Posts

It’s worth discussing the difference between growth and grind mindsets. Growth is the process of learning, improving, and evolving–ideally in an upward trajectory. Conversely, grind is working hard, often to the point of exhaustion or burnout. The former is aspirational; the latter is…something else. I think most people are taught to grind rather than grow. I’ve written about this before in another post, but framed differently. The grind mindset is ground into us when we enter the school system and are subjected to homework, tests, grades, and other forms of performance assessment. The grind mindset is further reinforced when we enter the workforce and are expected to work long hours, often for a fraction of the value we provide to the company’s bottom line (unless you’re lucky enough to wriggle your way into the executive suite).

Anyone who’s worked in computers for any amount of time has likely experienced a deluge of recruiter spam over the years. Most recruiters use the same strategy men use on dating apps: spray and pray, ask questions later. The primary beneficiaries of this strategy are companies like Microsoft (the parent of LinkedIn), for which LinkedIn generates about $4bn in revenue per quarter (‼️) for their spam facilitation, according to their latest earnings report1.

Okay, the title is clickbait, and I am ashamed of that. So, I’ll give you the bottom line up front: the Dunning-Kruger effect is (in my experience) spot-on, and even though it’s a bit of a pop psychology trope these days, I have encountered this effect many times. There’s a delightful (sacrasm) synergy between Dunning-Kruger and imposter syndrome where these two can work together in confusing ways.

We humans are complex animals, and our brains developed over hundreds of thousands of years to survive on a rugged unforgiving planet. We invented technologies that became luxuries, and for many (in the West, at least) we live relatively easy lives, by historical standards. It wasn’t until the late 1800s in the US that indoor plumbing was commonplace, which is surprisingly recent.

Speaking broadly, there are two ways to think about life: passively or actively. Passive philosophy amounts to letting things happen, whereas active is about making things happen. I generally try to stay active. If I want something to happen, I need to make it happen. Sitting around waiting for something to happen or for someone to come along and tell you what to do is passive.

Young people are often fed some variation of the belief that hard work will be rewarded; therefore, it’s good and virtuous to work hard. While I do agree with this sentiment, I think the same is also true of laziness. Unlike hard work, laziness is generally regarded as a negative attribute for any person, but this is just a misunderstanding about what laziness is.

If you pay much attention to the mainstream media, you’ve likely heard the phrase “energy transition” thrown around, which alludes to an ongoing global effort to transition away from fossil fuels and move toward so-called “green” energy sources1. As much airtime as this catch-phrase gets, there’s little evidence to support any transition2.

We live in a society, or so they say. And as members of society–a community of interdependent people–we should probably strive to contribute positively. Society (and community) can provide tremendous value when it works. It’s easy to contribute negatively, or rather, to detract. Simple examples of detracting from society might be:

When I look back on my life, I’ve made countless mistakes, some of which were more costly than others, but one general theme I’ve noticed about my own mistakes is that in my younger years (i.e., 20s and early 30s) I let my ego grow a little too large. This post–I suppose–could serve as a letter to my younger self, containing some thoughts I wish I had internalized then.

A fluid is anything that flows, which includes gasses and liquids. Some fluids even exhibit both properties of solids and liquids, such as in response to shocks (i.e., water with corn starch, a “non-Newtonian fluid”). Ketchup is an example of a substance that does the opposite: it exhibits solid properties until it’s disturbed, after which it flows, which is why shaking or pounding on the bottom of an upturned bottle of ketchup will make it pour out.