Judge Orders Los Angeles Times to Delete Part of Published Article - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/us/judge-los-angeles-times-delete-article.html <comment><USER2> There is a lot of crossover here and the Right to be Forgotten. The EFF opposed EU right to be forgotten laws because they could often be used in censorship (like in this very matter).

In the US, there are fewer people who expunge criminal records because there are companies that will produced expunged records in background checks so long as they were public at any time. Banning this gets into 1st amendment grounds.

And that's the flip side: labeling theory. In places like Australia, certain crimes do get removed from your record so long as you've stayed out of the system for five years. Even their sex offender registry has limited use (certain jobs, housing restrictions etc.); it's not public like ours. Then again, they don't have freedom of speech (except in Victoria; sorta).

Could we have laws that restrict companies from considering criminal records past x number of years in the US? I'm not sure if that'd be possible in our currently legal system.

In America, you can't really restrict information, once it's published, except in certain limited cases (like when a case involves a minor).

<comment><USER3> I think it is abhorrent that data of expunged criminal records are kept by private firms. Why can't this be made illegal if yelling "fire" in a theater is?

<comment><USER4> I can't see how you can prevent someone making a truthful record of history. What are you going to do? Hold a gun to people's heads and tell them to forget that things have happened?

<comment><USER5> In a whole lot of countries this information is not readily publicly available in the first place, and privately publishing it means someone has violated the terms under which they were given access.

E.g. in the UK, to even be able to do a check to see if someone is barred from certain types of work, you are required to abide by a long list of terms which goes much further than merely not republishing the data. To request a less comprehensive check requires you to have a compelling need (a specific set of roles). The basic checks can only requested by the person they're about.

Violating the terms comes at the risk of no longer being able to do records check (among other consequences), which may force you to close down your business in the worst case.

Nothing prevents you from making a truthful record of history if you have the data, but lots of things act to prevent most attempts to publish them.

<comment><USER6> That's fine, but this thread is specifically talking about the US, where all court records _are_ public documents unless specifically sealed by a judge, with justification that can be challenged in court.

Now, publishing _expunged_ records in the US is morally dubious. I don't know the case law in this area, though, so I don't know where it stands on legal grounds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Eugene Volokh discussed this case earlier today on his blog [0]. His rough conclusion, with appropriate caselaw citations, was that the 9th circuit will almost certainly overturn the injunction on the article.

[http://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/15/judge-orders-la-times- to...](http://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/15/judge-orders-la-times-to-alter- story-abo)

</comment><comment><USER8> The times wrote about a confidential document that was mistakenly released to the pulblic. The judge who sealed the document in the first ordered the times to redact their article which goes against decades of case law and arguably the first amendment. Not only this but the Streisand effect seems to suggest that the court order will have the opposite than intended effect

<comment><USER9> I agree that rare, isolated incidents like this one will have the Streisand effect.

However, once this practice becomes routine, it will no longer be the case.

<comment><USER10> Yes and arbitrary state censorship via prior restraint is knocking on our doors right now. If this isn't throughly thrown out with prejudice, things will only get much, much worse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Here's the article before it was edited: [https://web.archive.org/web/20180714180330/http://www.latime...](https://web.archive.org/web/20180714180330/http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la- me-ln-glendale-detective-guilty-plea-20180714-story.html)

<comment><USER12> _John Saro Balian, 45, pleaded guilty to one count each of soliciting a bribe, obstruction of justice and making false statements to federal investigators as part of a plea agreement he reached with prosecutors. The document was ordered to be filed under seal but appeared on PACER, a public online database for court documents._

I'd say that last part is the part that got LAT in trouble... I rarely support the whole "under seal" thing, especially when it's in order to protect a corrupt dirtbag cop, but this "ask for forgiveness not permission" stuff won't fly with many judges...

But yeah, this guy is scum. Not only has he gleefully profited from both sides of the ruinous Drug War, but his police status has allowed him to escape the draconian punishments that normal people suffer.

<comment><USER13> > especially when it's in order to protect a corrupt dirtbag cop

It was an order to protect his family from retribution from violent psychopaths that have in the past murdered not just informants / plea deal recipients, but their entire family in the most bloody way imaginable. I would not be surprised if the headline in a few days is about his wife and children dying in ways unfit to print. And it would be irresponsible journalism of the LA Times that made it happen.

I'm one of the most pro free speech person I know, but I'm squarely with the judge and the right to seal court proceedings here. And with a now gone age of journalism where this crap didn't happen in the first place.

<comment><USER14> Wow. Your circle of acquaintances must be strongly against freedom of speech, then.

You cannot create the Memory Hole by court order. LA Times has a constitutional right to print _anything_ they obtain legally. They are not directly placing anyone's lives at risk by publishing.

If anything, they could publish _another_ article about how slipshod security practices in the court system leak sensitive information to the public, and the court system tries to censor journalists rather than investigating and fixing their own problems.

The easiest way to protect the corrupt cop's family would have been to crack down on police corruption, so that no cop could get so deeply involved with a violent criminal organization that their family would ever be at risk. If the gangs couldn't get corrupt cops to cover for them, they would find it much more difficult to murder families for retaliation and intimidation.

Judging by Mexico's example, publishing may also put the journalists and their families at risk.

This is definitely shooting the messenger. In a system where doing that is illegal.

The judge is wrong, and should be reversed. Yesterday.

<comment><USER12> The "easy" way for cops, cop families, and normal people to be protected is to end the disastrous Drug War. It wouldn't matter if all police were paragons of virtue, applying enforcement rather than treatment to a drug problem is a sure way to end up with multiplied problems.

<comment><USER14> It is difficult to get someone to understand something when their livelihood depends on not understanding it.

Drug trade earns money; money buys guns and shooters; guns and shooters protect drug trade.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Regardless of their reasons, it feels very wrong to think a judge or an elected official could even think about regulating free speach. Double wrong for doing to the press.

I hope the judge get removed from office. I don't want people like that in charge of justice.

<comment><USER16> I know this isn't related to hate speech, it was done to protect someone's family, but in much of the world, various forms of speech are regulated (by judges or elected officials).

To me, anyways, there's overwhelming anecdotal proof that having some limits on speech correlates (and more than likely contributes) to a safer and more just society without any virulent side effect. This is not a slippery slope.

I think it's good to be vigilant about these things and scrutinize judges and officials though.

<comment><USER17> It's the slipperiest slope of all. Thousands of people have been arrested for causing offence in the UK after they introduced their absurd laws. Police have recently been threatening to arrest people for mocking them online. In the US we're very lucky to have the first amendment to protect our speech no matter who deems it hateful or offensive.

<comment><USER18> There are middle grounds that also work well, like what Canada has.

It's got entrenched constitutional protections for freedom of expression which courts are willing to use to invalidate laws, but the same constitution explicitly allows certain limits on that freedom.

The balance isn't perfect, especially not as applied to most Canadian defamation laws (Quebec is a bit friendlier to defendants here). But it's pretty good and way better than the UK's lack of any restraint on Parliament's surveillance state tendencies.

<comment><USER17> Canada is a terrible example, they have compelled speech in their laws. Referring to somebody by the wrong pronoun is a criminal offence in Canada. The right to free speech is intrinsically the right to be offensive, for the very simple reason that any statement at all could be taken as offensive by somebody. As soon as you criminalise being offensive, any speech becomes fair game for government censorship. It is the very definition of a slippery slope.

<comment><USER19> I find that definition is typically only used by people who are more interested in "offence" than "freedom of speech".

We should obviously all have the freedoms to be offensive, because like you say, offence is essentially arbitrary. But we draw limits on that freedom all the time - for safety, libel, or public order reasons, for example. The real argument should be about where that line is drawn, and not those silly straw men about "they are going to arrest me for calling a man a man"

<comment><USER17> It's not silly at all, because that is literally a law in Canada.

There are also 0 restrictions on offensiveness in the US. Any restrictions on speech are restrictions on other crimes. You can't incite violence for example. If your straw man of what free speech means we're true, then a gang leader could freely sit behind a desk and direct others to commit crime on his behalf all day because all he's doing is speaking, right?...

<comment><USER20> _There are also 0 restrictions on offensiveness in the US._

That's not true: see "seven dirty words".

<comment><USER17> The Supreme Court ruling on that case held that broadcasting content into people's homes is materially different to public speech.

<comment><USER20> So if the UK courts rule that posting on Twitter/FB is materially different then it's all fine?

<comment><USER17> If twitter stopped operating on the internet, and started terrestrially broadcasting their content into people's homes then you might have a point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This kind of things often ends up in a Streisand effect, seems very clumsy.

