Say you're a recent hire and everyone else is kicking your ass, or you're taking a class with a group project and everyone else has more experience than you. Some thoughts:

1) You need to be the hardest worker on the team. Show up earliest, stay latest, and put in more work than everyone else. Until you catch up you're in the doghouse. Also, the way to improve your skill is to put in more (deliberate, efficient) practice time than everyone else. Some people say th

2) Don't apologize, curse, or be a miser. It goes without saying that you're behind; don't reinforce the opinion. As my old coach told me, "Play like a lunatic today. Give them a reason to keep you. Sell them that practices will be better if you are a part of them. Have energy and enthusiasm."

3) Know your limits; don't bite off more than you can chew. If you can't do X, don't volunteer to do X, or try to complete it. Try to become excellent in a few key areas.

4) Don't accept low expectations.It's hard to dig yourself out once people on the team don't expect much from you.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

The Internet was down for about an hour today. The resulting scene on campus looked something like this: What a blessing! People got more things done. Students in my dorm interacted, face-to-face. The girl sitting next to me in class couldn't open Perez Hilton - she had to focus. People stopped sitting on their email and Facebook. Honestly, when was the last time you got an absolutely urgent email requiring action or a reply within an hour? Or when a Facebook chat was a good substitute for talking to someone? Well I thought it was good, anyway. I believe this is a case where limiting consumption can produce a better outcome.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

Start here (but only if you are not busy for the next hour or so). I'm still thinking about the answer.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

T.S. Eliot wrote "The Love Song of Alfred J. Prufrock" as an undergraduate at Harvard. It's one of my favorite poems. The current literature, and my professor, suggest that the poem is a criticism of love in a modern age. I believe it's more of a warning against the dangers of hesitating and of being negative in the market for love.

Eliot's imagery is consistently concrete and original. He does a great job of painting an emotion in the viewer's mind in a few words. Eliot rarely wastes words.

But the poem hits home for another reason; the speaker makes numerous cognitive errors in his deliberations about the opposite sex, all of which I've made at one point or another. So in a way, this poem is painful to read. Maybe the second or third time I analyze this I'll be able to write without pointing out all of the cognitive errors and trying to correct them. But that's the plan today.

Lines 23-34:

And indeed there will be time For the yellow smoke that slides along the street, Rubbing its back upon the window-panes; There will be time, there will be time To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet; There will be time to murder and create, And time for all the works and days of hands That lift and drop a question on your plate; Time for you and time for me, And time yet for a hundred indecisions, And for a hundred visions and revisions, Before the taking of a toast and tea.

The speaker procrastinates. He knows he's useless, but he's okay with that, because there is time for indecisions and revisions. The problem is this is that once you say this one night, the next night comes around and because you said it last night, you can stand in line behind yourself. Meaning that your preference for remaining hesitant solidifies, because now your rationale for hesitation is that you did it last night, not that hesitation is the best decision.

Continuing:

In the room the women come and go Talking of Michelangelo. And indeed there will be time To wonder, "Do I dare?" and, "Do I dare?" Time to turn back and descend the stair, With a bald spot in the middle of my hair-- [They will say: "How his hair is growing thin!"] My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin, My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin-- [They will say: "But how his arms and legs are thin!"] Do I dare Disturb the universe? In a minute there is time For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.

The speaker makes several mistakes here. He second-guesses himself; he worries about "disturbing the universe." Life is too short for second guessing, or regrets. When you second-guess yourself, you're toast, even if you approach the person later. You can't give yourself time to think; say "Hi" and go from there. The speaker gets paralyzed thinking about all of the things that people are thinking about him. Every attempt he makes at a positive mental frame of mind is destroyed by his imaginings of negative comments by others. This is a self-reinforcing cycle of darkness; thinking about what people think about you makes you hesitate, or stand against the wall and stare, and when you do that people will think bad things about you, reinforcing your original judgment. Maybe people think hurtful things about you, and maybe they don't, but others' criticisms should not merit your attention. Continuing:

For I have known them all already, known them all:-- Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons, I have measured out my life with coffee spoons.

Brilliant.

And I have known the eyes already, known them all-- The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase, And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin, When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall, Then how should I begin To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways? And how should I presume?

The speaker's intimidated by women who give him the thousand-mile stare. But these stares stem from his initial problems with second-guessing and hesitation. If you believe you're an interesting person, you'll give off a good vibe and people will want to get to know you. But why would any woman want to spend more time talking to someone who thinks his days have been "butt-ends"? (Leave aside for a second that the speaker is one of the West's greatest poets. Or, maybe don't leave it aside. Eliot was a frustrated virgin until age 26).

