> Being honest about fucking up is almost always worth it
Through several channels, I think this has a subtle but powerful impact on self-honesty. Those channels include: Self-evaluation practice, cementing an honest self-image, and exposure therapy to self-criticism. Self-honesty reduces the amount of energy spent on things which are no longer likely to work out.
I know several people who are struggling in life despite being smart and hardworking. A common thread I've seen is an inability to update a core belief. This often results in the belief that they're "almost there" to being proven right, while other life options (all quite respectable) quietly fade away. Multi-level marketing is a systematic exploitation of this propensity, sucking energetic people out of the actual economy. But many other people create their own hype-traps in more subtle ways.
In the last few years, I've come to evaluate some of my best early moments where where I let go of a comforting illusion (often about my realistic options). Later, while making progress on a less sexy path, I saw opportunities that were at least as good as the original, especially considering that my preferences had changed.
I agree on the index fund thing, but so long as you've not got your money in something insanely stupid I think better advice in the UK is 'get the wrapper right'. At least intuitively, it seems that the loss to tax from not putting your money in an optimal wrapper (which is probably ISA when you're young, SIPP when you're older, workplace pension if it's offered) is greater than the loss to fees from investing in a managed fund. Haven't crunched the numbers, though, so maybe I'm wrong about this. Obviously the best thing is to have your money in an optimal wrapper *and* in low-fee index funds, but if I was just picking one piece of advice for investing I'd focus on getting the correct wrapper rather than the correct fund. Would be interested to hear if you've crunched the numbers and think that getting the correct fund is more important.
A load of people I know who don't wanna think much about their money have been told to put it in an ISA for tax reasons and end up putting it in a cash ISA where they're getting like 2% interest. Convincing people to move it to a stocks and shares ISA is a slog, people I know hate the idea of losing 10% in a bad year or whatever, especially given the inflation situation. If I could convince them to move to an actively managed stocks and shares ISA that would obviously be much better than what most of them are doing, but the ISA meme leads people astray a bit IMO.
> 1) If you’re succeeding in most things you do, you’re probably not aiming high enough. Attempt things that you think will almost certainly fail.
> 8) Do things that feel easy to do.
> 11) Stimulants make hard tasks easier.
Combine these three probably is a good idea (barbell): diligently work for guaranteed benefits (even if it means having more coffee), once and a while test things with high fail rate and "long tails".
> 2) There is a lot to be said for making friends from across the political spectrum.
> 10) Tap into networks of interesting and intelligent people.
This is also kind of an extended socialization barbell: seek to "bridge" with the opposition, and find diverse views within alliances and neutral parties.
Getting a prescription for ADHD medication is a great idea for people with ADHD. It's terrible advice for people who don't have ADHD. It may well be good advice for most people reading this. That doesn't mean the world would be a better place if everyone - or even most people - reading this took ADHD medication.
> 7) Learning new skills is often more valuable than acquiring knowledge when you’re young.
One more thing, about tacit knowledge: when is "just learn a skill" a bad idea, discounting all the "Four Hour Chef" training cliches? Could "tacit knowledge" (some knowledge can be seen but not heard) and "anti-meme" (some pseudo-knowledge are blind rituals or "costly signaling") be possible contenders? https://commoncog.com/the-tacit-knowledge-series/https://www.lesswrong.com/s/3xKXGh9RXaYTYZYgZ
> Being honest about fucking up is almost always worth it
Through several channels, I think this has a subtle but powerful impact on self-honesty. Those channels include: Self-evaluation practice, cementing an honest self-image, and exposure therapy to self-criticism. Self-honesty reduces the amount of energy spent on things which are no longer likely to work out.
I know several people who are struggling in life despite being smart and hardworking. A common thread I've seen is an inability to update a core belief. This often results in the belief that they're "almost there" to being proven right, while other life options (all quite respectable) quietly fade away. Multi-level marketing is a systematic exploitation of this propensity, sucking energetic people out of the actual economy. But many other people create their own hype-traps in more subtle ways.
In the last few years, I've come to evaluate some of my best early moments where where I let go of a comforting illusion (often about my realistic options). Later, while making progress on a less sexy path, I saw opportunities that were at least as good as the original, especially considering that my preferences had changed.
Someone on the Internet agrees with me! QED ;)
https://www.benkuhn.net/abyss/
I agree on the index fund thing, but so long as you've not got your money in something insanely stupid I think better advice in the UK is 'get the wrapper right'. At least intuitively, it seems that the loss to tax from not putting your money in an optimal wrapper (which is probably ISA when you're young, SIPP when you're older, workplace pension if it's offered) is greater than the loss to fees from investing in a managed fund. Haven't crunched the numbers, though, so maybe I'm wrong about this. Obviously the best thing is to have your money in an optimal wrapper *and* in low-fee index funds, but if I was just picking one piece of advice for investing I'd focus on getting the correct wrapper rather than the correct fund. Would be interested to hear if you've crunched the numbers and think that getting the correct fund is more important.
A load of people I know who don't wanna think much about their money have been told to put it in an ISA for tax reasons and end up putting it in a cash ISA where they're getting like 2% interest. Convincing people to move it to a stocks and shares ISA is a slog, people I know hate the idea of losing 10% in a bad year or whatever, especially given the inflation situation. If I could convince them to move to an actively managed stocks and shares ISA that would obviously be much better than what most of them are doing, but the ISA meme leads people astray a bit IMO.
TL;DR all and all a nice post. good job.
> 1) If you’re succeeding in most things you do, you’re probably not aiming high enough. Attempt things that you think will almost certainly fail.
> 8) Do things that feel easy to do.
> 11) Stimulants make hard tasks easier.
Combine these three probably is a good idea (barbell): diligently work for guaranteed benefits (even if it means having more coffee), once and a while test things with high fail rate and "long tails".
> 2) There is a lot to be said for making friends from across the political spectrum.
> 10) Tap into networks of interesting and intelligent people.
This is also kind of an extended socialization barbell: seek to "bridge" with the opposition, and find diverse views within alliances and neutral parties.
Getting a prescription for ADHD medication is a great idea for people with ADHD. It's terrible advice for people who don't have ADHD. It may well be good advice for most people reading this. That doesn't mean the world would be a better place if everyone - or even most people - reading this took ADHD medication.
I think it’s good advice for most people, but I don’t strongly hold that view.
I read few substacks advocating drug use these days … anyway not a bad list, thank you for sharing
> 7) Learning new skills is often more valuable than acquiring knowledge when you’re young.
One more thing, about tacit knowledge: when is "just learn a skill" a bad idea, discounting all the "Four Hour Chef" training cliches? Could "tacit knowledge" (some knowledge can be seen but not heard) and "anti-meme" (some pseudo-knowledge are blind rituals or "costly signaling") be possible contenders? https://commoncog.com/the-tacit-knowledge-series/ https://www.lesswrong.com/s/3xKXGh9RXaYTYZYgZ