</comment><comment><USER22> Perhaps the judge should look instead to the court's and clerk's own record management. Something that is obviously in error, and the original cause of the risk.

Of course, they may well seek to quash such publicity. After all, who's going to make a deal with a system so incompetent it can't keep a sealed record safe from its own negligent mis-handling?

</comment><comment><USER23> It sounds like the reporter found it on PACER.

[https://www.pacer.gov/](https://www.pacer.gov/)

It's an extremely useful resource for information gathering.

</comment><comment><USER24> I look forward to hearing how blockchain technology could have prevented this.

<comment><USER25> Well the info could be hosted on IPFS, which eventually could be monetized by something like Filecoin. I suspect you're trolling, but decentralized technologies certainly will play a part in publicly disseminating information in the future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> There's already manufactured consent and corruption of civilizational- implosion proportions, but this is a shot across the bow that the day of the fourth estate independent press maybe numbered.

</comment><comment><USER26> Stifling the first amendment is serious business. When are judges going to be held accountable for their wrong actions?

<comment><USER27> IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#Tenure_and_salary)

<comment><USER28> Not a federal judge and not an impeachment, but a judge has been removed for a controversial ruling recently: [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge- aaron-p...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-persky- who-gave-brock-turners-lenient-sentence-sanford-rape-case-recalled/674551002/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Anyone have copies of the decision?

</comment><comment><USER30> > LA Times

Zero sympathy for them having been rangebanned from their site.

</comment><comment><USER31> Wikileaks gets raked over the coals for (allegedly) printing similar information and the LA Times gets a pass.

I believe it was in the Noriega case where the first order to CNN not to publish was made. It was overturned by the 11th Circuit.

<comment><USER32> > and the LA Times gets a pass

Hu? The LA Times took it down. How is that "gets a pass"?

The LA Times also acquired the information lawfully, Wikileaks did not.

<comment><USER33> The people at the LA times that published the information haven't been forced to choose between exile in an embassy, and facing a kangaroo court, and also well-documented persecution via probably illegal psy-ops, falsified slanderous/libelous communications "from" trusted colleagues, etc, etc.

Compared to wikileaks, they "got a pass". It doesn't make the mistreatment of the LA Times any better though.

<comment><USER32> Because they obeyed the court order and took it down, so obviously they didn't have to do any of that.

I really don't understand what you are expecting. If you disobey a court, you get punished. Why is that strange?

And the exile in an embassy thing was unrelated to any leaks, despite Assange desperately trying to make it as if it was.

Look, I supported Wikileaks goals at first, but then Assange tried to turn it into his personal PR firm, using the name "wiki" to try to make it as if it's some "for the public thing".</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you motivate yourself to do un-motivating work? - <AUTHOR> I've been having issues lately trying to motivate myself to do mundane, or at the very least "unappealing", work (namely, [high]school work). It's not that I'm lazy — actually I'm afraid I'm a workaholic sometimes — but that I always find myself giving priority to another project or hobby I enjoy doing and find more worthwhile.
I personally find I have one of two reactions to tasks I have to do: either I'm completely engrossed in my work and won't sleep, eat, etc. until it's finished, or it is the last thing I would ever possibly want to do with my time and I will do everything but that task, even if only to say that I was the one that wasted my time, not somebody else.
The main problem I have is the pervasive feeling in the back of my mind whenever I spend time doing something that I could be doing something else. But this other work still has to get done, so I procrastinate terribly, which accomplishes nothing but adding more stress to my life.
In accordance with one of pg's essays (http://www.paulgraham.com/procrastination.html), I'm definitely a type "c" procrastinator, only I'm not sure it's a "good procrastination" because I'm afraid it's going to cause me to fail school.
I suppose what I'm really looking for is the answer to the question: How do I make otherwise un-motivating work intrinsically motivating? The only two responses I've gotten to this question when I ask people this is either a.) you're always going to have to do work you don't want to do, or b.) you have to do it because you need to get good grades / graduate high-school / etc. Neither of these answers help motivate me in the slightest — they just imply I'm going to be unhappy for the rest of my life if I keep doing this. <comment><USER2> [Edit: Sorry - this probably won't apply to the OP's specific problem, but it will apply to others facing un-motivating work (assuming they have an hourly rate that will allow them to do this)]

Answer: oDesk, eLance, etc...

Seriously, my life and productivity have improved dramatically since I started outsourcing the grunt work I used to dread doing. For me it's well worth it to pay someone else 1/2 or 1/3 of what I make per hour to do something I would just stress out over and procrastinate.

With my money I'm buying: 1) Time (a scarce resource) and 2) Will-power (an even scarcer resource).

For instance, I have a side project that requires a lot of web scraping. I found a great scraper guy in southeast asia that is a much better scraper than me and is happy to work for 1/10th of what I make per hour. It's a great trade off.

I can then use the time and will-power to do all sorts of more important things to me - exercise, intense learning, systems design, etc. Specifically, with my extra time lately, I've worked on marathon training, speed reading, learning short-hand, esoteric ruby concepts, practicing the ukulele, etc.

If you are getting stuck on something you don't want to do - outsource it. Even if a poorly skilled outsourcer makes it through my hiring process (rare, but can happen) and they churn out some crap - it is oddly motivating for me to go and fix the issue and get it right. For some reason I get a mental block sometimes when starting a project from scratch - but if I hire someone else to take a stab at it and they fail horribly, I'm like "Wo, that sucked, you really should have done it this way...." My motivation is then unblocked since I'm 'fixing' something, not 'creating from scratch'.

oDesk is basically a store where you can go and trade money for time and will- power. Seriously, how cool is that ;)

<comment><USER3> > Even if a poorly skilled outsourcer makes it through my hiring process > (rare, but can happen) and they churn out some crap - it is oddly motivating > for me to go and fix the issue and get it right.

This is KEY. There is something about editing and feedback that kicks in. It's the same "someone on the internet is WRONG" impulse that drives so many Hacker News posters.

I think it is related to the fundamental distinction between "multiple choice" vs. "fill in the blank" questions. Prompted recall is so much easier than unprompted recall.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm not going to try to motivate you, because only you can motivate yourself. I'm just going to share my perspective that might shed some light on your issue.

I had the same problem in college until a fraternity brother who had graduated 2 years before told me something I had never thought of. He said, "You may never have a better opportunity to explore and learn new things. Once you settle down with a career and family, all your time will be spoken for. So try everything! How will you know who you are and what you're interested in unless you experiment?"

Some of the best advice I ever got, and since I was a sophomore at the time, I tried as much as I could for the next 2 1/2 years. I still majored in math and became a computer programmer, but I did a lot of stuff that I simply don't have time for today. And I miss a lot of it. Back then, I thought humanities was boring, but what I would give for a few days off to curl up with a good book.

Sometimes you can learn a lot about something you are interested in by doing something totally different. Reading literature might help you write code. Music may help you with math. Working at the mall or living in a fraternity house could help you learn how to run a business.

At this point in your life, you still don't know (for sure) what you'll love and be good at for the rest of your life. So keep doing those things that _seem_ like they're boring and uninteresting. Many of them will be a waste of time, but there will certainly be a few pearls in there, too. Don't miss the opportunity of discovering them because you just want to stay in your comfort zone. Now is the best time to leave that comport zone and discover the other stuff. Eventually, you'll be glad you did.

</comment><comment><USER5> Sometimes you have to pull off any dirty trick you can google on yourself.

 _Strapping myself to chair with trouser belt worked for me once_ when I had to do work for customer but my brain constantly zoned out away from drudgery and was raising my body from the chair and sending it to kitchen to look for something unspecified.

</comment><comment><USER3> I run into this all the time and have two strategies.

1) Pair programming. If you can find someone to work _with you_ on this, it's much easier to get rolling and to stay on task.

2) Overkill it. Approach the task as if it were Mount Everest. Assemble food, water, energy drinks. Go to a place like a library or conference room where no one can run into you. Disconnect the internet. Block out all sounds. Play Rocky on your headphones as you're unpacking.

Just approaching it as if it were a _difficult_ task helps.

<comment><USER6> > Just approaching it as if it were a difficult task helps.

I have literally the exact opposite experience. I procrastinate horribly on difficult tasks (or just any task that I don't know exactly how to do.) I guess different people are wired differently. If the OP is wired like me, I'd advise him to try to do work as quickly as possible and not worry about quality. Just come home from school and finish everything before 5:00.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Okay - let's get the obvious out of the way: are you ADD/ADHD and, if so, have you been taking any recent meds? If not, let's talk about your diet: tons of carbs but lack of protein? How about sleep - getting enough of it? Lastly, when was your last vacation?

