Courtroom Illustration
Sketches are further removed from reality than photographs, so the viewer would know that this is the artist's interpretation of the event. If you bring a camera and take 100 or 1000 shots of someone, you can pick any one of them to act as the full representation of reality. Look how much people trust publicity photos or photos in ads to be unaltered to see how much faith people put in photography. Also, anyone can be made to look jovial or angry if you take enough photos of them, and the photo is more closely related to reality in the viewer's mind than an illustration.

Kind of related, in Sweden, there's been a murder case in the newspapers the last months where the defendants' heads were blurred in photos during the trial and their names were anonymized. As soon as they were convicted, full photos and names were published. Here the idea is to protect their identities until found guilty. I don't know if this is regulated by law or if it's just a matter of press ethics.

scandinavegan··on Soylent recalls powder after dairy accidentally slips into 1.8 powder
Oh, messed up formatting and too late to edit. Here it is:

- Average consumption for U.S. is 100 grams/day

- Protein requirements:

-- 40 grams/day for females

-- 55-70 grams/day or 0.8 grams/kg body weight for males

- Recommended protein intake for athletes or physically active people (Paul 1989):

-- Protein and carbohydrate requirements increase somewhat

-- more calories

scandinavegan··on Soylent recalls powder after dairy accidentally slips into 1.8 powder
I read a scientific book on sports health a couple of years ago, but I can't remember the title. I've tried to remember the title before and have searched my library history, because it said that even if you do heavy strength training, the amount of protein you need is basically the same as any normal person. It said that 0.8 g/kg of body weight was enough for anyone, and that's only 0.36 g/lb of body weight. It's so much lower than what I typically see: your 1 g/lb is on the lower end, since people usually recommend 2-4 g/lb of protein for strength training or bodybuilding.

I've also read elsewhere that the average Western diet contains twice the amount of protein you need. Too much protein comes with its own problems, in addition to just being stored as fat if it's more than the body can utilize. Perhaps strength trainers and bodybuilders use the extra protein as energy to build muscle, so that you could get the same energy from fat or carbs instead?

The same book said that the caloric ratio of the recovery shake or meal following strength training should be 4:1 calories from carbs and protein. I use soy protein powder, Powder Dextropur Plus, and water for my recovery shake. The high amount of carbs is to kick the body back from stress mode to recovery, and is only advised post heavy training when your body can handle it.

I really should find the title of the book, as it goes against a lot of wisdom found on the net. I just looked up ExRx.net [1] which I find is based on referenced science and facts, and they say:

* Average consumption for U.S. is 100 grams/day * Protein requirements 40 grams/day for females 55-70 grams/day or 0.8 grams/kg body weight for males * Recommended protein intake for athletes or physically active people (Paul 1989) Protein and carbohydrate requirements increase somewhat more calories

They say that protein and carb requirements increase somewhat when you're active, but further down on the page they say that the protein requirements may increase quite a bit. But it seems like the main requirement is a higher calorie intake, and that the ratio of calories from protein is basically the same for high-activity individuals.

[1] http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Protein.html

scandinavegan··on How to Become Well-Connected
Thanks for the summary. I haven't read the book yet, but I'll have to sometime. It's interesting that on one side you have Carnegie's "make them feel important to make them interested in you" and on the other side you have the pick-up artists' (I'm not defending them) "neg them to make them interested in you". In one variant you lift the other person up and in the other you push them down, both with the idea of wanting them to talk to you more.

I've heard that men that tease each other (in one sense making them feel less important) in groups do it as a bonding experience, because the fact that you can tease the other person without them punching you is a sign that you're members of the same group. On the other hand, gently teasing someone in a group can make them feel more important as well, since you're suggesting that they're important enough to deserve being teased.

With Carnegie on one side and the pick-up artists on the other, I'll obviously side with Carnegie's more positive view of human interactions. It also fits well with a tenet in improvisational theater that you should always make the other actor look good. You both benefit from that, especially if they do the same to you. If you make them look good, the audience thinks you're both good, and the other actor will want to play more scenes with you. It seems like an obvious suggestion, but what it does is it shifts your focus from what you can do to look good yourself to what you can do to make the other person look good, which is often a lot easier anyway. It takes you out of your own head and makes you more attentive and focused on the other person, so that you can respond to and amplify the good thing they do.

scandinavegan··on How to Become Well-Connected
Even if it's presumptuous, what's the worst that could happen? I think you should email and see what happens.

As a consultant and employee, I would be a bit surprised by such an email because I'm not in a position to hire people. But my manager is always looking for people and we have a referral bonus system, so I would get some money for introducing someone to my manager who gets hired. Both me and my manager would have selfish reasons for seeing you, apart from just being nice people that want to help others out.

If you suggest a coffee close to their office, I don't see a problem. They'll either ignore your email, tell you they're busy, or meet up. I would definitely suggest that you make your intentions clear that you're looking for a job, but also that you're interested in learning more about the job or the industry. I would also suggest that you say how you found the person, otherwise they may be more suspicious or confused. Just say if you found them on LinkedIn, on the company website, or wherever, so that they know where you're coming from.

