Again, the unstated implication is that the US has a moral right to shepherd the rest of the world to the correct moral conclusion to this situation. The rest of the world is just too damn ignorant to figure out how to not murder everyone with nukes, so the US has to have the hard job of controlling the nuclear stockpiles of the world. It's tough having that moral high ground, but someone's got to do it.

The US has committed crimes of war with nuclear weapons against civilians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_a...

The fact of the matter is that knowledge cannot be suppressed. The ability to create and operate nuclear weapons is not something that is going to be a controlled secrete for very long - if it is at all. The current policy of the US asserting its power over the rest of the world is only going to ensure that when this knowledge is common, it will most certainly be used to ensure the end of the US power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melian_Dialogue

The unstated implication is that weapons and military power are for the US, and its allies. Others can't have any.

The brazen arrogance of that idea is probably among the chief reasons the US is so vehemently and passionately disliked throughout the world.

What precisely is wrong with other states acquiring nuclear weapons, beyond the fact that it threatens US power?

> miserable schmuck > barely gets by in his job

People who are miserable schmucks barely getting by in their jobs are the very antithesis of the manipulative human I described above. A manipulative person is usually the director of sales. A manipulative person is someone who spends 20-30 hours in the office at the most, and the rest of it with his/her family or vacationing.

You need to understand that manipulation of human beings isn't a character flaw, or something done for its own sake. It is done with a laser-focus on the results. Either you have manipulated the dev/ops team to work unreasonable hours to meet a promise to a major client that will net you alone a 20k benefit at the end of the month or ... you are going to be "just" the sales guy.

People like "us" here on HN are cannon fodder for people who operate at this level. Manipulation, persuasion, sales, negotiation - people who excel at this eat people who "ENJOY" their 40hr jobs.

I - I'm writing honestly here. It's difficult for me to believe you are not trolling. It's a very thin line for me to believe you are writing honestly here.

> cheater actually gain? Almost nothing.

The ability to demand a salary equivalent and easily surpassing that of a 20+ year engineer for ... the ability to sell things? Do you realize this human has no academic expertise whatsoever? They are PAID to manipulate and persuade.

You can call that "cheating". You can find it detestable. You can cry about it in eloquent and persuasive language as you have attempted to do above.

I sincerely do not mean this as an insult but: either you will adapt to the fact that 'success = manipulation' in life, or you will become one of the deluded schmucks in a dead end job because your skills with rails/js are obsolete in 20 years. The ability to manipulate people has infinite job security, and infinite earning potential.

As the Marines say: adapt, and overcome.

Unfortunately, this is a skillset orthogonal to focuses of STEM majors: hence the drama generated by this post.

As the Marines say: improvise, adapt, and overcome.

Still further: what of the gender bias? A forty person study seems hardly likely to account for the gender bias inherent in compassionate activities. I would suspect that a male would be more inclined to give up his seat to an attractive female than any other, even regardless of the circumstances (broken foot, lack of chairs, etc.) This "study" warrants some careful reading.

A country's military is a reflection of and limited by the society that spawns it. The USA can keep disciplined and ethical soldiers because it has never suffered civil unrest, never been invaded, enjoys prosperity, freedom, public law and justice. No such thing can be said of Afghanistan or Iraq. Moreover - the "10 weeks of BCT" is not "just" "10 weeks of BCT". There is a logistics and supply train several tho-- million pages long that creates those "just" 10 weeks. Consider the fact that humans are recruited. Recruiters need to be trained, fed, paid, and have offices. That costs money. Afghanistan has no money. Consider the fact that young men need to be transported from and to BCT: this requires roads free of IEDs, requires fuel for trucks, favourable economic conditions to produce or import buses. Consider the fact that a certain percentage of all military trainees quit before completing that training. This is accounted for and expected: there are 300 million humans in the USA and this is acceptable losses. Consider the fact that abiding by the laws of a nation and strict adherence to authority is something these "17/18" year olds have done for two decades by the time their military training is over. It is ingrained into their psyche to follow the law from the earliest age, in the most gentle of methods: by the witnessing of safety and prosperity of Americans abiding by the law. Consider an Afghani youth: what is ignrained into them is an invsion by Russia and now invasion by America. How confident in justice do you think they are? How inclined are they to respect authority? How confortable are they submitting to a national government?

A country's military is fundamentally a reflection of the society it spawns. Afghanistan is a failed state in every respect, for the last several decades, and as such it cannot muster a professional military despite the efforts of the US-led coalition.

That can be horrifically depressing or pragmatic and inspiring: the emotional reaction is irrelevant, it is the truth.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpX--7xb2IA [2] http://rapgenius.com/Kendrick-lamar-keishas-song-her-pain-ly...

It's not so simple. If the reader is interested in comprehending a large amount of technical or objective information quickly, then yes, by all means, start with the point, hold no cards above the table, and get to it.