These are all major factors in feeling a sense of restlessness or being lackadaisical towards critical, yet mundane tasks. Sometimes burnout is the term for this whereas other times it is simple procrastination. So which is it?

<comment><AUTHOR> "are you ADD/ADHD and, if so, have you been taking any recent meds?"

Don't think so. I'm not on any medication.

"If not, let's talk about your diet: tons of carbs but lack of protein? "

I guess so, but I don't feel that my diet is particularly unhealthy. So far today I had: an apple, oatmeal, avocado, carrots, some (whole-wheat) toast, a hard-boiled egg, a sweet potato, and a bag of steamed mixed vegetables w/ corn, asparagus, green beans etc, and just water to drink.

"How about sleep - getting enough of it?"

I usually get 6 – 8 hours (except at the beginning of the week when I'm typically feeling apathetic about school and stay up late working on a project or something), so yes, I think so.

"Sometimes burnout is the term for this whereas other times it is simple procrastination. So which is it?"

A combination of both, I think.

<comment><USER7> Okay - so those are the fundamentals and it seems as though you deem yourself healthy. From your diet, I would assume you are vegetarian - is that correct? I am a vegetarian and here's the main thing I have to watch out for: getting enough iron. If I don't get enough iron, I am sleepy, cranky, tired-feeling, and just have a general malaise. This leads to less focus and less "patience" to deal with the mundane. Is it possible you are either anemic, borderline anemic or whether you are iron-deficient?

<comment><USER8> Although iron deficiency may be a concern, a word of caution about taking too much (such as iron supplements if you (the general "you") are not a menstruating female): you can ingest too much iron. If you are low in iron, eat iron-rich foods (eggs, spinach, beans/lentils, fortified cereals), rather than take supplements.

Easy non-scientific way to check if you're low: pull down your lower eyelid and check the color of your skin of the uncovered lid. A pale red suggests you should be checked for anemia.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Sometimes when I'm feeling unmotivated or depressed, it helps to remind myself about some of the struggles that other people around the world are dealing with.

For example, I'm sure the average teenager in Afghanistan or the Democratic Republic of Congo would love to trade places with you. Did you know that 80% of humanity lives on less than $10/day? A shift in perspective might make your problems with school seem a bit more manageable.

You don't _have_ to apply yourself in school, but try to remind yourself that it's an opportunity that relatively few people in this world have access to.

(As a side note, this highlights a failing of the school system itself -- they should probably put more emphasis on broadening your perspective. It's sad that so many people go through the school system without understanding why they are there in the first place.)

</comment><comment><USER10> In high school I dealt with boring work by seeing how fast I could do it. After a while I'd usually be able to do it (if it wasn't, say, a term paper) at school, and not even sweat it at home. Not a good strategy if you're trying to be top of your class, but it did make me a good standardized test taker. Also my high school was not particularly challenging, so YMMV.

Also, the answers you've gotten are pretty much true, and no amount of 'mind hacks' is going to change that. You won't be unhappy the rest of your life, though. High school is pretty much the peak of that stuff. Later you'll have a lot more flexibility to put yourself in a situation to avoid it (rule #1 for this: don't get into debt)

</comment><comment><USER11> It sounds to me like you need a good hack. If you're truly the type "c" procrastinator PG talks about then let's visualize this. This means your intellect is running on a higher level than the mundane circumstances around you. Would Einstein flunk out of high school because his mind was in neutron land while sitting through a lecture on some obscure part of history? He might, but that would be bad form. I strongly believe you should at least get a high school diploma (or GED equivalent), because it's too simple.

If you're on this board then you are likely entrepreneurial. You need to be able to analyze and solve problems. At the end of the day your teachers (now they are customers) need you to produce either a certain test score, or paper. Find a way to give them what they want, even if you have to _hack it_ so that you're not doing all the tedious work yourself and/or simply test out of subjects.

</comment><comment><USER12> I split it up into tiny tasks on a physical paper so I can cross items out and feel accomplished.

</comment><comment><USER13> As a college freshman, here's my view on high school work: just do it. It's the only way to get into college. That has to be your sole motivation, as for most intelligent people, high school work in itself is not interesting in the slightest (although I was lucky to take a Constitutional Law class senior year that I loved).

However, don't despair: college work IS interesting. Unlike high school, a college will let you take essentially whatever class you want. Interested in physics? Take a class on special relativity. Interested in philosophy? Take a class that applies the theories of the great philosophers to modern moral problems. Interested in spaceflight? Take intro to aerospace engineering. At a university, the possibilities are endless, especially freshman year when you don't have to worry in the slightest about your major.

So, to sum it up, this is my advice: high school work sucks, but college, at least from what I've found, is awesome. Not only are you encouraged to take classes in areas that interest you, the atmosphere and social life is also incomparably better than high school. Your motivation thus should be directly tied to college: if you do not do this paper tonight, you will not get a good grade in this class, and you will not be able to get into as good of a college, meaning you may not be able to take high-quality classes in the areas that really interest you. It may seem like negative motivation, but if you view college as something good for you (and not just good for your career), it really becomes positive motivation. Good luck.

<comment><USER14> I agree with what you say about high school and heading to college. However, I am about a year or so away from finishing my undergrad in CS, and I have to disagree with the idea that college work is entirely interesting. It is true that most of the classes that directly involve your major are found to be more interesting to the individual. The problem is that colleges will require you to take classes that are not always directly related to your major.

For example, I am currently taking an upper division political science class, but only because it was required. I have no real interest in this course, but my motivation to do the work is to never have to look at it again. I figure if I can do it, and I can do well, then I will never have to sit in this type of class again.

The other issue with college is professors. I have had interesting subjects with the most uninteresting professors. This definitely makes the subject matter more difficult to find interesting. The opposite, however, is great. If I have a subject that I can't stand, but a professor that is very excited and interested in the subject, it will usually get me really motivated to do the work.

Obviously, these are my opinions, so this will vary from person to person. My motivation for doing uninteresting work in college is to have one less obstacle between me and my future goals. I'm sure this motivation can be applied to many other situations.

<comment><USER13> Perhaps my opinion is colored by being a person interested in studying many fields. It is very true that if your interests lie entirely in your major, you will be forced to take classes outside of that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Shit work is definitely less painful if you "just take care of it" and get it out of your consciousness faster. I think learning to let that "lesser of two evils" trade-off motivate you to action is something that will take many years and will always leave room for improvement...

It works for me to have higher goals. These days, 99% of my shit work can be easily categorized into long term goals and desires. This does not make them quite "transformed" into something intrinsically motivating like you are asking for but what it does at least is make them fairly easy to "just take care of." It takes the sting out or something.

People that tell you "you're always going to have to do work you don't want to do" are correct but what you might not realize is that this does not _have to be a significant part of your day_ like in high school, so this "unhappy for the rest of my life" is a red herring. You are not going to be as unhappy when you can align your coursework more easily with your interests. College is way better than high school. Post-college is even better once you find a money situation that works for you.

Which leads to some more immediate advice: see what it will take to apply to college early. I got out of high school after junior year by taking my last remaining credits at a local college over the summer. My school was not set up for this, I had to do some serious convincing to administrators and parents. Almost a full year of work avoided. And no, I did not need a 4.0 GPA.

P.S. Don't get pregnant or get anyone pregnant for at least 15 years :-)

</comment><comment><USER16> My guess is that there are a few underlying issues that could be causing this, and it's probably important not to "diagnose" this incorrectly. It sounds like you have thought about this for a while. Have you tried anything already to help with this, and how did it go?

Also, the two responses you mention are obviously well-intentioned but not necessarily correct. "b)" is totally false and even "a)" can be dealt with.

There might be others in your life who think your biggest problem right now is your school issue. I'm guessing your biggest concern is really that last sentence of your post. There's no need to assume you're screwed for the rest of your life based on your experience with high school work. The rest of your life will not all be high school work; it will consist of things that are fundamentally different in nature. They will, ideally, be meaningful and rewarding, rather than artificial, arbitrary, and useless. You can be optimistic about the future.

I think you said in another post that your parents don't want you to leave high school. Others suggested starting college (probably a community college) early; that's a good idea, or better than staying in high school, anyway. For some people, that change is enough, but some people don't like either high school or college, and that's fine, too.

</comment><comment><USER17> Find something you actually want. There is almost a 100% chance you will need a high school degree to get it, but knowing specifically what it is will help greatly.

