Prioritizing Content Consumption
A reader recently wrote me this email:
I’d be very interested in a blog piece from you on how you prioritise what content to read/watch/listen to. There’s so much out there, and it doesn’t stop. You seem to balance a very busy job with significant content consumption and some healthy time off.
Curious as to how you do it without it becoming a major distraction.
The key word for me in that email is “prioritise” because it suggests a system in which I conciously decide what content is most important to consume.
The truth is pretty much the opposite. I don’t have much process, system, and organization in my life.
What I do have is routine and I use that routine to set and keep priorities.
This blog is a big piece of that routine. I post an audio or video piece every Saturday so I want to check out audio and video that I think the AVC readership would be interested during the week so I have something to post.
Similarly, I need things to write about and reading what other people think and write about is quite helpful to me in figuring out what to write about.
I have several dozen friends who are always sending me things to read or watch or listen to. Many/most of these people do not work in tech but are hyper-curious and have great breadth of interest. They are my most valuable source of content and inspiration and I have cultivated these relationships over my entire adult life. This was not calculated or planned. It is just happened.
Most importantly, I do not allow technology to drive what content I consume. I use Twitter but drop in and out of it occasionally to get a taste. I don’t drink from it’s fire hose. I let Google Now send me alerts but I understand they are filter bubbling me and mainly use it to make sure I see certain things. I have a Facebook account but have not actively used it since they went hostile on Twitter almost ten years ago.
Maybe some day technology will be able to do for me what humans can do, but today it is the exact opposite. Technology shows me things I already know about. Humans show me things I don’t know about.
I have a very strong bias to read/watch/listen to things that I know nothing about. I can go deep if I need to but I would prefer to be a mile wide and an inch deep in terms of what I know about.
I wish I read more books. I can’t read business books. I find them dull and boring. I love novels and read them when I can but I maybe read five to ten novels a year. Books are the biggest casualty of the current demands on my time.
We also don’t watch a lot of TV in our home. I like to watch live sports and often wind down with sports before going to bed. But we don’t binge on Netflix or anything like that. This provides us a lot of time for other things.
So that’s how I approach content consumption. It works for me. I don’t know if it will work for you. This is not a recommendation as much as an answer to an interesting question from a regular reader.
Comments (Archived):
You just made the perfect Anti-Singularity statement:- tech shows me what I already know about- people show me what I do not know aboutTools automate, people create.
Yup. I’m not a believer in the singularity
should be “current tech”…there is a lot technology can/will eventually do to be able to show you what you do not know…but right now it’s still just in the “getting to know you” phase (btw, that phase may last longer than both of us do).It’s already getting harder and harder to tell what is “tech” and what is a “person”…that line is just going to blur more over time…
There is no “getting to know you” by the AI. It’s mindless.* https://www.fastcompany.com…* https://www.cnbc.com/2017/1…
We fundamentally disagree on this point.It’s OK though – I’m wrong more than I’m right…so the odds are with you. Time will decide the winner. 🙂
:*). In AI, we know Deep Learning isn’t adequate. MIT TR: “Indeed, backprop wasn’t discovered by probing deep into the brain, decoding thought itself; it grew out of models of how animals learn by trial and error in old classical-conditioning experiments.”* https://www.technologyrevie…So when FB, YouTube et al have us clicking “like” it’s treating us like dopamine rats in Skinner’s box:* https://www.theatlantic.com…On top of this, the recommendations algorithms all work the same (collaborative filters): https://uploads.disquscdn.c…Note the cosine similarity function. That’s how Google search and word embeddings work too. https://uploads.disquscdn.c…And the outcome of all that coding is “All of the anti-Semitic, racist, and xenophobic ad-targeting options offered by Big Tech.”* https://qz.com/1079284/anti…So the tech isn’t getting to know us. It measures the exhaust of behavior and makes predictions based on previous actions and recommendations based on co-correlation with other people in our social groups (FB’s core assumption is “birds of a feather flock and buy together”), and knows next to nothing about why we’re buying or interested in something.I’d thought about these things before and throughout inventing my system.@fredwilson:disqus – Today’s tech is about the past: propagating and compounding historical biases, previous purchases, old ways of thinking like Skinner’s operant conditioning from 1950s!My system is all about the future.
