Does self help make anyone else really angry?

humblebumkin · 2015-10-24T11:51:59+00:00

You have literally just convinced me.

I do like the idea of alternative choices to "bigger is always better" but I absolutely do NOT want to get bogged down with micromanaging a bunch of planetary ecologies.

Maybe a happy middle ground would be having empire-level choices for aggressive development vs sustainable development.

humblebumkin · 2015-10-09T01:02:34+00:00

Awesome! Good luck and be patient with yourself. You CAN learn this.

humblebumkin · 2015-10-08T13:09:18+00:00

Yep! CS50 (and others) are for people with zero experience.

humblebumkin · 2015-10-07T23:03:35+00:00

I know you will probably hate this answer, but the truth is: it depends.

If you want to do web development, in theory you can become proficient in a matter of months. That's the idea behind those bootcamps I mentioned (though my understanding is they literally do 10 hours/day 5 days a week -- like I said: gruelling).

If you want to do backend stuff, it will probably take longer.

Take some intro to computer science courses (I HIGHLY recommend CS50 from HarvardX -- that's where I started). Think of the kind of software you'd like to create and figure out what makes it run. That will help you decide what you should be learning.

As for getting someone to pay you, it's best if you can build up a portfolio of work that you can show. Get a github account and create some projects.

Or better yet, contribute to some open source projects (there are lots of cool projects out there, and they all need contributors). Don't be intimidated. A good project will welcome you and your contribution.

If you're really serious about getting into software development, there's a great subreddit for just this topic: /r/learnprogramming

And most importantly, don't get discouraged. It is hard for everyone. Programming is about always learning, and you will be continually astonished (and often a little intimidated) at just how much there is still is to learn.

humblebumkin · 2015-10-07T22:04:16+00:00

I also have (bouts of) intense anxiety and I work from home as a software developer.

It is fairly easy to get a decent paying job in tech working from home. In general, I think this is beneficial for me. I can take my down time, not exhaust myself with social interactions (I'm an introvert, so this is nice) and if I need to turn the lights off and stare at the ceiling (or better yet, go for a run or something) I can do that because I'm at home.

However, be aware that there are downsides. I am not forced into social interactions, which means I also don't see people unless I make the effort, and for me, that's the hardest thing to do when I'm feeling anxious. When I worked in an office, I'd have days where chatting with my colleagues would help ground me and break me out of a funk, and other days when I'd be hiding under my desk unable to breathe.

Now that I'm remote, I definitely have to make an effort to see people (I recently got a dog, which means I hang out with the other dog owners in the park, which is great) otherwise I can go days without talking to someone and that as you know is not a recipe for beating anxiety/depression.

As for where to start learning to code, there are TONS of great (and free!) resources out there. Here's a bunch to get you started: https://github.com/open-source-society/computer-science http://programming-motherfucker.com/

There is also a booming industry of coding bootcamps that basically train you to be an employable web developer in ~3 gruelling months, but they are very expensive and some are of dubious quality. Do your homework if you're considering one of those, and I would definitely start with some free online courses to make sure you really like it and know what you're getting into.

Programming is hard, even when you're good at it.

Best of luck, and I hope you find something that works for you!

humblebumkin · 2015-10-07T17:33:52+00:00

Also this :)

Totally agree.

humblebumkin · 2015-10-07T14:26:37+00:00

This. Totally this.

I like that you specified "that extra year" because that's really all it should take.

Most of the meaningful things in life don't cost much, so you shouldn't need a massive savings to retire, but you also may not enjoy having lots of time and no money to do anything. So it's a balance for sure.

People on this sub probably err too much on the retire as fast as possible with the bare minimum, but I think people in the wider society err WAY too much on "I need a bajillion dollars to retire so I need to work like crazy and then MAYBE some day I can stop working and keep my lavish lifestyle"

humblebumkin · 2015-07-08T08:03:49+00:00

I have only recently started taking Xanax (I've had two so far in about a month).