</comment><comment><USER18> Google up Hoagies.com (Hoagies Gifted Page). You might find some helpful info there.

If your parents are at all sympathetic, you could ask if you can start taking community college classes while in high school. Some folks drop out of high school to pursue college. You might find supporting info on Hoagies to present to your parents.

After taking graduate level classes, I had a really, really hard time focusing on classes for my Bachelor's degree. (One thing that helped: Breaking the work up so I wasn't bored to tears for too long a stretch at any one time.) Due in part to divorce and financial problems and other issues, my degree remains unfinished. I have an Associates and two different certificates (wildly different, in fact), one of which was paid for by my employer. (Yes it helps to get paid to pay attention to this stuff and finish the class.)

As an adult, I'm mostly not required to take classes that bore me to tears. It's possible I'll wind up an entrepreneur simply because I am not all that enthused about going back to undergrad classes after doing graduate level work and most employers won't let me advance much without the sheepskin. Being an adult does give you some choices that being a minor doesn't.

</comment><comment><USER19> Look for ways to make the assignment relevant to your interests. Sometimes it's as simple as choosing a topic you like for an English essay. If you're not interested in your math homework, try poking around those topics on Wikipedia. Being able to click through to subjects that seem interesting might peek your interest in the original subject. Sometimes, seeking out more work can make the assignment "easier" because you're more interested in it.

If you're referring to really mindless work, then I solve that by listening to something I like when I do it. (Such as music or a podcast.) For example, I'm a researcher, and sometimes I just have to do some mindless data entry. It's my data and no one else is going to do it for me. I get through it by listening to things I like while doing it.

</comment><comment><USER20> Have you thought about getting your GED? Maybe the reason why you're unmotivated by schoolwork is that it _is_ useless to you.

What types of activities do you find difficult to do? Cleaning toilets, doing math problems, writing reports?

One technique that I use is stolen from PJE ([http://dirtsimple.org/2006/01/smelling-fear-feeling- future.h...](http://dirtsimple.org/2006/01/smelling-fear-feeling- future.html)), The "Mmmmm" test.

Generally you're doing these things to get something else that you find worthwhile. If you can visualize this goal deeply enough to change your emotional state, like Homer Simpson fantasizing about donuts, then you can associate it with the thought of doing the drudgery as well. It takes time and effort to retrain yourself to do this, though.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, the GED is the way to go, if you want to get into college. That's how I did it. The GED is so retarded, you're pretty much guaranteed to score in the top percentiles. College are required to treat these high GED scores as equivalent to an A average (per subject).

Your state might have a regulation forbidding taking the GED to graduate ahead of your classmates. I got my GED in a different state when I was 17.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Dominique_Bauby>

This man wrote a fucking BOOK by _BLINKING HIS LEFT EYE_.

After reading his story, you might find it easier to do your homework.

<comment><USER23> _Despite his condition, he wrote the book The Diving Bell and the Butterfly by blinking when the correct letter was reached by a person slowly reciting the alphabet over and over again._

Man, how did they not work up a system like morse code? That's _horrible_. Mad props for the patience, though.

<comment><USER24> Being clever would have taken time away from the goal of writing a book. It's arguable that the book would have been done sooner had they both taken the time to learn Morse Code (or Huffman Coding), but they quickly found a workable solution and got on with it.

They did one clever thing, though:

 _To make dictation more efficient, Bauby's interlocutor, Claude Mendibil, read from a special alphabet which consisted of the letters ordered in accordance with their frequency in the French language._

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> If the work that _has_ to be done has a deadline, and you find yourself procrastinating right up until the deadline, whereby you work frantically on the boring work for far too little time but _still manage to get it done_ \- I wouldn't worry _so_ much yet. In fact, if you can gauge your ability to get things done at the last minute, and you've sussed that you only work well under extreme pressure, you can enjoy your procrastinating and schedule in the real work for the last minute. I don't advocate this for a life strategy but it sure got me through undergraduate maths supervisions.

</comment><comment><USER26> 1) Do the easiest/most fun part of whatever boring task there is to do first. Most things are not as boring or as excruciating as they seem to be, once you're actually doing them. Objects in motion...

2) Only do the bare minimum work necessary to get passing grades in high school, unless you plan to attend college. No one cares what grades you got in HS. Anything you're genuinely interested in you can learn much more deeply on your own.

3) Learning self-discipline is extremely valuable, even if you rarely invoke it. This boring work could be a blessing, if you can use it to teach yourself discipline.

<comment><USER27> 2 and 3 are at odds. Do the bare minimum, but learn self-discipline? Self discipline is a muscle. Don't exercise it and it atrophies.

<comment><USER26> I didn't claim they weren't contradictory. I don't think they are though. He could work to become very disciplined in doing the bare minimum consistently and efficiently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> High School is not hard. I just did enough to pass and get into my school of choice (standardized tests usually matter more here). I basically made a game of how little I could do and still get by...this is somewhat stupid and is really only advised if you are naturally smart...whatever that means.

There will always be people that say you HAVE to this or that. In my experience this is hardly ever the case...as long as you're willing to work as hard as you possibly can when you really really actually need to.

</comment><comment><USER29> We are the same exact person. I'm in my last year of college and I'm doing intro classes just to satisfy requirements. I hate it beyond belief, since I feel like it's a complete waste of time when I could be working on my startup. When I have to do homework or study, I spend hours doing anything _but_ my hw (for example, I post way more on HN when I have homework to do). When I'm working on my startup, I do little else (girlfriend time stays the same though haha).

</comment><comment><USER30> "I have to do it. There is no way I can avoid doing it without unappealing consequences. I will do it now and then move on, do the interesting stuff."

</comment><comment><USER31> "they just imply I'm going to be unhappy for the rest of my life if I keep doing this."

Keep doing what? Finishing high school? That's going to make you unhappy for the rest of your life?

The fact of the matter is that you lack discipline. Life will always have mundane or unpleasant tasks that need doing. It's called responsibility and most of the time it takes discipline to buckle down and get things done.

</comment><comment><USER32> moosecake, You need to ask yourself what motivates you. Why do you find some stuff more worthwhile than other stuff? When you work on something that is not worthwhile, can you find the bits that can be worthwhile to you?

In my case, even the most mundane work has something to teach me. If it's not by doing it myself is by doing it with other people (I like to see how other people solve problems). So here is an idea, get together with friends and work on the stuff you find unappealing. That way, you'll throw two birds with one stone. You'll learn to work better as a team, and you'll get the unappealing work out of the way. Also, I find it better to finish the boring work first thing, and then move on to the cool work (that way the cool work seems like a prize). Good luck, and don't forget to have fun, you are still a kid above everything else.

<comment><USER33> This is similar to what grosales said but a bit more drawn out with some fancy psychology thrown in: \</comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

I have struggled with a similar problem and know how debilitating it can be. What I mostly offer here is a few questions to ask in hopes of getting honest answers for yourself. These tend to turn into much deeper issues than they seem at the surface. Not that deep issues are bad, but just take longer to work through. To encourage the full reading of this comment, I have broken into three parts. I should also note that I am not a certified psychologist, but will pretend to be one if the price is right.

PART 1 of 3

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

I think the key is in what you said here: "The main problem I have is the pervasive feeling in the back of my mind whenever I spend time doing something that I could be doing something else." When you say, "I could be doing something else", I imagine its just not _anything_ else. Instead it's something that internally drives you to become "completely engrossed in my work and won't sleep, eat, etc. until it's finished".

What is it about this other stuff that seems so appealing? Because it can be different for everyone, let's just say it's "stuff that makes me feel X". For me, this was "stuff that makes me feel creative/unique". I found that anytime I was doing "stuff that makes me feel creative/unique" I became "completely engrossed in my work and won't sleep, eat, etc. until it's finished".

SUMMARY - Some tasks/activities/stuff can organically motivate you because it makes you feel a certain way

PART 2 of 3

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

Now, there are some tasks that were towards the middle of the spectrum ("stuff that kind of relates to X or gives me some feeling of X every once in a while"). But then, and this is the dangerous part, there were tasks that were the opposite of X. So let's say Y = -X and call it "work that makes me feel like Y". Y work was _terrible_. Y work made me question whether I should be in the industry and even made me feel depressed. So, in order to avoid these bad feelings, I would "procrastinate terribly [which in turn] accomplishes nothing but adding more stress to my life".