Singularity assumes faster processing of more quantities of data will (miraculously) spark qualia, intelligence, language understanding and mindfulness.They obviously never stood in front of a Brancusi. https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Beautiful. Love his quote: “simplicity is complexity resolved”I know that it is a difficult question, but.. do you have a guess about when it will happen? How much compute and data is needed? 100X, 1000X, more?
She’s is saying there is fallacy in that logic – more data, more processing power does not change the nature of the activity.Programming can only learn in the way you teach it.
I actually know part of Twain’s work which she has shown to us here so it is a double mistake on my part.Thanks for pointing it out.
Word of the day: qualia
I have SO many books that I’ve read only the first few chapters of, that I could write a book about it. Obviously, chapters 2 onward would be blank pages.
I almost never quit on a book (though I have done it once or twice).Something about tapping out that I just don’t handle well (side benefit: it forces me to put more conscious effort into my decision to start).
Other stuff comes up. I don’t think I consciously decide to quit. I just get busy with other stuff.
Cool. You’re just in the middle of a few hundred books then. 🙂
But still, don’t tell me how any of them end.
Mostly with periods….oh sorry, didn’t mean to spoil any of them for you!
Hahaha.
I always quit on a book that doesn’t hold my attention. Life is so short, I know I’ll never get to read all the books out there, but I sure as hell want to read the ones that interest me.
Curious to peel back more on this statement:I have several dozen friends who are always sending me things to read or watch or listen to. Many/most of these people do not work in tech but are hyper-curious and have great breadth of interest. They are my most valuable source of content and inspiration and I have cultivated these relationships over my entire adult life. This was not calculated or planned. It is just happened.Looking back, what did you do to cultivate these relationships? How did they develop? Are there patterns among them?
i am drawn to people who are interested and passionate about many things, not one thing
Interesting. I like those people too, but I also really like knowing people that are super passionate about one thing and have a super deep knowledge about it. In our office: Lego’s, Performance Cars, Board Games, Independent Films, Music, Fishing, Gaming, Beekeeping, Photography, Slick Karts, Food, Gardening, Hot Peppers, Raspberry Pi’s, Hunting, and Slot Cars.I love to talk to somebody that knows something so deeply that they can impart great knowledge and have passion doing it.
The ‘passion’ thing is an invention of millennials as a way to fit in. On the Bachelor the other night it was discussed because the contestant (Ari former ‘race car driver’) liked that one of the girls was passionate about something. As if that is actually going to matter when they have kids and what not. It won’t. Won’t mean anything at all.Back in the day people didn’t search for something to hang their hat on they were just ‘in to something’. Or not. And actually often derided for it. Was like ‘he’s into cars’ or ‘he’s into photography’ etc. Was actually seen as obsessive in a negative way.Nothing wrong with someone not having something that they perseverate over to me. My brother in law has on his web page (he’s a millenial) ‘Joe enjoys making artisan gelato’.
Were you passionate about flying RC Helicopters? Have you forgotten more than I will ever know on the subject?
Yeah and people thought that was weird actually. That is one of my big complaints. Back in the day of ‘hurt feelings’ you either did something that people thought was mainstream and acceptable or they not only ‘didn’t pay you no never mind’ but actually thought you were strange. For example if you couldn’t go to a party because you had a football game that’s ok ‘get out of jail free’. But if you were flying a RC Heli ‘you can do that another time’. It didn’t fit a predictable and acceptable pattern. Neither did entrepreneurship.When I graduated Wharton I never forget my girlfriend’s mother at the time. When I said I was going to start a business she cringed. I saw it in real time and I am good at reading faces (in today’s lingo that would be called a ‘superpower’ you know; I hate that expression).The thing is this. I learned a great deal from flying the heli and it was a boatload of fun. That’s why I did it. And that’s when it was difficult and expensive and took a great deal of adversity. If you crashed you had to rebuild and was very difficult not having anyone teach me. Took a long long time (same with docking a boat btw learned on my own with high stakes).Just the other night was explaining to my wife how I learned about metal fatigue. We were watching “Below Zero” and some guy had to replace a wind turbine. Was obvious to me that it was metal fatigue. Then he puts another replacement up. But doesn’t balance the blades. So I figure it would happen again. In my heli the metal frame pulled apart because I did not balance the blades and at high speed the vibration will cause the metal to fail and separate (not correct technically but the general idea). Ditto for boat props obviously.So sure and yes you can learn from anything. But I just don’t agree with needing to have a passion and either you have one or you don’t but if you don’t that’s fine also. My wife doesn’t really have a passion but she’s boatloads of fun and in a good mood all the time so it would be unfortunate if I rated her on ‘lack of passion’. I just hate that label.