But even this article demonstrates that sometimes, a different approach is appropriate. "When I was a 25 year old editor" -- what the hell is a 25-year old doing being an editor of a paper? What kind of a paper is this anyway?

That - strikes my interest. That makes me want to continue reading. It draws me in. This is why I read - to shed the dust of everyday life - to be drawn in and whisked away to a fantasy world much more exciting than my own life.

The way to start a chunk of text is to be keenly aware of who your audience is, and what they want. And, equally, the way to begin reading a chunk of text is to either adapt to the the mold of the intended audience or simply reject the writing. It's not valid to say that starting a book in a coy, crafty, inviting way is somehow illegitimate because it doesn't get to the point right away. Some people prefer and enjoy that type of opening.

After 3 months, I generally take apart an idea over the course of days. I'll destroy it from every angle, and I'll show from as-simple-as-possible logic. Every single sentence has to be sound logic, and every tiny nook and crany needs to be explored.

The first three months are for my emotions to settle and solidify. The next 1-2 weeks are for me to have a logical, impartial, and objective argument with the idea. A portion of it is to assume the role of a 12 year old internet troll and absolutely assault the idea from every angle. There cannot remain even a single facet I am unsure of, or uncertain of, or cannot backup with facts or logic stemming from facts.

If it stands after this, then it becomes second nature to begin. There isn't any giddy enthusiasm, but there also isn't any hopeless depression when encountering an unknown. The fight has been fought, all that remains is execution. Starting is weary, and execution is tame. There is no gut-sinking defeated feeling once the euphoria wears off: there's just a logical argument - written down - for what needs to be done, and why.

This is how I've made some of the most difficult decisions in my life, and it has so far worked. It protracts the decision making process into months, and that's inefficient and sad. But it is guaranteed to work for me. This is how I have lost a very significant amount of weight, and how I have stopped smoking.

A part of it is, for me at least, to acknowledge that I dislike change intensly. I don't think I'm unique in that regard among humans, but it's something I feel passionate about changing. If baby steps is what's required, then baby steps it'll be.

My next goal is to begin running. I'm in the first month of the fermentation stage: the passion to start running 3 times a week has been building within me over the last 3-6 months, but I've gotten serious about it last month. Now the 3 month waiting period begins. During those 3 months, I'll begin kicking things around my head. Just this morning, it occurred to me that I'll need to keep a precise schedule, and if I lax from it, then I'll miss a day, and this makes me very worried. I want to be disciplined about it. I'm not sure how I'll solve that - perhaps run in the afternoon? It's something I'm going to work out by the end of January.

Simple example:

  Product  
  - Features I'm excited to work on   
  -- the new customer lookup workflow  
  -- the Google mapping API

  - Features Customer has requested   
  -- bulk download and emailing of electrical schematics documents  
  -- text ripping of PDF invoice documents

----

As a result of asking "why X for foo here, and not X for bar there", it's easy to be comprehensive and thorough. That is the secret sauce of FreeMind. If you organize the tasks and ideas sensibly, you can apply simple questions to analyze them and generate valuable ideas and ensure nothing is missing.

The second bit of secret sauce is: I have a deadline for end of week to demonstrate text ripping features of the accounting documents. But but but - the back of my mind is screaming - but that Google mapping API is really interesting and I bet I could get it done in less than ten minutes. How cool would be to map all their customer invoices on a map of the earth? And it would be really nice to research an open source document management system. And, and, it would be kind of neat to see if that system had a "bulk upload/download" feature - I mean, that sounds sensible enough?

All those questions/concerns/thoughts are unfocused, de-prioritized noise. I'm not getting anything accomplished and I'm in danger of getting even less accomplished if I follow any of those thoughts.

To combat this in FreeMind, I simply create another toplevel node called "Today's focus", drag the priorities into it from the other nodes, and then fold all the other nodes so that I don't become distracted.

... this, as evidenced by this sprawling post, still requires discipline to work. :)

I'd like to know what instant chat tools HN folks favour for instant asynchronous communication.

I'm leaning against setting up an IRC server simply because graphical notifications would be nice. I would also prefer something open source, and possibly PHP based as I'd like to extend it and tie into our existing systems.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4528643

Points: 8

# Comments: 13

Moreover, Peldi's blog is frequently featured here on HN, and he writes cogently and about interesting things. These posts, in particular, struck a chord with me: http://blogs.balsamiq.com/peldi/2011/09/07/policies/

Can anyone explain why a spinal cord injury would render a human unable to raise their blood pressure through strenuous physical exercise? It doesn't seem to make sense.

For reference, here are the article's points: > The market doesn’t care what you love > You must create value > You must be adaptable. > You must learn how to sell > You must be entrepreneurial

Clearly list your criticisms. The absurdity of your two comments is staggering.