This is where you start to go nuts. You feel like its lose/lose (hate my life when doing it / stressed out when I don't). Sounds like this is the point you may be at. But as I eluded to before, the avoidance of these feelings makes sense. Logically, if something feels bad, we will either put an end to it or try to not let it happen in the first place. But let's dive into these feelings a little bit more. If you are not sure what kind of feelings this Y work can cause. Just ask yourself this question:

"What would happen to me if I had a job where I did nothing but Y work"?

Obviously, its much more effective if you fill in the Y. Again, as an example, for me the question was: "what would happen if I had a job where I did nothing but fix other people's bugs, uncreative maintenance work and writing a bunch of documentation?" My answer was (and this is where is gets very 'psychological'): "I would feel like I am not contributing anything special to the organization. Then I would feel I wasn't unique. Then I might be lost in the crowd, forgotten or abandoned". Everyone answers will be different, but in most cases it fits a model of "I would initially feel _________, but that might lead to ___________, which just feels REALLY scary for some reason". The second 'blank' is usually one of the basic fears: unworthiness, abandonment, loss of safety, ill health, etc. I found that being able to honestly and accurately complete that sentence exposed many subtle, but clearly driving forces in my everyday and long term decision making.

SUMMARY - Answer the question: "What would happen to me if I had a job where I did nothing but Y work"?

PART 3 of 3

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

Once you see that some work "makes you feel Y", and that Y feelings suck, its easy to understand why procrastination might happen. But because some of these tasks seem necessary (I'm afraid it's going to cause me to fail school), you try to find a way to do them. So let's address your specific question: "How do I make otherwise un-motivating work intrinsically motivating".

I would say you could accomplish this to two degrees:

* first degree - somehow believe that doing Y work will NOT result in something that seems terrible (answer to SUMMARY question above)

* second degree - figure out how Y work can let you feel traces or bits of X

Imagine, abstractly, that the first or second degree is possible. Do you think you would procrastinate less? I imagine you would because you would not be avoiding what seems like the realization of something terrible.

Now, these two suggestions don't seem very actionable (i.e., 'okay now what?'). Things you can actually do or take action on usually results in a change of behaviors and patterns. Unfortunately, behaviors and patterns become so specific to a given person that to give a general diagnoses would be a waste of your time. Thus, you have to find the change that works for you. I will continue to provide a personal example, but be sure to read the summary at the end as it will give you a more specific question to be asking yourself and others.

My major catalyst turned out to be a "positive vs. negative framing" situation. I framed all of my Y work as "negative." Anytime I would be assigned something in the Y work category I would have quick and subtle thoughts run through my mind, "Great... now I have to put up with this crap again. This work is so meaningless and doesn't even make sense. What I really want to work on is X. But this Y work is holding me back... how dare you Y work!".

Framing my current or future situation in this negative way didn't allow _me_ to provide myself with any "intrinsic motivation". Instead my motivation was thinking about all of the cool X work I could be doing. By simply identifying the framing of my thinking, catching myself in the "quick and subtle" negative thought process and a bit of self-coaching, my stress level (and thus happiness) shifted dramatically! Doing these tasks became much easier. The reason this happened was because I was able to stop my "quick and subtle negative thoughts" and tell myself things more along the lines of "okay, so it looks like we were assigned some Y work. Is Y work really _that_ bad? It is going to kill me. Probably not. In fact, I can't believe they are paying me to do Y work. Oh look it's sunny outside!". Again, this was a behavior or pattern that was specific to me. Yours may not be the same, but your outcome should be.

SUMMARY - find out what behaviors or patterns are holding you back from achieving the "first or second degree" and change them

TIME TO START

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

So, in summary, look into what about the Y work really makes you avoid it. Then, determine if what you are avoiding is as bad as it seems. It is at this point that honesty really pays off (Personally, I could have easily answered this question with more "quick and subtle negative thoughts", but that would defeat the purpose). Finally if it doesn't seem worth avoiding, change your pattern or your behavior to something that serves you better. To provide some encouragement, I have been able to achieve the "second degree" with my job. I literally went from despising it to enjoy it! It seems impossible, but it's true. I could really have just responded with the comment "Oh hey, that sucks. You should do more positive framing". But my guess is that would not have helped you that much. Instead, the change needs to be specific to you.

It's easy to just shove these kind of things to the side, but situations like this can cause a great deal of stress and unhappiness. I am sorry that you are currently experiencing it. But, my advice would be instead of taking a large risk: switching jobs, switching careers, dropping out of school, etc., try taking a small risk: asking yourself if what you are avoiding is worth the stress of avoidance.

</comment><comment><USER34> My friends used to come over my place. We used to sit together, discuss what/how to do it, have drinks and complete it. So we essentially converted "Boring task completion time" into "Socializing and fun time".

</comment><comment><USER35> Wise words handed down to me: SUCK IT UP and take care of it.

Yea HS busy work can be idiotic. Yea, you could be using the time for something more interesting/better/cooler/profitable. The simple fact is that the work needs to be done.

If you must find motivation, use the fact that if it's not done, you won't be able to work on the other more interesting things. There are some tasks that you must do but will never feel motivated to do. Find a way to do finish these things as fast as is viable, then go work on the interesting stuff.

</comment><comment><USER36> I listen to Voodoo People by Prodigy on repeat. That was the only way I was able to write my papers in high school.

<comment><USER37> Music for me as well. For years at work I put on the headphones & Frontline Assembly and channeled the hate into productive work. Although lately it has been a Masters of Flamenco Guitar CD.

I seem to have the same personality as the OP but I've found it to be less of a problem as I get older.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Have a look at the book "Procrastination - Why you do it, what to do about it now" by Jane Burka and Lenora Yuen.

</comment><comment><USER39> fogbugz... Being able to guess how long it will take, and then meet your own deadline is strangely fun in itself.

If you have trouble getting started on your work, just make a few subcases, and estimate them as well.

As quizbiz said, crossing the todo's off your list makes it feel like you're accomplishing something :)

</comment><comment><USER40> I listen to repetitive, energetic music. Metal, techno, acid jazz, etc.

That, and caffeine.

</comment><comment><USER41> Coffee, if you need to power through a few hours of boring and tedious stuff. Works better if you are not a regular coffee drinker.

</comment><comment><USER42> > The only two responses I've gotten to this question when I ask people this > is either a.) you're always going to have to do work you don't want to do, > or b.) you have to do it because you need to get good grades / graduate > high-school / etc.

High school:

1\. Some learning.

2\. A credential.

3\. Some socializing and extracurricular.

4\. A "rite of passage" in Western society.

That's why people do high school. They don't normally phrase it like that, they say, "Well, everyone's doing it, it's normal, and it sucks, but you have to do it" - but the reason why is for some mix of learning, credentialing, "other benefits" (normal socializing, team sports, student council, whatever), and finally, the "rite of passage" aspect.

So this isn't exactly what you asked, but there are options besides high school which will be more motivating, interesting, and beneficial in the long term - if you're talented and disciplined enough to get by without the structure. If you do so, the first goal you ought to consider setting for yourself will be replacing the learning, credentialing, and socializing/other benefits (more on the rite of passage in a moment).

Learning - there's some skills in high school that you probably wouldn't be bothered to teach yourself outside of it. Look up your curriculum, and make sure you get decent enough at math, get introduced to the branches of science, read a little history, and make sure you have decent reading/writing skills. It's not hard to learn at a much faster rate than you do in high school. That's easy to replace.

Next is the credentialing aspect. You can forgo high school entirely if you're doing very interesting things with your time - no one will care if you've built a company, or organized charity events, or published articles in the newspaper, or anything really interesting. You can say, "Yes, I was working on [journalism/coding/sales/whatever] and thought that was more important than high school", and that'll work if you're outside the traditional track. But if you want to go to college and be salaried later, not having a H.S. degree could be a problem.

But it's a fixable problem - go to an adult learning center or alternative high school. Tell them you're emancipated from your parents, independent, working for yourself, and don't have time for normal high school. Ask how they can help. Doing it this way, you can get a real, genuine high school degree (sometimes with a very high GPA actually). After that, it's all on your standardized testing and other requirements to get into university. Maybe the highest level unis look into which HS you went to, but most state schools just plug your GPA into their formula and off you go.

Finally, the socializing/extracurricular aspect. This is also easy to replace. Take up some extracurriculars. A martial arts, some kind of science society, some kind of nature-based organization, a hiking group, a cycling group, maybe a couple of them. It's important you're in face to fact contact with people and developing your interests, so don't neglect that part if you move on.