A wonderful novel I’m reading now, Paris in the Present Tense, Mark Helprin. https://www.nyjournalofbook…
The book review makes the novel sound interesting. So, that novel has some people, characters, hmm …. So, can there be such people? I have accumulated a collection of real people possibilities and from that collection have to say “Yes”.How Helprin figured out those characters is curious. One way would be to get transcripts of many sessions of several clinical psychologists, but I doubt that this was his way. Maybe somewhere in the clinical psychology literature there are essentially lists of such personality features.So, the novel can serve as a list of examples of characters. Okay: Mostly when trying to understand something, we start with a collection of examples.When I was in high school and the English teachers would in rapture look at the ceiling and praise fiction, they didn’t explain the aspect of novels I just did and left me thinking that fiction was just something with no good evidence of being true or relevant. Well, fiction can be a collection of people, character, behavior, situation, etc. possibilities which can be a start on understanding such things, but just a start.I learned a small such lesson yesterday: The phone rang, and it was a woman looking for donations for cancer in women. She sounded really sweet. I responded to her, told her I’d LOVE to but just now couldn’t, and she ignored what I said. I repeated, and she paraphrased what I said in an insulting way. I repeated my response more strongly, and she showed that she wouldn’t respond to me or care about me and, instead didn’t respect me and was just trying to use her ability to sound “sweet” to take advantage of me.YouTube now has a lot of old movies. Recently I watched for the first time at https://www.youtube.com/wat…Letter from an Unknown Woman (1948, Max Ophüls)starring Joan Fontaine. She was amazing, especially at being very attractive in “sweet” ways. But, if look at her real life, have to conclude that in the movie she was acting and doing very well at it.Net, some people, IMHO especially females, from that woman on the phone to Ms. Fontaine, can be astoundingly good at acting, so good it’s tough to know what’s real and what’s made up, maybe so good even the female doesn’t know what’s real and what’s acting.Ah, back to things I have a decent shot understanding!
I LOVE Mark Helprin. Have you read Winter’s Tale?https://www.goodreads.com/b…
Yes. One of my all time favorites. This one is right up there.
.If you are a Brit, you prioritise.If you are a Norte Americano, you prioritize.Not a big thing, but a thing.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…
and if you are a citizen of the world and don’t identify with any country?
a stateless grace of being.https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…
.Come on, Freddie, you’re as American as apple pie, Making America Great Again in your own inimitable fashion.If you left NYC, you would shrivel up and disappear.Plus, what’s a bit of Brit lingo amongst friends?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…
Interesting side story on Mos Def who tried to side-step the country ID thing: https://qz.com/843687/rappe…
‘World Service Authority’ – sounds a bit Orwellian.I wonder how far i could get without having to show my passport?
You are several centuries ahead of everybody.
Then you are a member of the World Government of World Citizens & most probably hold a World Passport. Or not.
Going to add a second comment here, as I think this is a major 21st century issue.One of the great benefits of technology is its ability to magnify the impact and productivity of a single person. You can, with capital and tech, feel exactly how you do: a citizen of the world who does not identify with any country.In history, no one – I believe – has been able to sustain themselves with this philosophy. Many have thought of themselves as state ( e.g., King Henry VIII ) with sovereignty, near total independence and a view of themselves as ‘ of the world’. But, even they had to bump elbow with others and their beliefs were constrained. In essence, they paid a tax by spending on defending their kingdoms.In 50 years, 95% of the globe’s wealth could be held by 70M people. Maybe they can fund the UN through a global income tax and truly be ‘of the world’, paying on consumption and property taxes on the things they buy and the assets they own.
words are there simply to communicate. Just ask any 14 yo who is using an entirely different dictionary via SMS, Fb, twitter, et al than you and I.
Since I’m Chinese I pai,排 (put in queue order by hand) whilst also prioritising and prioritizing — depending on which keyboard default and autocorrect is on! Lol.
not a thing … just a difference in spelling, which really is nothing because it is in fact the same thing.
