I’ve decided that if I’m going to love, I’m going to love. hard.
Many people look at what didn’t work in their past relationships that lead to their heart being broken. They then try to avoid this in the future by having less emotional investment and being more guarded about who they let their heart out to.
I think people are conflating emotional investment with open communication. They think that if they had just been less invested in the person, then they could have avoided all this pain.I think people are deluding themselves. Two reasons:
I’m going to prioritize the person over the relationship .
A lot of times, when just entering the rush of a new intimate relationship, we get worried about defining the relationship - what it should be, whether or not we’re boyfriend/girlfriend, whether or not he’s seeing someone else. These trains of thoughts make it difficult to live in the moment, to appreciate the person for who they are, and savor the time when you’re with them.
It’s the prioritization of the relationship over the person that creates bad outcomes. Things start to become binary — we’re either exclusive or we’re not friends at all — and power dynamics come into play — he took 5 hours to respond to my text, is the ball in his court or mine? We’re no longer happy with the time we spend with them, rather, we suddenly build up expectations and want more.
I think this is related to my lines of thought on the replaceability of people. People are replaceable — but that doesn’t mean I don’t deeply value the people I have formed relationships with. Our relationship is not defined by my constantly looking into the future and weighing the value you could add to my life — it’s defined by the deep experiences that we’ve shared in the past to create the meaningful relationship we have now.
Few people are worth your EQ. When you meet someone you believe is worth emotionally investing in, instead of trying to put them into a hole and asking, “Is he the one?” why not ask, “Am I building something amazing with this person? What else do I want to build with them?”
Jun 26, 2014
I attended the grand opening party of Flexform’s first flagship showroom last night.
Stimulating conversation with Italy-based Flexform owner Giuliano Galimberti, moderated by acclaimed design editor Zahid Sardar.
I am obsessed with her jacket. And it turns inside out. what what. Back to the good days in grade school when my clothing was reversible.
If I were ever a man, one of the biggest things I’d be excited about is being able to properly fit my suits. How good does well-tailored look.
I’m in love Celia Shuman’s androgynous style. Few people can pull it off well.Jun 20, 2014
Sometimes I get really frustrated when I hear my mom talk about “saving face” and caring so much about what other people think and bragging to them about her daughter being a doctor (which is great, but not when you tie that into your self-worth and identity).
I should just accept her the way she it. It’s a very human thing to do. I appreciate the contrast when I hang out with friends who attribute their self-worth to other things (like inherent self-worth).
Additionally, there is unlocked power in gratitude. You could just see them as books.
There are 129 million books out there. How many have you read?
You could also see them as… having private access to the greatest minds in history. Oh, and what a coincidence that the most common language these books are written in is one that you are able to read! (approx. 2 in 3 people in the world cannot read English).
People don’t know what you want. It is your obligation (and your responsibility if you have self-respect) to communicate what you want and
hold them accountable to respecting your boundaries.
I’ve realized that sometimes I won’t state my boundaries first, because I’m afraid of what may happen, usually that I’ll piss them off. But often the opposite usually happens — people are more attracted to you for your clarity. They respect you, because you respect yourself. You take care of yourself. :)
Your boss? He’s just a guy. Peter Thiel? He’s just a person.
I further realized this upon meeting one of my biggest idols ever. I think he is such a visionary. When I asked him about he stumbled upon his vision, he said it just seemed logical. Now leafing through all the literature and talks and people who inspire him, I realize it only makes sense that he would have come to the conclusion that he did.
"I noticed a long time ago that people, on the whole, are stupid, and behave stupidly and responding to their stupidity is bad for me in the long run now, i’m not saying that people are stupid as individuals but people have this habit of forming opinions before they understand things or before they’ve been exposed to more than one viewpoint which is a stupid thing to do, because it opens you up to utter manipulation and demagoguery and then, to top it off they revel in their stoicism as they deal with the consequences of their ill-formed judgements.”
Sometimes when I’m lonely, I think I am the only person in the world who is alone and all my friends are busy and people-filled. How ridiculous does that sound?
You are only alone, if you ignore all the other people who are exactly like you.
Being vulnerable is important. You might feel anxious at first. Why not take the mindset of:
This is what I like about you. If you don’t like me, then it just speeds up this process faster.
Give up trying to control. I realized I was being delusional when I used to conceal my emotions or how I felt about someone. Now I focus on surfacing reality. I get better outcomes and I learn to design around it.