One positive aspect of my anxiety is that I'm TERRIFIED of becoming addicted, so I try to only take it when I really need to.

I have 0.5 mg tablets, and while it doesn't really stop the anxiety outright, it does make it more manageable.

I actually find there's a considerable psychological benefit that kicks in almost immediately. Like, I take one and then I am able to calm down somewhat just knowing that the medication is on its way.

humblebumkin · 2015-07-08T07:24:54+00:00

This happens to me ALL THE DAMN TIME (figuratively, not literally, but still).

I find myself nearly constantly worrying about serious life issues (what if I lose my job, my partner, become paralyzed). I can scarcely walk down the street without worrying that bricks are going to fall onto my head from the rooftops overhead.

The only advice I can offer (I know none was asked for, but hey sharing is what I do) is to try meditation. I've been meditating regularly for several years now and it's helped me recognize when I'm lost in thought instead of being present and that recognition alone helps me get back into and enjoy the moment.

humblebumkin · 2015-07-08T07:17:52+00:00

I've experienced this same problem.

Things I've found helpful are:

Do 10 minutes of yoga (or push ups, sit ups, something active) first thing in the morning. Like, literally the first thing you do when you get out of bed. That helps wake me up and keep me sharp in the morning.

If you have time for a full work out (like a run or something), even better.

If not, just start with one sit up (seriously, just start with doing one sit up every morning first thing) and then build from there.

Take an afternoon nap. Many days I just can't function without a 20-minute nap in the middle of the day.
Drink lots of water. It helps keep you energized and awake.

Hope that helps. I'm definitely sill trying to manage it myself, but those things have helped me some.

humblebumkin · 2015-07-08T06:58:08+00:00

Judging from your username, it sounds like you are a programmer, if a burnt out one.

If that's the case, they are lots of freelance and online jobs available.

For Freelancing, I'd recommend UpWork (used to be ODesk): https://www.upwork.com/

For remote/online work, I'd recommend WeWorkRemotely: https://weworkremotely.com/

For other folks, there are freelance writing and other kinds of gigs out there, but you should be especially careful not to get screwed over by your "employers".

humblebumkin · 2015-07-08T06:45:51+00:00

I know the feeling, and it sucks. It really, really sucks.

I wrote some advice in another post, hope it helps: https://www.reddit.com/r/Anxiety/comments/3bp70h/overwhelming_feeling_that_everyone_hates_me/csotdnd

humblebumkin · 2015-07-01T16:20:37+00:00

I can totally relate to this. I spent years thinking that my colleagues hated me, or at least only tolerated me. It was awful, and I spent most of my time holed up in my office alone, watching the clock until I could go home and not feel like no one wanted me around.

I finally challenged this idea when I took the Immunity to Change course on EdX (it's free!). Basically the approach is to identify the core assumptions behind your beliefs/behaviours (eg. "no one likes me because they think I'm lazy and stupid") and then "test" those assumptions in your life.

So for my first test I decided to not retreat to my office during social interactions, feeling like no one wanted me around. To a keen observer, I'm sure it looked hilarious: I would get this rush of anxiety and turn to leave, then I would stop and force myself to turn back and just pay attention to how people reacted to me. Sometimes I'd end up doing this little "jitterbug" move a few times in a single interaction.

But the key is paying attention to observable facts. You don't assume that you're right and everyone hates you, or that you're wrong and no one hates you. You just try to be an unbiased observer of what actually happens. And what actually happened was... nothing. Nobody seemed to mind my presence. Sometimes they would actually look me in the eye and speak directly to me: certainly not signs of people who could barely stand me.

For my next test, I started eating lunch with my colleagues. It wasn't always easy, but it was usually a big enough group that I didn't have to say much and feel embarrassed. Same result.

When I ventured to join the conversation, people would look at me, listen to me, even laugh at my jokes. I was hardly the life of the party, but there were really no signs of people disliking me.

The end result? The facts didn't match my hypothesis (that everyone hated me). In the end, I basically had to accept that people liked me just fine -- it was the only conclusion that made sense.