If you are a Brit, you may fail to prioritise, or not, but you certainly won’t ‘not prioritize’.If you are a Norte Americano, you may fail to prioritize, or not,, but you certainly won’t ‘not prioritise’.That is unless – commentary is in the third person – in which case all bets are off.Not a big thing but a far bigger thing – ‘coz it’s true !;)
Everyday life challenges: Managing curation and discovery. Was so much easier managing as a child when comic books were the center of my universe, though the more things change the more they stay the same as I still read about Jughead and Richie Rich everyday, though now they’re wrapped into one DJT.
You lost me: (1) In just what actual, meaningful, clear sense is DJT like Jughead or Richie Rich? (2) A lot of people have two legs, two arms, four eyes, etc., and so does DJT. Beyond such trivial similarities, just what are you claiming that is significant about DJT and like Jughead, etc.? Are you just engaging in some version of grade school, playground name calling, or do you have something significant?You lost me. It appears you don’t like DJT. Okay. But if cartoon characters are your most serious criticism, then you have nothing significant and are giving DJT a clean bill of health.Or, as I recall Jughead, he was a goof off and not good at getting good, big things done. Trump, however, has five children, lots of healthy looking grandchildren, put up a lot of buildings, did well on TV, and in his first try at politics went right to the top of the world, POTUS. Looks like he’s just darned good at getting good, big things done.There’s something significant he’s done, doing, intends doing you don’t like? I’m all ears.
Seriously? Lighten up, my friend. A bit of hyperbole on a Tuesday morning. Nothing more, nothing less.
elsewhere disqus can be a sewer of malcontents and their rage. the internet can enable a strong sense of empowerment not matched by real world conditions. people find that contrast difficult to cope with. open verses closed.
http://ayay.co.uk/arts/expr…
Yup, there is a lot of content on the Internet!Yup, with so much content, nearly everyone on the Internet has challenges in search, discovery, recommendation, notification, curation for content they will want to pay attention to. Maybe some day technology will be able to do for me what humans can do, but today it is the exact opposite. Technology shows me things I already know about. Humans show me things I don’t know about. Yup, there are problems in discovery and recommendation.Challenges for the “technology” include:(1) Personalization. Might as well just go ahead and say that everyone is unique in all the world. Continue and just say that often each time they want some content, what they want then is both new and unique for them. E.g., the last three movies they watched can’t be very good data on what movie they want to watch next. Similarly for music, Web sites, PDF files, etc.Really, might as well just personalize down to what they want at the moment for whatever they have in mind just then due to whatever influences in their life that no one or few others know about. E.g., they might want to pick a movie, Web site, PDF file, etc. to please someone else, maybe some children at a Halloween party.(2) Meaning. The reason for getting content recommendations from selected other people instead of “technology” is that the other people (A) understand something about the person they are sending content recommendations to and (B) understand the meaning of the content they are recommending.Uh, getting meaning out of keywords/phrases is not promising.A solution? Working on it. Actually, have written and run the software and it appears to be ready for significant production but have been doing system management mud wrestling recovering from a very sick development computer.Did I mention “a lot of content” and “nearly everyone on the Internet”?How to do that? Not with AI or ML at all and not merely with computer science! Instead, the crucial core of the “technology” is some original applied math I derived based on some advanced pure math prerequisites.
https://www.youtube.com/wat…from 6:50there is a lot of content on the internet, much of it generated by the malcontented.
Yup, the content has wide variety.
“prefer to be a mile wide and an inch deep” agreed, I also prioritise info through my chosen peers.”That’s me in the corner” Hopefully “The obvious child” Two lines I never forget “Crosses in the ball park” & “Hanging by his heals in the odour of sanctity”
I wholly endorse Fred’s approach: I have adopted the same strategy of staying wide and not too deep except on specialist areas. I also try to source information from a variety of sources, even some that I have a visceral dislike of, in an effort to avoid echo-chamber syndrome.One other technique is to manage the subscription lists like your wardrobe: if it hasn’t been worn or read for sometime get rid of it.
Hi Fred,Really curious to know what genre of fiction/novels you’ve been reading in the past year. Literary fiction/Sci-fi/Thrillers?