Finally - the rite of passage. My advice here might be a touch controversial - forgot bowing, kneeling, scraping, and "paying your dues" via rites of passage. Seriously. If the benefits from an activity outside of the fact that "that's just how it's done" doesn't appeal to you, then try to find a way to get what you want without going through the wasted motions. Everyone successful throughout history had to depart from convention. But you _will_ get hostility, and expect that. I found this quote by Bertrand Russel recently, and it was quite insightful to me:

"Conventional people are roused to fury by departures from convention, largely because they regard such departures as a criticism of themselves."

So how do I know all this stuff? I dropped out of a private high school to self teach myself business and computers, and went and "scummed" around the local university just absorbing it. Later I re-enrolled in HS, this time in a gifted and talented program. Also very boring, also dropped out, got an adult high school degree (an actual degree, not just a GED), and with decent standardized testing scores, got a full ride scholarship to a decent college. Dropped out after 3 semesters there to start a company, which was successful, and I've since traveled all over the world doing all sorts of interesting things. I don't regret my decisions for a minute - high school? Hah, seriously, what a waste of time. I'm expecting my first child soon, and going to give him or her options to start doing interesting things outside of the mainstream starting around age 12, with just enough tutoring/parent teaching to get overviews of the important knowledge and enrollment in extracurriculars for the socializing and personal growth.

High school is fundamentally un-motivating, because it wasn't built for you. It's for people who want to be led down a reasonably certain and secure path and life. Stick with it if you don't have a better option, but if you do, go for it. With the growth of communication and freely accessible knowledge online, going outside the convention is more possible than ever. You will take hostility and abuse from people who don't understand you though, so be prepared for that. Everyone makes their own judgment calls, but it was definitely worth it for me in the end.

</comment><comment><USER21> > I've been having issues lately trying to motivate myself to do mundane, or > at the very least "unappealing", work (namely, [high]school work). It's not > that I'm lazy — actually I'm afraid I'm a workaholic sometimes — but that I > always find myself giving priority to another project or hobby I enjoy doing > and find more worthwhile. I personally find I have one of two reactions to > tasks I have to do: either I'm completely engrossed in my work and won't > sleep, eat, etc. until it's finished, or it is the last thing I would ever > possibly want to do with my time and I will do everything but that task

Amen, brother. Same here.

Here are some things I've done about this, with some success:

1\. "Pair" on it, even if it's not programming. Just doing the job with someone else often makes it a lot easier. Maybe it's theoretically not as efficient a use of time, but, bottom line, the unpleasant task gets done.

2\. Find a way to not do it. That is, instead of procrastinating, cancel the task. This approach calls for creativity: you might redefine your goal so the icky task isn't necessary, or you might pay someone to do it (this is how my kitchen stays so clean), or you might abandon the larger goal that's driving the boring task (e.g. drop out of college), or who knows.

3\. If the problem is simply lack of momentum rather than true revulsion toward the task, the 5M method ramps up momentum without too much pain. [http://false-epiphany.com/2009/04/incompletion-causes-and- so...](http://false-epiphany.com/2009/04/incompletion-causes-and-solutions/4/) I usually find that it takes me about two to three days to ramp up momentum so I'm merrily humming along and don't need to play any more mind games with myself. Kinda slow, but it does work. A variation: Wait until the deadline, and rush; or do a rush job right now, with a fairly short time limit, after which you have a hard commitment to go do something fun with someone, somewhere else.

4\. Pause and theorize about the task. Why does it arise? What social/physical/mathematical givens and relationships explain its existence? Why these tools? What other tools could do it? What change in the broader world could make it obsolete, or change the way it's done? What is the absolute minimum you could do and still get the benefits? What is the most efficient way to do it? Optimizing is "bad", but it's also fun, and it gets your mind immersed in the task. Devise the most efficient method you can for doing it, and test your method/skill by measuring your results.

5\. Just fucking do it. Sometimes ya gotta suck it in and deal with it. For inspiration, read what Paul Graham says about determination. <http://www.paulgraham.com/determination.html> Take pride in your will of iron, and taste the sweet fruit at the end of a forced march, when your sweat has dried and the Sun hangs low in the sky. However, if your whole life is sucking in and dealing with, it's time to make a systemic change. Don't turn into G. Gordon Liddy or something.

I have found #1 to be the most effective by far, but it's very hard to find a good pair partner for crud like writing a meaningless paper for some stupid class. I have also found #5 surprisingly effective. It's usually been my last resort, but empirically, that weird attitude shift, the resulting commitment, and all-out expenditure of energy actually feel good. You might do a couple "forced marches" and take notes on your own emotional state, to see if the same is true for you. (This is actually a form of #4.)

</comment><comment><USER43> I've found myself in a similar boat for a long time now. Go see your doctor and get referred to a psychiatrist for an evaluation.

Not that medication is the only solution, but ADHD can manifest itself in different ways and sometimes taking something can help you bridge the gap.

<comment><USER44> ADD can be an advantage if you learn how to concentrate and control your impulses (read Richard Branson's biography). Plus the OP is in high school. How many people here can say they had motivation and concentration problems in high school? An individual's brain isn't fully developed until his or her late 20s.

<comment><USER43> I agree with you, but when I was in high school I was able to slack off and do things an hour before they were due and got a good GPA simply because I was intelligent enough to pull it off. I had no reason to believe anything might be wrong with me. Now, 5 years later, I'm struggling to keep myself focused and can look back and realize that this might have been manifesting a lot longer than I thought.

Like I said, it's not the end all solution but it is worth exploring.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> You don't have to get a high school degree. Seriously. But there is some unpleasant work that needs to be done. High school is not unpleasant work that needs to be done.

<comment><AUTHOR> "High school is not unpleasant work that needs to be done." Could you elaborate on that?

<comment><USER46> Hard to read...he's saying there are two categories within "unpleasant work": necessary, unnecessary. School is in the latter.

<comment><AUTHOR> oh, I see. I agree, but my parents don't, and I can't support myself yet.

<comment><USER45> so prioritize. learn a set of valuable skills that will allow you to support yourself. then drop out.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: which web-based client/invoice management app do you use? - <AUTHOR>

Being a freelancing web developer I'm exploring solutions to manage my clients and projects. Invoice management and a mobile interface (I have an Android phone) would be a nice plus.
Argentum (http://www.argentuminvoice.com/) doesn't seem to have a mobile interface nor does Ofuz (http://www.ofuz.com/). But they both seem to fit my needs.
Thank you <comment><USER2> SugarCRM</comment>


What Makes a Good Software Developer? - <AUTHOR> http://benlakey.com/2014/05/10/what-makes-a-good-software-developer/

<comment><USER2> This list says little that's new and has the feel of a developer with only a few years' experience. It should have been called "What works for me," rather than presenting it as a prescription to others.</comment>


Social Media Is Warping Democracy: Why It Feels Like Everything Is Going Haywire - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/12/social-media-democracy/600763/ <comment><USER2> I'm still on the fence about how much correlation is causation here.

There was another key development in the early 1990s, with the development first of the 24-hour news cycle, then the partisan divisiveness of it. At the same time, political consultants began to focus on divisive language and coded name-calling, continuing a notion that dated back to the late 1960s -- a notable divisive time in American history.

So I can't tell whether this is just the natural growth of partisanship as reflected in new media, or whether there is an actual inflection point. There is a feedback causing an exponential growth, and it can be hard to tell the difference between an apparent sharp, sudden increase in an exponential curve, and a real external effect.

<comment><USER3> The article does say there are other causes. But social media took the previously invented 24-hour news cycle and all its ills, and put it on steroids.

<comment><USER2> Absolutely. It's just that one of my main concerns is that we've been partially blaming foreign agitators on social media for that amplification, and I believe we need to recognize that we've done it to ourselves. Rather than look outside, I want us to start looking inwards... and I've believed that since before social media.

I'm trying to remain neutral here, though I suspect you can guess that I blame some specific individuals and groups for that. To my knowledge, they have shown no signs of letting up. They should be the easiest point of failure to fix, and if they won't, I don't know if any amount of analysis and understanding will help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> A cathartic article, but it might be worth examining this as a gradual process that has ramped up with social media. The newspaper, the radio, and the television all brought us further down the line to where we are now.

I think the big question is how do we move on and adapt from here. Do we add social media controls, like you might see in China? Perhaps do we try and pass constitutional amendments that fundamentally change our democracy in a way that jives better with the modern flow of information?

edit: of course, it's also possible the next generation will simply learn to live better with the barrage of information than we handled it, and our current highly volatile state of politics will reach some kind of status quo once again (for better or for worse)

<comment><USER5> This is a great point. We've been building to this for a long time. Social media and the modern internet is just the tip (a big tip though!) of this problem.

