I upped the font size on my Pixel recently and this is one of those sites where (in Firefox) the sidebar takes up more than 50% of the width of the screen and retains tiny text while the article itself wraps on a couple words per line.
Maybe things have changed since I was an Android dev in 2013, but I buy Pixel devices because I don't expect something to work well on most Android devices if it doesn't work well on a Pixel.
I'm willing to switch between Chrome and Firefox. On Chrome I get 66% body content I can't read. It's one of the reasons I stopped using Chrome.
Shortly before he passed during his AMA he offered some advice I try to follow.
Me
This doesn't really relate to psychopaths but I just wanted to say I've been a follower of yours for years since I discovered your state machine language, multi-threaded kernel and web server back in the 90's. The AMQP / ZMQ work you've done is inspiring. How do you do it?
Pieterh
Well, thank you! :)
I don't know how my brain works, but it likes to take huge, complex situations, learn them inside and out, and then and find simple paths through them. I've always done this since I was young. In software, that means writing simple things that solve large problems, well. In writing, this means explaining mind-boggling things in simple words.
I have been trying to square such suggestions for happiness with G.B. Shaw's quote:
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
The steps towards happiness basically require accepting the world as is and appreciating it as is. Does that mean happy people are reasonable? And if they are, does that mean that happy people do not drive progress? Are there happy AND unreasonable people?
That quote is from a play, and was written by a character who is a revolutionary and an anarchist.
In a meta-sense, I don't think G.B. Shaw intended this quote to be taken as an absolute truth by the audience.
And, even taking the quote itself at face value (pretending the fictional character who wrote it was a real person), I think it's referring mostly to political progress. Indeed, most times that political institutions have been upended, it was by people who were not happy with the status quo. But I think that's a different sort of unhappiness from the unhappiness of not being satisfied with your life.
It's not a binary choice, but a spectrum. It depends on the scope and your own abilities - you can't turn a river around with a stick, but you can clean up your part of the lawn. Keep control over what you can control, and don't get too upset about what you can't - so with a little effort you change (or progress) a little part of the world.
Funnily enough I also know some happy people who adhere to none of these points.
One can be content or happy without being complacent. Also finding peace with what you have can open motivation to make change. The discontent of one’s current situation can be debilitating and demotivating so removing the mood or feeling can actually enable action.
But then what you put effort in will resonate with you and not be the same as what you would do when trying to chase something to impress someone outside.
There is this strange paradox of accepting a situation enables changing it. I hope others who read this who understand it better will share their more lucid insights.
I mean you have to ask what does unreasonable mean in this context?
Because in a literal meaning, that basically puts both John Carmack and Adolf Hitler in the same "unreasonable men" bucket. Both had ideas for the "world" and adapted it to themselves.
But I don't think we should read it that way. Also you should never take one philosopher's idea and only follow it in isolation. Every great thinker has massive blind spots and it's always better to think for yourself and read opinions that may counter each other.
Also I don't think its as simple as to be happy you must accept the world and be a passive host and make no changes. In fact, many would argue you get real happiness when you pursue something bigger than yourself and in those pursuits, we usually make progress.
More so, do you think Hitler was unhappy? Are you saying every unreasonable person that makes progress is unhappy? That clearly cannot be true.
In fact, your question should be answered by what is happiness rather than how to be happy. And the answer can be complciated. No 10 list guide can truly help you unravel the actual human pysche and what makes you you but it can act as markers and make you think if done properly.
In Europe for sure and possibly many parts of Asia like Japan or bigger metropolises in China etc. most people will commute by public transport.
You can read. Whenever I had a job where I commuted at least an hour a day, the number of books I read, per month, went from 2–3 to 10 or more.
I see you noticing a thing, with your senses. Sincerely:
A (used) folding phone offers 66% body content, 33% sidebar. Is a noticeable improvement.
I'm willing to switch between Chrome and Firefox. On Chrome I get 66% body content I can't read. It's one of the reasons I stopped using Chrome.
I don't want large phone though. I'd prefer to have a less appealling small phone that encourages me to spend more time off it.
Me
This doesn't really relate to psychopaths but I just wanted to say I've been a follower of yours for years since I discovered your state machine language, multi-threaded kernel and web server back in the 90's. The AMQP / ZMQ work you've done is inspiring. How do you do it?
Pieterh
Well, thank you! :)
I don't know how my brain works, but it likes to take huge, complex situations, learn them inside and out, and then and find simple paths through them. I've always done this since I was young. In software, that means writing simple things that solve large problems, well. In writing, this means explaining mind-boggling things in simple words.
It does take time.
The Price of Happiness (62 points, 32 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48996364
(Needs a 2016 in the title)
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
The steps towards happiness basically require accepting the world as is and appreciating it as is. Does that mean happy people are reasonable? And if they are, does that mean that happy people do not drive progress? Are there happy AND unreasonable people?
In a meta-sense, I don't think G.B. Shaw intended this quote to be taken as an absolute truth by the audience.
And, even taking the quote itself at face value (pretending the fictional character who wrote it was a real person), I think it's referring mostly to political progress. Indeed, most times that political institutions have been upended, it was by people who were not happy with the status quo. But I think that's a different sort of unhappiness from the unhappiness of not being satisfied with your life.
Funnily enough I also know some happy people who adhere to none of these points.
Somebody forgot to tell this[0] guy.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashrath_Manjhi
But then what you put effort in will resonate with you and not be the same as what you would do when trying to chase something to impress someone outside.
There is this strange paradox of accepting a situation enables changing it. I hope others who read this who understand it better will share their more lucid insights.
Temper it all with Desiderata[0], since we’re being philosophical.
[0] https://www.desiderata.com/desiderata.html
Because in a literal meaning, that basically puts both John Carmack and Adolf Hitler in the same "unreasonable men" bucket. Both had ideas for the "world" and adapted it to themselves.
But I don't think we should read it that way. Also you should never take one philosopher's idea and only follow it in isolation. Every great thinker has massive blind spots and it's always better to think for yourself and read opinions that may counter each other.
Also I don't think its as simple as to be happy you must accept the world and be a passive host and make no changes. In fact, many would argue you get real happiness when you pursue something bigger than yourself and in those pursuits, we usually make progress.
More so, do you think Hitler was unhappy? Are you saying every unreasonable person that makes progress is unhappy? That clearly cannot be true.
In fact, your question should be answered by what is happiness rather than how to be happy. And the answer can be complciated. No 10 list guide can truly help you unravel the actual human pysche and what makes you you but it can act as markers and make you think if done properly.