Good luck!

scandinavegan··on Evidence-based advice we've found on how to be successful in a job
> Then try again.

This is very important, as well as, as you say, just doing it.

You (the general you) have a better chance of going on a date if you ask ten people than if you ask only one. You need to be able to handle that not every interaction will be successful, that sometimes people are not interested, and then you just cut it short and move on. Since it's important to get as much practice as possible, it's better to have ten short conversations at the coffee machine, in the elevator, and so on during the day, than one prepared line to say to the person at the front desk as you leave for the day.

Another suggestion to practice talking to people is to approach people who work in clothing stores, cafes, libraries, and so on, and talk to them. They get payed to talk to you, and will make an effort to make the conversation be pleasant for you. You probably won't have the deepest conversations, but the idea is just to experience what it's like to small talk with people. You can either talk about clothes, books, or coffee, or tell them something small about your day and see if they pick it up and asks a follow up questions.

scandinavegan··on Feynman Algorithm (2014)
> So that would point to Feynman's calculus book being "Calculus for the Practical Man" by J.E.Thompson rather than Silvanus P Thompson's "Calculus Made Easy", whose second edition came out in 1914. I would not be surprised that Feynman read and used both.

It's just that the quote on fools is very prominent in the beginning of Calculus Made Easy, and the author continues to hilariously refer to both other people and himself as fools. I searched inside Calculus for the Practical Man [1] on archive.org for the word "fool" without a single hit.

I'm sure Feynman read both, but I was interested in the origin of the quote, since I learned it a few days ago and think it's very inspirational. Feynman was constantly arguing that everyone has the capacity to figure things out, it's just that they rarely practice it.

[1] https://archive.org/details/calulusforthepra000526mbp

scandinavegan··on How to Become Well-Connected
For what it's worth, I got your point through the examples and I think that posing the right questions to get to more fruitful territory is an excellent observation. The question is how to identify which questions lead to good conversation and which questions risk shutting it down. Avoiding obvious yes/no questions is one way, or at least use those questions sparingly, but try to go elsewhere.

I currently read the pen-and-paper RPG Microscope, and one rule in the game is that before a scene you select a question to direct the action. The scene concludes when the question has been answered. There's no game master so all players collaborate to create characters and answer the scene question.

The game text says "The best questions are extremely specific. Vague questions are bad and lead to confusing or muddled scenes. Open-ended questions can work, but you will get much better scenes out of very loaded or incriminating questions."

The game goes on to list examples:

"If you have an idea you want to explore, don't hesitate to stack the deck and make your question more specific. A simple formula is to just add more conditions or 'even though' twists to establish clear issues.

'How does the Alliance beat the invaders?' is a good starting point, but that's a very open-ended scene.

'How does the Alliance beat the invaders even though they're outnumbered and outgunned?' is more specific. We have a better idea of the situation.

'Is the Alliance willing to sacrifice the colony on Sigma VII to beat the invaders even though the colonists will get slaughtered in the process?' is better still because it gives us a clear situation, an obvious dilemma."

Finally, on good questions:

"It may not immediately be clear why a question is interesting. Don't be alarmed. Once you ask the question, the other players get to jump in and run with it. They may have ideas you didn't even consider. So long as your question gets everyone on the same page about the scene, you're in good shape."

This relates to what hueving said. The game assumes that the other players want to turn your questions into something interesting, and that you collaborate to create something great. If the other players are hostile or indifferent, they can ignore your question and take the scene in a completely different direction so that it never ends, but the point is that some questions have a better chance of keeping things on track. The same with other people. If you're talking to someone indifferent to hostile, they can obviously shoot down all conversation, but if they're indifferent to positive, you may have a chance to interest them.

I looked up Kezia Noble on YouTube, having never heard of her. I think your summary of what she says was more interesting than her videos, at least the first one I watched on how to specifically talk to women in the fashion industry. But in another video she said something interesting on posing questions that take the other person off auto pilot. If you ask "So what do you do?" and they answer "I'm a teacher." and you say "Do you like it?" they'll probably say "Oh, it's OK." or something similar. They (and you) are on auto pilot, and have probably both had this exact exchange before with other people. If you instead ask "So what made you choose teaching?" you'll perhaps take them off script and force them to think, which is a good thing because it makes them more engaged in the conversation. I think it relates to the RPG suggestions above to be a bit more specific with the questions, and to try to add some kind of twist to the question to make the other person think.

scandinavegan··on Feynman Algorithm (2014)
There's a quote under "Skill theory" on that page from Feynman:

> "Right. I don't believe in the idea that there are a few peculiar people capable of understanding math, and the rest of the world is normal. Math is a human discovery, and it's no more complicated than humans can understand. I had a calculus book once that said, 'What one fool can do, another can.' What we've been able to work out about nature may look abstract and threatening to someone who hasn't studied it, but it was fools who did it, and in the next generation, all the fools will understand it. There's a tendency to pomposity in all this, to make it deep and profound." -- Feynman, Omni 1979

The "what one fool can do" quote from a calculus book is probably from Calculus Made Easy that was posted on HN a couple of days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14161876

In Calculus Made Easy, the exact quote is "What one fool can do, another can. -- (Ancient Simian Proverb)".

scandinavegan··on What do you prefer – the French or the Silicon Valley dinner?
I've never seen this description before, saying that introverts are tense and extroverts peaceful. If you put them in an empty room, you could instead easily picture the introvert being calm and the extrovert tense due to a lack of human interaction.