I am a huge reader — my pace is something like 50 books/year. I don’t watch much TV except sports and I fly a lot, so that’s how I find time to read. I always read at night before bed. Goodreads is one of the best apps ever – that’s where I store the list of want-to-reads, see what others are reading, read reviews and see what has just been published. I rarely give up on a book once started, so I vet pretty carefully what I decide to read. I read a wide variety. My last two books were The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes (A MUST READ) and A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles. Both excellent. Like you, I don’t read many business books. I have found that books that have nothing to do with what I do all day help me think about what I do all day with new perspective and bring new connections to my thinking.The winners last year for me were: Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson and The Three Body Problem series by Liu Cixin. Just in case anyone is looking for some amazing reads.For news consumption it used to be random. I’m back to newspapers — I guess I trust the editors more than randomness. But I’ve tried to include a non-US paper to get a bit more perspective. I scan the Independent (UK), the NYT and the WSJ pretty much every morning. I listen to the news on the way to work as well – mostly Bloomberg – the only way I can digest business news.
Rhodes also has, IMHO, an even better book on the hydrogen bomb.Another candidate foreign news source ishttps://www.afp.com/en/
The parsing of content: When cable TV capacity expanded decades ago it was rooted in micro-targeting relative to its broadcast TV cousins. The ability to reach folks based on their affinity and interests. With OTT distribution not rooted in cable carriage that model and its content potentially will be pushed even further. Fox today announced a new OTT sub service called Fox Nation appealing to, what they call, Fox News’ “super fans.” Think of it as Hannity on steroids. We are all aghast at what the Russians are doing, but we’re kind of doing the same thing in our own backyard, and that also applies to an MSNBC or CNN if they too have any plans to slice and dice their propaganda—not necessarily news—agenda. What exactly is news today? More and more, it’s increasingly becoming no different than Russian state news (agenda driven and lacking in objectivity).
We are all aghast at what the Russians are doing, but we’re kind of doing the same thing in our own backyard, and that also applies to an MSNBC or CNN iThis is exactly true. And in a much bigger way. In other words not ok if a foreign government in any way shape or form. But ok if anyone here in the US in any way shape or form does the same or worse. [1][1] I am reminded of the ‘Diana constipated’ story from growing up.I had a friend and his name was Mike.He had a stepmother whose name was Diana.He would constantly trash Diana and call her all sorts of names. One was he would say she was ‘constipated’. Where I first learned about that medical condition.So one day I called her ‘constipated’. He said ‘I can call Diana constipated Diana constipated, but you can’t’.Parting thought is that one key to a good marriage or relationship is that the other party accepts that if they say negative things about their family it’s ok if you also do the same.
If I’m reminded of anything growing up it is the person that goads two people into a fight, because they know both will lose and that makes them feel good in a weird way. Pretend to be friends to both, but actually hate both.And I think that the key to a good marriage is never saying negative things about another persons family. (Even if there are some serious losers)
To me if they are sticking ideas into your head then it’s fair game. In other words don’t constantly complain and say shit and then expect me to keep my mouth shut. Just because it’s your family doesn’t give you superpower rights. Now if they don’t say negative then fine I will keep my mouth shut (obviously). This concept also extends to religion and race. If you say things about your own race/religion (and god knows I do btw) you don’t get a special exception and then the right to trash others (close to you I mean) that speak the same way. No “I can I am protected but you can’t”. Can’t have it both ways.My younger millennial brother in law’s name is Joe. We both call him ‘joe it all’ because he doesn’t want to hear any advice he thinks he knows it all. My wife loves that one. I came up with it.One of the things that I loved about my wife when I met her was that her family wasn’t some kind of ‘protected’ class. Ditto for her kids (or my kids). We both call it like we see it. That works for us not saying it will for everyone.
What amazes me is that for me I have CNN and Fox right next to each other. Observation, not political.My wife sometimes has Fox (hate) on in the Kitchen.So then I flip to CNN (hate) just to see the other side, as I cook.Near as I can tell the sole purpose of both is to make you angry. Angry because you agree with one, and angry because you disagree with the other.And they literally are alternate universes. I mean if you just woke up from a comma and had no context if you watched one and then the other you would think it couldn’t be about the same topic.
CNN might have its issues, but any kind of equivalence with Fox is really false.Fox has picked its audience and makes up content to what it thinks the audience (president and his core base) wants to hear. Spinning, deflection, distortion, obfuscation, suppression are all their specialty.Fox has been nothing less than obsequious to Trump and obnoxious to his predecessor. I have a hard time with their falsehoods and deliberate pursuit of untruth.