I imagine navigating this problem space will be very difficult. Small changes are likely to have major impacts down the line.

The re-tweet button is a great example.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Social media seems to drag everything down to the lowest common denominator. The only barrier of entry to express your opinion is to register on Twitter, which is not a barrier of entry.

In the past, one had to be published in a magazine, a paper, or show up on TV - not an easy task, just to say something.

Then we had blogs, which was a vast improvement in giving people voice, but at the same time a very good center ground. Setting up a blog, and then writing an entry is not that enjoyable. You need to really have something to say to go cross that bridge.

Now, however, you just open up your app and go "LOLZ LOLZ STUPID LIBS R SO TRIGGERED MAGA". Done.

Social media is where social conscience goes to die, so yes, I believe it.

There is a very good reason why the tornado of lies we hear from the VERY top of our government, and in fact, governments, is because social media brought down the attention span to zero. It's not that they became better liars - people just no longer critically process information, and move on to the next thing.

<comment><USER7> > social media brought down the attention span to zero

> people just no longer critically process information, and move on to the > next thing

Sadly I don't even think this is true. I think "people" in general have always been like this, and social media hasn't really changed that. You mentioned the barrier to entry dropping to zero. I think most of these issues are almost solely a result of that. The intellectual bias that used to be present in "the discourse" has been erased. The politicians/CEOs no longer have doubts, there's no reason to hedge. They __know __exactly how easy it is to manipulate the populace.

<comment><USER6> While I see your point, I also believe the sheer shameless lies were not possible before 2007, pre-mobile and pre-twitter. People would consume the info, slowly, and have time to process it. Now, the you know who says something like, "you know, that seems shady, someone should look into it", and leave it there. And then just burry that under another never-ending stream of lies.

I think both are really interlocked. Low barrier of entry = a flood of info = low attention spans as a defense mechanism to deal with it.

<comment><USER5> This is a really good point. The pace of shameless lying is so fast it's impossible to keep up.

Even if you're paying attention you can't keep it all straight in your head. You have to be a real time BS processing machine these days. And that simply isn't possible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > The problem may not be connectivity itself but rather the way social media > turns so much communication into a public performance.

This is a key insight. The performance aspect is what is killing social media and getting us addicted to Like and karma points. And of course these metrics are directly related to engagement and ad-based revenue models. It will be interesting to see how far these companies dare to go undoing the damage by hiding Like counts etc.

</comment><comment><USER9> Very insightful article. Explains a lot that is happening currently.

</comment><comment><USER10> It's really a shame that we are all forced by law to sign up to Facebook/Twitter/etc and check the feed constantly

<comment><USER11> I don't use any of them.

Every one I know is being bombarded by their paid speech though.

So even non-users have a legit argument to regulation.

I can politically assert my right to a world that isn't bent towards paid speech.

The most important bias we don't discuss in our algorithms: they're all designed by paid workers. They're designing to improve their pay.

I don't owe Facebook, Zuckerberg, or anyone on this forum my deference to the economic ideas of dead men next November :shrug:

<comment><USER5> When you say you don't use any of them, I think you're being fairly narrow with your definition.

It's pretty hard to dodge Amazon and Google on today's internet. Are you prepared to shut yourself off entirely from those services?

Would you be willing to block the Amazon and Google blocks of IPs? You're free to do this. Is it really a choice though?

<comment><USER11> No because I don't have to take ownership for choices I have no control over.

I don't have to block them because some site will still funnel it to them as a middle man. All blocking indirect access to my data will achieve is me wasting time thinking I can.

I can directly avoid their services and personally generate no emotional buy in, staying indifferent to their literal existence, and politically flexible then on Sanders or whoever taxing them billions.

The only framework that has social merit/weight, IMO is the legislative one. Not a corporations interest in gaming our agency for their feudal trade schemes.

I don't believe in any of this or whatever obligations others say I have. I'll politically support ones that seem sensible: m4a, education, engineering at scale to support those initiatives.

Outside that the reasons for providing institutional support of trade seem contrived. The ideology of long dead men exported into the limbic systems of the living.

<comment><USER5> You're making my point for me when you say this.

> I don't have to block them because some site will still funnel it to them as > a middle man. All blocking indirect access to my data will achieve is me > wasting time thinking I can.

These tools and services are _everywhere_. It's simply not true that you can live outside of them in a _modern_ internet.

If you do somehow _escape_ entirely, the people in your life still haven't.

In what sense have you made a choice here? Or are you living outside of the zeitgeist entirely? The conversations and politics of the day are happening on Twitter with or without you. Very real policy is happening in 240 characters.

> I don't believe in any of this or whatever obligations others say I have.

Ok... But the culture is shifting. POTUS has Tweeted every single day since announcing that he'll be running for office. Twitter has an effect on your life.

Not having a twitter account doesn't change that. Not using Facebook directly doesn't change the fact that their tracking pixels are all over the internet. Not using gmail doesn't mean your email isn't being mined on the back end.

Putting your head in the sand and saying "it doesn't effect me" isn't true.

>The only framework that has social merit/weight, IMO is the legislative one. Not a corporations interest in gaming our agency for their feudal trade schemes.

Ok?

>I don't believe in any of this or whatever obligations others say I have. I'll politically support ones that seem sensible: m4a, education, engineering at scale to support those initiatives.

Ok.. But you are still playing in the same sandbox as the rest of us. And this sandbox is very influenced by FAANG companies and the policies they offer.

> Outside that the reasons for providing institutional support of trade seem > contrived. The ideology of long dead men exported into the limbic systems of > the living.

Ok?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


We Can Fight Injustice Without Endless Videos of Black People Being Killed - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/george-floyd-video-social-media.html <comment><AUTHOR> By Melanye Price

Dr. Price is a political scientist who specializes in contemporary black politics, public opinion and political rhetoric.</comment>


Defenestration - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defenestration <comment><USER2> Some of French use this term when installing Linux over Windows on a computer... :)

<comment><USER3> Not just the French! I'm from the US and recall using it as early as 2006...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Harry was unsuccessful in his oral defenestration of the grape seeds, which were now sliding ungracefully down the inside of the half open passenger window of Sally's otherwise immaculately kempt vehicle, leaving a trail of the kind that remains visible until chemicals are used in the cleaning.

<comment><USER5> What a fantastic paragraph... is this from a book?

<comment><USER4> Thank you friend :)

As dhess pointed out below it's a moment from a scene in the movie When Harry Met Sally. The wording above, however, is my own.

That scene just happened to pop into my head when I read the word defenestration, so I decided I'd like to "use it in a sentence". I've read some Pynchon in my time, too, so I have a penchant for densely descriptive prose. I'm glad it was appreciated.

<comment><USER5> You're welcome! I've always wanted to read Pynchon, but have never made the time. Any recommendations on which book to start with?

<comment><USER4> The Crying of Lot 49, it's more a novella, but is still quite dense.

Bleeding Edge was relatively straight forward compared to Vineland. I haven't had the courage to tackle some of the larger tomes of Pynchon's yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defenestration](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defenestration)

 _The act of throwing something or someone out of a window. [from c. 17th c.]

(Britain) The high-profile removal of a person from an organization.

(computing, humorous) The act of removing the Microsoft Windows operating system from a computer in order to install an alternative one._

</comment><comment><USER7> "In December 1840, Abraham Lincoln and four other Illinois legislators jumped out of a window in a political maneuver designed to prevent a quorum on a vote that would have eliminated the Illinois State Bank."

Imagining something like this happening today is ... difficult, to say the least.

<comment><USER8> Oregon ended up having State Senators flee across State lines. Even one going so far as to warn law enforcement to send unmarried men without families to try to forcibly collect them.

[https://kval.com/news/local/oregon-senator-on-governor- sendi...](https://kval.com/news/local/oregon-senator-on-governor-sending- police-send-bachelors-and-come-heavily-armed)

When there is as much on the line as there is in America's legislative system, you will be surprised the shenanigans that ensue.

The business of the Congress at one point had to ban the practice of dueling. Not necessarily because it wasn't seen as a way to settle a dispute, but that it happened so often. Kentucky I think is the state that specifically disqualifies legislators based on participation in duels.

[https://www.sos.ky.gov/admin/land/resources/articles/Documen...](https://www.sos.ky.gov/admin/land/resources/articles/Documents/CodeDuello.pdf)

Robert's Rules of Order are often looked upon those with a darker sense of humor in the same light as the Third-man out rule in hockey. Ruins all the good fights.

Though Asia has been known for some doozies. I recall the use of either a chainsaw or fire axe at one point.