It’s a matter of prioritization. Confronting reality and controlling reality are not mutually exclusive. First do one, then do the other. There are some things:
This makes things temporary, because you’re no longer attaching yourself to outcomes. And that’s OK.
I like that I can appreciate the past and the present and what I have. But I can also understand the temporal nature and not be longing for things or be sad that I won’t have it in the future.Jun 19, 2014
While I’m all for checking your ego at the door (a la Ray Dalio’s “Principles”), it’s important to recognize and own your accomplishments and the value you bring to a setting.
Think about the power dynamics at play when a teacher walks into a classroom. The teacher is able to bring that much more value because he is aware of what he has to offer.
Let us imagine a universe in which he attributed all his past accomplishments to luck. It would be much harder for him to recognize what he could bring to the table — there would be a gift there, but his doubts would kill the gift. Attributing accomplishments to luck and circumstance can lead one to a mindset that deprives others of the gift you behold.
What if you took that power mindset to every situation — a situation in which you’d generally take a more deferential role, like your next job interview? How much more value could you add?
As my former manager Jeff Taylor says, “I figure if I’m going to be attending a meeting, I might as well run it.” People will tell you if you’re stepping over their boundaries.
There is a vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening that is translated through you into action, and because there is only one of you in all of time, this expression is unique. And if you block it, it will never exist through any other medium and it will be lost. The world will not have it. It is not your business to determine how good it is nor how valuable nor how it compares with other expressions. It is your business to keep it yours clearly and directly, to keep the channel open.
Martha Graham.Jun 18, 2014
I had the pleasure of sitting with Alan Kay ("The best way to predict the future is to invent it.") last week during his visit to the CDG. Some personal takeaways:
It forces you to consider that you may be doing something wrong, at the expense of entering a herd-like mentality — a desire to conform to social approval. This mindset stifles progress, because people just end up making copies.
How do we bootstrap self-consciousness in children and get them to grapple with themselves as creatures?
We can accomplish this through expanding outlook and an openness to intellectual weirdness - anthropology, for example, pushes at the bounds of this. The discipline forces you to realize that everything that is strange to someone is normal to someone — teetering towards validating your independent thinking.
One of the fastest ways to accelerate awareness (and get smarter) is through reading. We have access to some of the best minds in history — writing has enabled us to not only share ideas at different times, but also piece through the cleaned-up thought processes of others.
Jun 16, 2014
By the time I got to school, I had already read a couple hundred books. I knew in the first grade that they were lying to me because I had already been exposed to other points of view. School is basically about one point of view — the one the teacher has or the textbooks have.
- Alan Kay
I’m playing a new game: 1. Find the elephant in the room, 2. Mention it.
Sometimes I get into conversations where there is something I am thinking, but for some reason I am not saying it. This often leads to bad outcomes. My good friend Eddie once mentioned:
If you don’t voice your opinion, then I won’t know what you’re thinking.
(Common sense. But common sense is not always common.)
The other day, my friend James was frustrated that an ex-girlfriend Sasha he still wanted to keep in touch with wasn’t responding to his emails or texts; or would respond sporadically and be flakey about it. James went on about his frustrations, and I asked him, “Have you told her that this frustrates you?” He responded, “You know what Adrienne; I had not even thought of that.”
A few days later, James told me he had talked to Sasha about her unresponsiveness, and Sasha was surprised and had not even realized he was trying to contact her.
Why do we not mention the elephant in the room? This can be attributed to a (dangerous!) mindset:
In other words, we allow ourselves to be pulled into a crowd mentality, and fail to give credibility to our individual thoughts.
At the Stanford Salon yesterday night, I was giving a talk on visualizing probability distributions, where I was explaining an equation and assumed everyone was with me.
It wasn’t until Rafael interjected with, “If that makes sense to you, give a thumbs up,” that I realized some people were lost. His interjection led to furthered understanding and learning in our conversation, which would have been lost without his independent thinking.
As Nietzche notes:
Jun 10, 2014Madness is rare in individuals — but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule.
Bret was speaking of the requests he gets to release the source code for his prototypes, and his rationale behind not doing so — that it could lead to innovation halting, because the release creates a standard for what products should be.
When an inventor creates a tool and makes it available to the world, the public has a tendency to simply accept the tool as is, use it, and stop thinking of new ways to do things. (thus halting development of the product).
Pie charts are pervasive…
A simple example illustrates that pie charts make it difficult to make comparisons between two quantities. See:
What if we represented the same information like this, instead? This illustration enables us to make direct comparisons between quantities.
