Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Being a computer programmer, I long ago gave up on ever even agreeing to deadlines. I'm sure there are programmers who regularly meet deadlines, but I'm also pretty sure they do it by massively overestimating how long things will take.
-
Up Front: Home is Where the - Ooo, shiny!, in reply to Isabel Hitchings,
And it's a bit of a crap-shoot as to whether you'll get ones whose body clocks suit your preferred work schedule or not.
Yes, I'd be amazed if it continues like this into their teen years.
I don't know, kids seem like a pretty expensive alternative to an alarm clock.
Ironically, the only alarm clock used in the house is in their room. It's a "must not rise before x oclock" kind of alarm.
-
YMMV but I've found kids invaluable for getting up in the morning, and knocking off in the evening. This is, however, because my wife and I have made a point of ensuring their lives are quite structured, especially concerning sleep time. So at 5pm, we eat together, that gets me out of the office.
-
Recently I've found one of the stock rules of time management to be most helpful. Write on paper a short list of things you want to achieve in the day. Do it first thing, every day. Don't let it get too long (less than 10 things is ideal) or it becomes highly demotivating. It should be an honest guess at what you could actually do in that time.
I've found this much more useful than any number of computerized versions of the same thing. The danger with using an automatic task management system is that you don't get two of the most important functions of the process: Firstly the time spent organizing and focusing yourself, and secondly the elimination of those things you won't be doing that day. With computerized task tracking, it's too tempting to analyze too far into the future, planning out in great detail every step in a process. I've done this for projects that spanned many years, and found looking at or reviewing such a thing on a daily basis mostly demoralizing. There's a feeling that the elephantine project dwarfs anything you could achieve in the day, that it wouldn't really matter too much in the big picture if you worked or didn't.
A small number of achievable tasks is quite the opposite, highly motivating. I tend to cherry pick the easiest tasks first, getting nice senses of achievement after each one. Then I usually break the next big task left down in a similar way and do the same thing - pick off the easy stuff. In the end, you get through your tasks, and pretty much every step was "easy".
This kind of planning is highly flexible, you're building the task lists as you go, ticking them off as you go, and can thus rework or elaborate a task that turned out to be harder than thought.
-
Much to agree with there. This is my 10th year of working from a home office.
I'd like to stress the "go out sometimes" point. Even if you consider yourself to be not naturally sociable, you'll be amazed by how nutty you can get after being alone for too long. Other humans form anchor points of reality around you, and regular contact with them is good.
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Matthew Poole,
They have achieved that. The dispute is about whether alternative courses might have achieved more. You don't seem to be able to accept that an Opposition with a clearly articulated dissenting alternative can be more of a moderating influence than meekly settling for tiny amendments. Or you don't think Labour has a real alternative. If so, I agree.
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Those are both achievements, and neither would’ve been possible had Labour previously acted in bad faith towards National over votes on legislation.
Both parts of that statement are assertions without a shred of evidence to back them. Perhaps they achieved nothing that National would not have done anyway, as soon as Labour proposed it because the amendments made sense. Perhaps Labour acting in "bad faith" would make no difference to anything National does. If Labour is as powerless as you make out on the one hand (while on the other hand claiming that they achieved a lot for file sharers and Christchurch), then they have nothing to either gain or lose from National by voting as they see fit. They do, however, have a lot to lose in terms of credibility with the people who might vote for them in the next general election on the basis of offering an alternative to National.
Obviously this is completely hyperbolic, but it's intended to illustrate how such an inflexible position as yours can lead to very sub-par outcomes that could be made rather less sub-par through some application of flexibility.
Yes, it's hyperbolic and could well have had the diametrically opposite outcome to your projections without the slightest inconsistency. You haven't done anything to show that the sub-par outcome we did get isn't also a result of too much "flexibility". I'm not offering any other evidence myself, other than "how's it working out for Labour at the moment?"
-
Hard News: A Work of Advocacy, in reply to HORansome,
Is it stronger than the coffee-bond?
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Matthew Poole,
If you're suggesting that Labour should've then welched on the deal and voted against the Bill despite having agreed to vote for it in order to get their compromise, then you're advocating that Labour behave in bad faith and in a manner that would diminish Labour's ability to achieve anything while in Opposition.
Yes, it would probably be bad faith to do that. Not so sure about the diminished power to achieve anything, though. Playing nice with National isn't going to work. But no, I think they should have opposed everything about the bill, and proposed their amendments, and said they were going to vote against it anyway. If, on reflection (for which there was not much time) they found they disagreed with it. It's then on National to adopt the amendments or not, but even more on them for ramming the whole thing through in the first place.
-
Hard News: A Work of Advocacy, in reply to Matthew Poole,
It's much easier to justify the use of force if it happens on the street. And to blame "clumsy" crims for their own injuries.
True, but there is that nagging worry that you might actually get bashed yourself, which doesn't factor down at the station. And who needs some sticky beak who saw the whole thing coming out of the woodwork?
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 602 603 604 605 606 … 1066 Older→ First