Shall I say, I have gone at dusk through narrow streets And watched the smoke that rises from the pipes Of lonely men in shirt-sleeves, leaning out of windows? . . . I should have been a pair of ragged claws Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.

Here the speaker thinks about what he could say to a girl, and then cuts it off in frustration. The simple truth is that it really doesn't matter what you say, as long as you sound confident. My friend Dave Roosth once said "you have to get diarrhea of the mouth."

I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker, And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker, And in short, I was afraid.

Sadly, yes. There's no reason for it. Concluding:

Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach? I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think that they will sing to me. I have seen them riding seaward on the waves Combing the white hair of the waves blown back When the wind blows the water white and black. We have lingered in the chambers of the sea By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown Till human voices wake us, and we drown.

Eliot reaches his inevitable, sad conclusion. By this point he is perfectly cynical; he compares women to sirens, luring men in until they awake and drown. The fact is that the world is the world; we can only choose how we see it. If you worry and waffle, the world will eat you alive. When you're depressed, or low on confidence, it's the most difficult thing in the world to avoid seeing the world as the speaker in the poem does. I don't have the answers, as the only thing that I know that worked for me was passing time. But the mental model is everything; if you have a negative mental model people will see that and react accordingly; if you're positive and confident, people will see that and react too. So I don't see this so much as a critique of dating in modern society as I do as an extremely well-written lament. It's also a warning against the dangers of waffling and not approaching anyone. The speaker is middle-aged, but Eliot was only twenty or so when he wrote this. To have written this as an undergraduate is a remarkable display of insight and wisdom.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

First off, if you're a teacher, realize that a good completion rate for reading assignments is 75%, especially if you assign a lot of work. If you're a student, getting through the reading can be a struggle, especially if you fall behind. Here are some tips for getting through difficult reading.

Low Difficulty

- Trace your place on the page with your finger. This keeps you focused and keeps you from jumping around the page. This also helps you avoid reading qua reading, where your eyes are moving across and down the page, but you're not actually absorbing the words.

- Go to Sparknotes or Wikipedia and read a plot or argument summary. Remember that the goal is not to read all the words, but comprehend and understand the arguments presented in the reading. Furthermore if you read a summary ahead of time, it will help you understand as you read, and stay on track. If you take 5 minutes before you start and 5 minutes after you finish for comprehension, you'll be able to contribute during debates and consolidate the things you just read in your memory.

- Print out your reading instead of reading it on the computer.

- Look up unfamiliar words. Let's say you don't know what "ignominious" means. Text "define ignominious" to 46645 (GOOGL) and they'll send you a text back within 10 seconds with the definition.

Medium Difficulty

- Remove all distractions. Reading is a solo activity; don't read with other people, as they will distract you. Put headphones in your ears, even if nothing's coming out, so people won't bother you. Go to a quiet place, because places can act as triggers for your mind. When I'm in my room or the lounge, I'm unwinding. When I'm at the gym I'm working hard. When I'm in the library, I focus.

- Find a way to make the reading interesting. Ask yourself why the teacher assigned this reading. Pretend you're a detective. Assume everything the author wrote is false, and find holes. Ask your teacher to give you a question, or make up your own question (or go to Sparknotes), to try and answer as you read.

- Don't try to cram everything into a marathon session. Figure out how long it takes you to read (for me, 60 pages an hour for light reading, less for bad translations and old works), and schedule it over a long period.

- Don't read on the couch or in a comfy chair, because you're going to fall asleep. If you're tired, sleep or get a coffee and then sit in a regular chair and read. Don't mix the two.

High Difficulty

- Change your mental model, the answer to your "how do you think of yourself?" question. Think of yourself as "a hard worker" or "someone who works super hard during the week, so he/she has time to unwind on the weekend." Then cognitive dissonance kicks in - if you believe in your mental model, and you're not meeting it, you'll feel uncomfortable, and that will help you get around to doing the reading. I'm going to write more about this later.

- Put money on the line. Write out a $20 check to PETA, the NRA, or some other organization you dislike, and tell your friend to mail it if you don't finish your reading. Essentially, you're making yourself poorer, then earning a cash reward for finishing your reading. You have to find a friend that will cash the check. For more see Stickk.com. Yes, this is ruthless, but it works, and I assume that what you're doing now isn't working.

Spend more time reading. Read through the text more than once, or read and then describe the reading to a classmate and have him/her do the same to you. If you don't have enough time in the day, consider dropping some of your activities.