I rather think that the best description of the difference is how you charge your batteries. An introvert prefers alone time to recharge and an extrovert prefers the company of other people to do the same. A social gathering with many people would drain an introvert and invigorate an extrovert. It has nothing to do with inner tension or peace.

I have seen Susan Cain in the book Quiet talk about introverts as highly sensitive, in the sense that they take in and process more information about the environment. An extrovert would love talking to their friends at a noisy bar, while the introvert would be bothered by the noise and prefer a calmer setting. Being alone is then a way of reducing sensory input to produce a sense of calm, it's not that an introvert would need to be alone to relieve any inner tension.

scandinavegan··on Cardiovascular Deaths Linked to Poor Dietary Choices
I was mainly thinking about soybeans, not humans eating grass. 75% of soy bean production goes to animal feed, and more than 50% of US, and 40% of worldwide, grain production goes to animals instead of directly to humans, where it's inefficiently converted to energy humans consume. All this because people like the taste of meat and because of tradition.

Other resources, such as fossil fuels and water, are used at a much higher rate when raising animals than when producing crops. Grain-fed beef production uses 100 000 liters of water per kilogram of food produced, broiler chicken 3500 liters per kilogram, and soybeans 2000 liters per kilogram. Water is a precious resource in many places of the world.

This is the way the world works today, but you don't argue for animal products over vegetables, you argue for grass-feed animals instead of crop-fed. You should vote with your wallet and only buy grass-fed meat, both when you cook at home, when you buy an animal-based snack, or when you go to a restaurant. I think that many meals would have to be vegetarian, because a purely grass-fed meat, dairy, and egg diet would be hard to uphold.

scandinavegan··on Ask HN: Which non-technology book has influenced you the most and why?
Tao Te Ching (Daodejing) by Lao-tse (Laozi). This is my favorite translation:

http://www.wright-house.com/religions/taoism/tao-te-ching.ht...

The text gives advice on both how to behave on a personal level and how to lead (and therefore what to expect from a good leader). It promotes the idea that ambition leads to strife and conflict and that the path to happiness is to be content with what you have. It also promotes the abandonment of pride and ego: Do your work and walk away, do not concern yourself with getting credit for what's been achieved. Be like water and flow around problems instead of butting your head against them. Be malleable, do your thing, and don't worry about what others are doing around you.

When it comes to how to lead, it says you should micro manage, and that the best leader is invisible. They make the group members think that they achieved it all themselves.

A lot of the things go against the current climate of ambition, greed, and always being visible in social media. How can you increase your salary without taking credit for all the good things you do? How can you be productive, and show others how productive you are, if you abandon ambition and are content? I still find that it calms me to think about the ideas, and that it feels like someone has my back when I don't want to become the center of attention. I just want to do my work and my hobbies, being happy with what I have, and not trying to maximize my salary or social standing.

scandinavegan··on Ask HN: Which non-technology book has influenced you the most and why?
I don't know if I ever started reading the book, or if I never gave it a chance, because I was so put off by Singer's utilitarianism.

I turned vegetarian in the mid-nineties because my first girlfriend was vegetarian. It coincided with media focusing on unnecessarily long animal transports in the EU, and I quickly realized I didn't want to take any part in factory farming. My wife turned vegetarian after meeting me, and we're both vegan since 2007. I joke that vegetarianism and veganism is transferred from partner to partner. Both our kids have been vegan their whole lives.

I came in contact with Singer's ideas in articles, and was both put off by the utilitarian ideas as I couldn't see them coexist with ideas of inviolable human and animal rights, and also that he used mentally disabled children as an example of the absurdity of using mental capacity as a measure of whether you can be used to make food and clothes. I agree, of course, that you shouldn't use human children or animals, it was just that the examples and arguments didn't speak to me at all.

Do you remember what it was by Singer that spoke to you?

scandinavegan··on Cardiovascular Deaths Linked to Poor Dietary Choices
Even if we kept those animals around for human consumption, we could cut the rest 99.9% out to save resources. As a pragmatical vegan, I'd take that deal in a heartbeat.

Lambs are usually slaughtered after 6 months. In Sweden, to use an example close to me, lambs have the right to live outdoor for two to four months during the summer depending on where in the country they live, which means that they spend at least 2-4 months indoors not grazing this non-arable land. They must be watered and fed, which increases energy consumption, and usually fed from land that could have grown crops for humans directly. Only a fraction of the energy we put into animals gets returned when we eat them, which means it's far more energy-efficient to eat the plants directly.

scandinavegan··on Cardiovascular Deaths Linked to Poor Dietary Choices
Do you get these high-altitude grazing New Zeeland lamb at Costco? Most lambs are raised in the lamb factory.
← PreviousPage 4 of 4