The Science of Thinking

What Hacker News said

Recommends bshacklett · 2019-12 · on “I Was Wrong About Speed Reading (2015)”

This sounds a lot like System 1 and System 2 as described by Thinking, Fast and Slow [LINK] Veritasium did a great job summarizing the idea: [this video]

Cites jimmies · 2017-03 · on “Abacus use can boost math skills”

It seems like the things that are more painful to learn and use make your brain work harder, and thus make you learn better. Or, maybe it is the case that people who know to use the hard stuff are interested in the subject enough to learn how to do it the hard way. You wouldn't be surprised that those who use Assembly to program tend to have better programming skills compared to those who only can program in Visual Basic, would you? Veritasium also mentioned this recently: [this video] The more interesting question to ask to me is (1) whether it is the abacus that makes children learn better, or it is just that children who choose to use the abacus learn better (2) whether teaching abacus use at

Cites pdkl95 · 2017-12 · on “Call of Duty gaming community points to ‘swatting’ in Wichita police shooting”

> the threshold for the use of lethal force That isn't the problem (at least primarily). Claiming that there is a serious hostage situation with the possibility of serious violence (perhaps even a potential murder) seriously escalates the risk and hostility of the situation. I didn't say potential hostility; the claim itself directly increases the perceived threat level of the situation, even if it isn't credible. A team of people responding en masse with weapons[1] at the ready further escalates the tension of the situation and the hostility of the room, even if their weapons are never used. The end result is a very tense situation with everyone - on all sides - ready to jump at anything th

Cites pdkl95 · 2018-07 · on “Is Facebook a publisher? In public it says no, but in court it says yes”

(edited and fixed after accidental early posting. edit2: added URLs) > does an ad being shown next to something objectionable transfer some of that negative sentiment to the brand? Yes, it does because the negative sentiment will be added to the possible results returned by "System 1"[1][2] thinking that tends to be very fast at approximate searches of long term memory and applying energy saving simplifications/heuristics. System 1 strongly favors fast lookup times over accuracy ; this is very useful when you need to decide quickly if that thing you just saw around the corner was a bear or just a strangely shaped shrubbery. Wasting a bit of energy running away from shrubbery is a better surv