Because pie charts cannot spatially fit all information, they also are pleasantly accompanied by a key (right-hand side), which attempts to illustrate what all the components of the pie chart designate.
Could we design another way to represent this information — one that doesn’t require you darting your eyes back and forth to understand the information?
What about this?
Okay. Maybe not as aesthetically pleasing. Perhaps a reason why people use pie charts is because all the circles look pretty. But I would argue that we should not sell ourselves short — can we not have a representation that is both intuitively functional, and aesthetically pleasing?
I re-designed a representation of the same information; illustrated below.
These are just pie charts. Okay, it’ll take a millisecond longer to process the percentages. Why does it matter?
I think we vastly underestimate how good the quality of an experience (in this case, understanding and exploring the world) could be, because we already have models in our heads of what the medium is currently like.
Another way to view this idea is through the lens of Bayes’ theorem. The traditional example is the cancer testing scenario, where you’re presented with a series of probabilities.
You are typically asked:
Assuming you have a positive test, what is the chance you have cancer?
When calculated out, the number seems much lower than expected.
Some of us simply accept that our brains do not intuitively grasp probabilities, but I’d argue that statistics is only unintuitive because we don’t have proper representations.
How would you design another representation of Bayes’ Theorem?
More to come.Jun 5, 2014
I like people with extreme personalities. People who are loud, aggressively opinionated, even. Some might find it a turn off, but my good friend Alton taught me we learn more from extremes than from the mediocrity of the means. Neil is one of those.
If you Google Neil deGrasse Tyson, a contentious array of headlines appear, from Neil deGrasse Tyson Slammed for Dismissing Philosophy as Useless to Neil deGrasse Tyson Destroys Climate Deniers.
I asked him, “What were key moments in your life when you acquired key pieces of wisdom? How did it inform your life going forward?”
On taking the red pill to live forever if the choice were given to you:
It is the fact that we die that brings focus to our lives. Imagine animals that live for one cycle. Think about the intensity of their experience.
[During the Civil War period] many slaves thought, “Something great happens in the after life.” This led to complacency. There was no urge for them to change their circumstances.
On working with the government for space exploration:
Jun 3, 2014
[We should] remind ourselves that the president works for us. So if I have a five-minute statement, somebody ought to sit the fuck down and listen to me.
Most business relationships either become too tense to tolerate or not tense enough to be productive after a while. Either people challenge each other to the point where they don’t like each other or they become complacent about each other’s feedback and no longer benefit from the relationship. With Marc and me, even after eighteen years, he upsets me almost every day by finding something wrong in my thinking, and I do the same for him. It works."The Hard Thing about Hard Things" by Ben Horowitz May 30, 2014
There are different lenses in which people perceive the world, which enable them to process thoughts and concepts in different ways. I’ve asked this question to several people after my friend Hani asked me.
This is an illustration of the responses I’ve received:
A mutual friend visualizes a running thread, where he bookmarks salient points, synthesizes them, and then communicates them when the fellow conversationalist is done talking.
Hani visualizes conversations as a stream of images and text. I notice in our conversations, he’s always pulling out entities.
I visualize many conversations by constantly trying to put ideas into buckets. For two reasons: 1) an anchor that I can keep for later, or 2) an association that helps me arrive at a new insight.
My colleague Gil is more contrarian who might view many conversations in this manner: he synthesizes the points of the fellow conversationalist, and then maps each point to a counter-point. The goal is to turn over the same concept in as many ways as possible.
As Marvin Minsky says, “You don’t understand something until you understand it more than one way.”
Think about the last meaningful conversation you had with someone. What was running through your mind?May 30, 2014
You know how when you stop seeing someone you’ve been emotionally involved with, and every.thing. reminds you of them? It’s painful to think about how I can draw associations between a guy I was seeing to all of these things that are completely unrelated.
But what if I instead applied this to learning a new concept? Every time I learn something new — an economic theory, a cognitive bias, a sorting algorithm — I try and anchor it to as many other (tangentially-related) concepts as possible?
The power is in the person who can make the most connections and build their latticework of mental models. :)
One day I was surprised to discover that some adults—even most adults—did not understand or even care about the magic of the gears… I have never turned away from the questions that started with that discovery: How could what was so simple for me be incomprehensible to other people?
My proud father suggested “being clever” as an explanation. But I was painfully aware that some people who could not understand the differential could easily do things I found much more difficult.