C’mon Man! (NFL reference). Look I think Fox is horrible. CNN? Just as bad. Firing your top three investigative people for publishing a false story about Trump and Russia: http://money.cnn.com/2017/0…I give them some credit for firing them, but then it comes out the head of News was saying Russian Scandal gets us ratings, might as well told them to do it, and probably did.No, this is how we got where we got. There are very few people like me that say: In the words of Mercuito from Romeo and Julliet: “A pox on both of your houses”
call me biased, but hard for me to see beyond how Fox does business. Remember the Seth Rich scandal where they blamed a young kid who committed suicide for the whole Russia scandal? Every day was filled with hate during the Obama years, and now they are servile to the point of being shameful. CNN might have made mistakes, but they simply do not operate at the same level of partisanship and cunningness.We are here because intelligent people made false equivalences in 2016 and still do now. I am sorry but Trump and Fox News are the very anti thesis of decency, truth, and looking out for the good of the country. I am not a democrat and think they had (have) a horrible message, but it is time that good people take a stand on the cancer that trump represents. My nephews from India refuse to come to the US for education because they fear (rightly so) that the country has turned backward.Time to call BS on false equivalence. Trump is a master manipulator and a great marketer, but is serving at best, only himself or at worst, a foreign overlord. We can do better and we should.
You are right that is a huge problem. I we should allow the best and brightest to come to the U.S., get a STEM degree and get a Green Card. Now if we talk about equivalence…why didn’t Obama push for that?? Or repeal Patriot Act, or curb NSA, etc. And he edit: Trump is for lack of less polite term a pig.Nope a Pox on both your houses.
I we (sic) should allow the best and brightest to come to the U.S., get a STEM degree and get a Green Card.I can’t say that I totally agree with that. The upside is they pay full freight at universities and in theory that should lower the cost for others at that school. [1]The downside is they take a spot away from someone in the US. There are only so many spots, right? If it’s filled by someone who comes here from India (and many go back home btw) then the same opportunity doesn’t exist for someone here.The makeup of Penn (as only one example) is vastly different than it was back when I went there.[1] But that is debatable since perhaps they universities just end up increasing the budget and spending more money, right?
Nope. In the last post CD states these huge companies where are they based and who do they employee?? What happens when that is not in the U.S. What happens if Google was not based in the U.S., Facebook?? Apple……Don’t believe in outsourcing, but it is not a zero sum game.
> cancer that trump represents.Details, cases, examples, facts?
Debate is worthwhile only with people who seek the truth, not with those who will ignore or belittle evidence that do not conform to their views. Let us agree to disagree.
You still have given no “evidence”.
Dude, I am not wasting any energy or effort with you on political debate. My conversation was with Philip, not with you.
I unfortunately blocked him, the only good thing is he at least wasn’t badgering, berating, and belittling a woman.Let me be clear I am not debating the chilling effect Trump has had on my Indian developers who comprise 20% of my staff and 75% of which are working towards Green Cards.It is absolutely stupid. My first tenant of management “find the best people”It is not a zero sum game. Full stop.Let me give a great personal example. We were acquired. I STRONGLY believe that all of development should be centralized in my office and all of those people are fairly paid, receive benefits and pay taxes (the company also pays taxes on those employees) You can agree, or disagree with my position.But all of those people are paying taxes and spending money in the U.S. economy. Then somebody argues: Yes but those 15% are taking American Jobs!!!Let me tell you how the other three divisions operate: They outsource all of their development to Infosys. No American jobs. No American taxes. No spending in America. If I did that those 85% of Americans would not have jobs! (and I wouldn’t have the great product which is why we were acquired)That is why this rancor is so bad. I’d love to have a discussion where we say we are going to make outsourcing tougher, we are not going to have visa mills where people come over for a short period of time get paid and live like shit, then go back to another countryI’m great as long as the tradeoff is that those really talented people get treated like they should. I.e. get Green Cards.For the last hire we interviewed 86 people we were so impressed by 2 that we couldn’t pick and therefore we picked both when we were only looking for 1. One was an Indian working on Green Card the other was an American from a farm family in Lancaster, PA He had decided to go get his CompSci degree and grow locally at a manufacturing company and decided to move to get a software company job. But that manufacturing company will hire another American.These are discussions we should have not just yelling.