Ah! Taiwan was it.

[http://loweringthebar.net/2017/07/brawling-again-in- taiwan.h...](http://loweringthebar.net/2017/07/brawling-again-in-taiwan.html)

South Koreans seem to prefer the legislative Sledgehammer.

[https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-korea- fight28-2009jan28-...](https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-korea- fight28-2009jan28-story.html)

<comment><USER7> I stand wholly corrected!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Reminds of a particular Family Guy episode, as it is the only time I have heard the term:

Dennis Miller: Now I don't want to go on a rant here, but America's foreign policy makes about as much sense as Beowulf having sex with Robert Fulton at the first Battle of Antietam. I mean, when a neo-conservative defenestrates, it's like Raskalnikov filibuster deoxymonohydroxinate.

Peter: What the hell does "rant" mean?

<comment> blaser-waffle There was a 2nd Battle of Antietam?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is this term not widely known?

remember learning this term as the cause of some wars you learn about in grade school

<comment><USER11> It's not that widely known, but WW1 started with:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Archduke_Fran...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand)

<comment><USER12> Is this a joke? The assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand was always the explanation for the start of WWI for me and everyone I've had the chance to speak, and there are at least two world wide known bands related to the event.

<comment><USER13> The wars OP referred to are much older ones, e.g. : "The term was coined around the time of an incident in Prague Castle in the year 1618 which became the spark that started the Thirty Years' War."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> And here I thought maybe there was a new Defenestration in San Francisco

[https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/defenestration](https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/defenestration)

</comment><comment><USER15> There's a generation of nerds who learned this word from the glossary of the Apple ][ manual which included, " __defenestration __: The act of throwing something or someone out of a window."

</comment><comment><USER16> I was in my kid's secondary school student support office one morning where one student was telling his friend about the time his dad threw him through a window. It wasn't a big, heavy conversation, just a recounting of it as something that was a bit of a novelty.

So I pipe up and say, "Hey, there's even a word for that!" which in a strange way left them somewhat pleased.

</comment><comment><USER17> When I was in high school, we used to refer jokingly to "defenstration of an ecdysiast." I don't remember where we got it from, but it usually was brought up in connection to the highly exaggerated and dramatic way teens tend to tell a lengthy story about their day as if it was the most interesting story ever.

</comment><comment><USER18> Tom Francis has been working on a Defenestration Trilogy. Video games that feature defenestration.

[https://store.steampowered.com/curator/34631927](https://store.steampowered.com/curator/34631927)

</comment><comment><USER19> One of the greatest things on YouTube.

Defenestration: The Movie

Seven minutes of very short clips from Hollywood movies involving defenestration.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_tV49vsIXc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_tV49vsIXc)

</comment><comment><USER20> I wonder if that happened like in a violent fashion like when someone is tossed out of a bar by a bouncer or did it happen like in the cartoons when a prisoner walks slowly over a board into the sea from a pirate ship.

</comment><comment><USER21> Probably the greatest Czech contribution to the European history and heritage.

<comment><USER22> Not "robot"?

<comment> blaser-waffle Or Jaromir Jagr?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Easy to see the connection for this word when learning that the German word for "window" is "Fenster."

<comment><USER24> And it is quite cute how civilised throwing someone out of a window sounds once there is a sophisticated word for it :D

<comment><USER25> My fave word for something that sounds innocuous but is actually severe is: _vivisection_.

If you didn't look up, it almost sounds like something you might casually get at a spa.

<comment><USER26> "My friends spent the summer waterboarding at Guantanamo Bay."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> to me defenestration is always sounded like a process that removes intestines but every time I mention it to someone who knows German they say fenster means window

<comment><USER28> Disembowelment you mean?

<comment><USER27> yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> TIL?</comment>


Apple swallows Aussie startup company's name – HealthKit - <AUTHOR> http://www.news.com.au/finance/small-business/apple-swallows-aussie-startup-companys-name-healthkit-and-their-worldembracing-idea/story-fn9evb64-1226943793182

<comment><USER2> A dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7850456](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7850456). Since it's not clear which is the best url, we'll add this link to that thread.</comment>


Allocation Efficiency in High-Performance Go Services - <AUTHOR> https://segment.com/blog/allocation-efficiency-in-high-performance-go-services/ <comment><USER2> When you need to start worrying about memory allocation control, garbage collection latency, pointers, byte padding, and CPU instructions per operation, Go might be not be the best tool for the job anymore. Seems like Rust might be a better choice here? Instead of reverse engineering what the compiler might do, then structuring the code in subtle ways to get the compiler to actually do what you intend to do, why not pick a language that lets you command the compiler do to what you want?

<comment><USER3> Garbage collection simplifies but does not eliminate memory management. That's okay, because even though it does not eliminate the need for memory management completely, it does still save the programmer from an awful lot of work.

Anyway, the choice of Rust vs Go should not be based on a single factor like "Rust is not garbage collected". Especially since many common coding patterns require some form of garbage collection, even in Rust!

<comment><USER4> I love the work they are doing in regards to low level systems coding and safety, but in general a GC + ability to statically allocate feels more productive, specially as former Oberon user and Modula-3 fan.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The interface problem seems like something the compiler team should fix or mitigate. I worry this post is going to cause a lot of premature restrictionism.

<comment> achille-roussel I agree, there's area for improvement for the compiler here and hopefully in the future we won't have to worry about those issues. For now those are constraints we have to deal with to make our software more efficient unfortunately.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I noticed there's a go:noescape compiler directive that seems to provide an escape hatch for a lot of this unexpected compiler behaviour:

[https://golang.org/cmd/compile/#hdr- Compiler_Directives](https://golang.org/cmd/compile/#hdr-Compiler_Directives)

Does that actually work?

<comment> achille-roussel go:noescape is meant to be used on functions that are implemented in assembly because escape analysis only works on Go code. As far as I know a etting this tag on a function that is implemented in Go has no effect.</comment></comment>


Computing, Rather Than, Absorbing Novels - <AUTHOR> http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/computing-rather-than-absorbing-novels/?src=twr <comment><USER2> The article referenced:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1969699>

</comment><comment><USER3> surely that title does not make correct use of the comma(s)</comment>


N-back training: improving your working memory - <AUTHOR> http://www.gwern.net/N-back%20FAQ.html

<comment><USER2> If anyone has any questions not already covered in the FAQ (long & comprehensive as it is), I'd be happy to answer them to the best of my ability.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Found via pella's post at <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2319027></comment>


How to make your first game for less than $1,000 - <AUTHOR> http://deadpanic.com/make_a_game_1k

<comment><USER2> Keep in mind he's valuing his time at 0$ for the title, in which case you can make your first game for $0 very easily.

<comment><USER3> I'd love to make a video game, but I value my time at $9.25 an hour, which is currently Canadian minimum wage. I'm not going to work for less unless it fulfils some other need, and I doubt video games will ever be need fulfilling for me.

<comment><USER4> They're one hell of a way to learn, especially arcade style games are more like mini operating systems inside.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The bad news is that the iPhone gold rush is basically over.

</comment><comment><USER6> what can I learn from this article? That is, what I can read there: You have to create images and sounds and if you can't you have to buy them. And no matter what you do, in the end you still have to pay your rent (what will be more as $1,000).

<comment><USER7> > _"You have to create images and sounds and if you can't you have to buy > them."_

As a hobbyist game developer, this idea is probably the most key thing to game development (for a hacker) - and gets a bit more nuanced.

There's a very real cost-benefit to the type of game you're making vs. the cost of content.

For example, in a first-person shooter content costs a lot more than, say, SimCity. That one wall you had to model, texture, and light? In the player's field of vision for may 2 seconds tops. The amount of labor required to generate all of your artistic assets is pretty prohibitive - which is why we don't see many shooters coming out of small shops, and shooters tend to be mass-market affairs so that they stand a shot at recouping the investment.

On the other hand, games like SimCity have significantly less content development going on. That one building? Replicated hundreds of times over in a single game, players keep coming back and seeing it, but never get bored. Each piece of content goes further and has considerably more lasting power than it does in an action game.

This is something many amateur devs disregard to their peril - the very _structure_ of your game needs to account for your low-budget status. The alternative is to try and execute a shooter on a budget, and then compromise on the quality of the content (or worse, use bad design to gloss it over: e.g. making players traverse a level backwards).</comment></comment>


If I Touched the Moon, What Would It Feel Like? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/12/science/randall-munroe-moon.html <comment><USER2> As it's not obvious from the title: the article is by Randall Munroe of XKCD fame.</comment>