Slowly I began to formulate what I still consider the fundamental fact about learning: Anything is easy if you can assimilate it to your collection of models. If you can’t, anything can be painfully difficult.
May 13, 2014
Reasoning, problem solving, and learning depend on a capacity to code and manipulate relational knowledge, with complex structures emerging from the systematic recombination of more primitive elements.
Instead of asserting the takeaways to be those with which the speaker attempted to communicate, I instead tried a different route and extrapolated a few takeaways from my personal views.
It was David’s accomplishments, yet contrast with his humility that particularly struck me.
The mission of the d.school is to build confidence in creative abilities. There are two ways to accomplish this:
When I trace how I came to be a mathematician, I see much that was idiosyncratic, much that could not be duplicated as part of a generalized vision of education reform. And I certainly don’t think that we would want everyone to become a mathematician. But I think that the kind of pleasure I take in mathematics should be part of a general vision of what education should be about. If we can grasp the essence of one person’s experiences, we may be able to replicate its consequences in other ways and in particular this consequence of finding beauty in abstract things.
If we really look at the “child as builder” we are on our way to an answer. All builders need materials to build with… In some cases the culture supplies them in abundance… For example, the fact that so many important things (knives and forks, mothers and fathers, shoes and socks) come in pairs is a “material” for the construction of an intuitive sense of number. But in many cases where Piaget would explain the slower development of a particular concept by its greater complexity or formality, I see the critical factor as the relative poverty of the culture in those materials that would make the concept simple and concrete.
What if, instead of thinking of university as a contiguous 4-year experience, we thought of it as a 6-year experience, where you could spread out those 6 years and attend them at any time in your life?
The concept here is breaking the treadmill. The urgency and pressure to finish — and rather, create an extraordinary experience.
I find another thread intertwined here — the importance of gratitude. Contrast helps to create that. When you’ve been out of school for a few years, and then come back to school, you’re able to suddenly notice particular details and opportunities that you didn’t see as available before.
How do we amplify the power of awareness?
A simple story which illustrates this- this weekend I went to see the Mexican musical duo Rodrigo y Gabriela at Oakland’s Fox Theatre. Person B on my right side said, “What? Our seats are all the way here?!”, while person A on my left noticed, “Wow, this is a beautiful theatre.” I looked up the at the ceiling and was in awe at the architecture.
How does noticing change the way we perceive the same experience?
Life is filled with instances — a conversation with a friend, a new concept learned, an experience with a new person. The mission is to find the Class that ties together a set of instances. And then maybe the super Class.
Up and down the layers of abstraction… everything is connected.
May 9, 2014
Exception is what we tell ourselves to wake up in the morning, the common is what helps us sleep at night. Finding yourself in a community helps split the difference.
The idea of the replaceability of people is interesting. There are spectrums of replaceability, but at the end of the day, everyone is replaceable. It’s a sensitive subject, and I’m not asserting that people are unimportant — I deeply value the people in my life — but rather, in a statistical sense, there is abundance in the world.
John has taught me a lot about programming, and I value the relationship I have with him, but I know that if I had never met him, I would have built a relationship with someone else where I would have learned that much about programming.
Part of it is the trust and confidence in yourself to tease out the value in life, instead of depending on others for good experiences.
Virgil pushed back on me and said some people are more replaceable than others namely, that some people, like Steve Jobs, are not replaceable.
But had Steve Jobs not been born into the world, some similar smart phone (et al) would have eventually been put into the world. It would not have been Apple, and I’m not proposing that we ignore his valuable contribution to the world, but had it not been for him, another pioneer would have brought the technology to life.
This would have just been a matter of connecting all the game pieces lying on the floor. Steve Jobs comments on this himself:
Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things.
People tend to underscore and be emphatic about [being the first]. In The Double Helix : A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA, Watson documents his and Crick’s discovery of DNA. But there were other scientists — Rosalind Franklin, Maurice Wilkins, and Linus Pauling among them — concurrently working on the same issue. Watson and Crick were only notable because they got to the discovery first — and were probably egotistical in wanting to claim the fame.
Time is probably the most salient differentiating factor — how important it is is a matter of how big your ego is.
It is a romantic notion — the individualism of a human being and something being lost in the world if person x wasn’t here.
But as Tim Minchin mentions:
Your love is one in a million
You couldn’t buy it at any price
But of the 9.999 hundred thousand other loves
Statistically some of them would be equally nice.
Rationale from this post comes from conversations with Eddie.
What do you think? Pushing back is how we learn best.
RelatedMay 6, 2014