- 1. Get started, and 2. Keep going. The simplest way to get your reading done is to do it. Make time in your schedule for doing work - figure out what times of the day you are most alert and do it then. Once it becomes a habit, like brushing your teeth, you're in good shape.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

Robin Hanson writes,

Let us first notice some patterns about cynical moods. The young tend to be more idealistic, while the old are more cynical. People can remain idealistic their entire lives about social institutions that they know little about, but those who know an institution well tend to be more cynical. Leaders and the successful in an area tend to be less cynical than underlings and failures in that area. Things said in public tend to be less cynical than things said in private. People prefer the young to be idealistic, and discourage teaching cynicism to the young. Cynicism is not considered an attractive feature.

Today I noticed that my cynicism about a field (basketball, the Ivy League, government, my love life) tends to follow failure in that area. I also tend to be idealistic in areas where I've had success (the classroom - "Anyone can succeed with hard work!"). The Robert Day program provides a great example - contrast the opinions of the students who were rejected with those who got in.

Of course a rational person would have just the right amounts of cynicism and idealism, regardless of their success or failure in the given field (or, perhaps a rational person avoids such feelings). This is troublesome; is it correct to be more cynical about some institutions than others? Should our cynicism be in direct proportion to the difficulty of success?

There are two equilibria - the people who fail become cynical about their experience, which helps them cope, and the people who succeed are idealistic, because we want to believe the best in others and they're successful anyway so they can say whatever they want.

I guess the takeaway is to hold a cynical opinion weakly. I try to avoid pessimistic people, and believe that I can succeed in any new area if I'm willing to work harder than others. As Richard Bach wrote, "He who argues for his limitations gets to keep them."

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

Marc Ambinder has posted a list of things people are "outraged" about this week in Washington. Reading the list reinforces the obvious point that a politician's world is extremely disconnected from the reality on the ground.

Not making the list, and hardly drawing a peep from anyone in Washington, is the language tucked into the stimulus bill that makes it harder for skilled foreign workers to get jobs in America. At best this can be described as bad logic; at the worst it's blatant racism. If companies want to hire skilled foreign workers, it's probably because those people are willing to work harder for less pay. Forcing companies (which, now, are more international conglomerates than American firms) to hire only American workers is hurtful to the shareholders and it's hurtful to the workers who wanted to work in the United States. It also encourages firms to move their operations to countries that welcome these skilled workers, and encourages those workers to make a home elsewhere.

Immigration has been America's growth engine for the past 250 years. We have built this nation on the backs of immigrants. To turn our backs on the (skilled) people that want to come here is idiocy. One of my ancestors crossed over from Europe and was able to forge a life for himself here. Nearly everyone that applies for jobs is either an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant - what's the difference? When we shun extraordinarily skilled people that want to come here, pay taxes and spend money on our goods, Americans lose. It's not like foreigners are "taking" our jobs; companies are giving those jobs to foreigners, for lack of a better American candidate.

Most of the best finance students at CMC, including my roommate, are foreign. But these students, who have spent the last four years working their tails off to get a good job in New York, probably won't be able to find one.

So today, I'm outraged that our politicians can pass xenophobic bullshit that will hurt our economy and our global competitiveness, without anyone in Washington batting an eye. We want to put the world's best and brightest to work here in the USA.

Tyler Cowen, There is no good reason for this
Thomas Friedman, The Open-Door Bailout
Barry Ritholtz, Economics, Security, and the Decline of the US Creative Class

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

I watched CMS play Pomona-Pitzer in the 5C rivalry game last night. CMS had 20 defensive rebounds (28 overall) and Pomona-Pitzer had 26 defensive rebounds (31 overall), so at first glance you would say that Pomona had a better rebounding game. But a look at the data reveals CMS was the far better rebounding team during the game. Why?

CMS missed 34 shots and Pomona rebounded 26, which gives them a 76.5% rebound share. At the other end Pomona missed 25 shots and CMS rebounded 20, which gives them a 80% rebound share. Inversely, CMS rebounded 23.5% of its own misses and Pomona rebounded only 20%. The key thing to note is that CMS had more chances than Pomona, so naturally Pomona would rebound more of CMS's missed shots.

Box scores don't do a very good job of presenting rebound statistics. I've seen many coaches make the above mistake. They present the data so that the obvious comparison is between one team's defensive rebounds and the other team's defensive rebounds. The problem with doing it this way is these teams are rebounding at different baskets. Some games, one team will have way more shots than the other team due to turnovers or free throws or whatever. This means that the defense will have far more opportunities to get rebounds than the offense, because there are going to be more missed shots. The better way to look at the data is to compare one team's defensive rebounds with the other team's offensive rebounds, and compare the proportions.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

Note the potential for a diabolical student to flip around the labels, and the mental map you have to make between the labels and the jars. Compared with this: BOOM! Any attempt to switch these labels will leave a messy trail.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.