I am going to out the outsourcing emails I got this week.This week in my junk email box.I did not authorize one of them so I feel if you can email me, I can out you:[email protected] [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@criticalimpact.comAll the pitches are would like you like to hire people for $10/hr with no tax!!!
Details, examples, facts, references?
“Near as I can tell the sole purpose of both is to make you angry.”Angry people leads to more tv watching, and talking /ranting with their friends. More tv watching = more money in ads.
We do not disagree. Find sad
Ugh, so so sad 🙁
I struggled with content consumption for a while, until I figured out what worked for me. And it works really well.Follow a small number of people on twitter (for me, it needs to be under 50 or everything gets drowned out. People who say, write and share things (but not too much) that I find interesting and learn from.Then, ruthlessly curate that list (if they start to say, write or share stuff I don’t find interesting or learn from- or too much in general, I just unfollow them.This throws up a good number of tweets and posts for me each week, which I quickly send to my kindle with one click and read later in the day.
“Follow a small number of people on twitter”I have a “VIP” list on twitter that is really the only people i pay attention to, though recently I’ve actually significantly decreased my Twitter usage.
I know there’s been a lot of recent posts around blockchain, but won’t decentralization solve a lot of how you prioritize your content? Instead of Facebook, Amazon, Google centralizing the data on you, and pushing out content, blockchain/decentralization will allow all of us to control our own data, etc. In which case, we will likely control the content that gets pushed to us as well. Maybe I am overthinking or don’t totally understand, but I would think the migration to decentralization would really help with this a lot.
Content is everywhere…I find two main points interesting in your post (1) the distribution (delivery) and (2) the consumption (inputs). These points are really beginning to evolve – how the author finds you and how they pull your interest. I have a short list of sources, mainly digital books/periodicals, thought leaders like yourself, and google alerts all help organize my choices.
My boutique law firm (startup, VC and crypto work) recently launched a weekly newsletter that covers (1) content relating to the startup industry that we liked from the previous week, giving you something to read, listen to, and watch; and (2) content we recently created, keeping you up to date on news and insight from our team. One of our goals with this is to help our community save time on locating quality content, which ties into this blog post. Link here — https://www.scannavinolamb….
I run a weekly newsletter as part of the private (paid) Geek Estate community (https://www.geekestate.com/). It’s a few links with a high level thought or two about each, as well as one or two topics I write in more depth about.
One of the things I’ve been looking for since many years are ways to read original news from within non-English countries in a subtle and authentic translation (no such thing as Google translate).It would be great to hear the heartbeat of the author that wrote the original article. I think we are missing out on a lot of knowledge and cultural aspect by not getting the authentic translation, nor having the capability and ability to grasp the local tone of news.Today the issue is not even that of translation, as the news even doesn’t reach me (or I don’t have good means to look for it – in Belgium Google by default turns me to local news!?). There are no multi-language news aggregators, just large media houses opinionating and attempting to translate as good as possible – or machines pointing me at wrong sources.Imagine that news from China, Russia, Arabic world, and many European countries could reach us in a single stream (to everyone in any language), but translated in such a way that the authenticity of the article stays as accurate as possible. Challenging, but should be possible to solve.
I wonder if that curated group of friends would share with you if they heard about or had distaste for incentivized structure crypto-assets for being Ponzi-Pyramid schemes?Curation is also a bubble, of what you like to hear, so if you put blinders on – you’re going to have tunnel vision; obviously you have the bias and incentive and financial responsibility to your investments — unfortunately those responsibilities of investors only extend to the company’s finances and heartbeat – and not all of society’s and our greater interests.
I started a paid mastermind group/community for real estate tech in September. The pitch is that the community curates the industry for you, so you’re not forced to wade through endless crap to find the relevant articles and videos to consume. Working pretty well so far.. at 70 paying members right now.
On the topic of content, I would urge everyone here to listen to the Humane Arts podcast series by Wes Cecil. I have been going through his lectures for about a year now and I have not tired.https://soundcloud.com/user…He tackles everything from modern philosophers to forgotten thinker to the history of language. I have no idea why he doesn’t have more listeners. Easily in my top 3 podcasts I have ever listened to.
for sure