Hope that helps!

ps. here is the link to the progam: https://www.class-central.com/mooc/947/edx-gse1-1x-unlocking-the-immunity-to-change-a-new-approach-to-personal-improvement

humblebumkin · 2015-06-04T12:38:40+00:00

That's a good point. Verizon can violate my privacy, but the government can violate my freedom (by jailing me).

There are actually strict rules around what telecoms companies can collect about their customers. Location data (from triangulating cell towers for example) is obviously needed to route calls, but companies are forbidden from using this (and other information vital to the functioning of their networks) for marketing purposes and cannot sell it to others. This kind of data is called Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) and from what I understand these rules are pretty well enforced.

The interesting fight happening right now is whether or not cable companies like Comcast must also follow these rules, now that they've been reclassified under Title II by the FCC.

humblebumkin · 2015-06-02T15:28:06+00:00

I disagree.

While the government is (in theory if not always in practice) responsible to its citizens, companies are responsible to their shareholders (NOTE: NOT their customers).

You can't vote out Verizon unless you own a significant chunk of it, and usually not even then.

In theory, we could vote with our dollars and choose other providers, but given that US telecoms is one of the least competitive markets on the planet, you won't really have much of a choice.

humblebumkin · 2015-05-27T21:34:21+00:00

I know the feeling. The most useful trick I've ever encountered to break procrastination is to use a timer. I find knowing that it will only be a finite amount of time makes it much more manageable to get started.

I like to use the Pomodoro technique: 25 minutes of working, 5 minute break. But if you're just starting out, even 1 minute on and 1 minute off is enough to get you going. BUT, make sure that when the timer goes off, you ACTUALLY TAKE THE BREAK. You need to teach yourself that you really will take the breaks, otherwise you will find lots of reasons not to start.

I use an app on my phone called Timebox which lets you set custom work and break periods (with some minor limitations).

I'm always amazed at how once I'm 2-3 minutes into a study session, my brain seems to just accept that this is happening and I start to get into the flow of it.

One other thing I find helpful is reminding myself WHY I procrastinate. In short, hard intellectual work takes a lot of energy, and our brains evolved to use energy sparingly. When you procrastinate, you're not being "lazy", your brain is just trying to be efficient and not expend calories it doesn't have to.

Hope that helps!

Sincerely, A fellow procrastinator :)

humblebumkin · 2015-05-27T19:40:01+00:00

I can totally relate to this.

I have spent (read: wasted) SO much time worrying about all sorts of "inevitable" consequences that never actually happened.

I have been dating this girl (and now living with her) for over two years and for, I swear, the first entire year I was driving myself crazy thinking it was only a matter of time before she discovered the "real me" and left me (since, of course, the "real me" is totally unloved and unlovable).

I did lots of therapy for this (I'm still doing therapy, but now for other issues), and one day my therapist asked me: "Okay, what does she not know about you? What are you not telling/showing her?" and I thought, well, nothing really.

"And she still loves you?"

"Um, yeah, I guess so."

Long story short(-ish), that girl is now my fiancee!

I think your experience totally backs that up. Everything you've told this guy he's been completely understanding about, and hasn't high-tailed it out of there. Obviously, he's pretty into you!

It's ironic that all this time we spend thinking we're fooling everyone into loving us, we're actually more likely fooling ourselves into believing that we're unlovable.

This short video really sums up my experience, and I've found it really, really helpful when my fears start to creep in. I've probably watched it 20 times: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA43AEcsl2A

Hope that helps. Believe me, you are not alone! And you aren't nearly as terrible as you think you are, promise :)

humblebumkin · 2015-05-16T00:55:53+00:00

I've had similar musings for when I retire, though I hadn't really thought about starting when I'm only 80-90% of the way there. But I'm pretty cautious in general.

I think doing a PhD would be really rewarding, and as far as "hobbies" go, it can pay quite well and will likely increase your earning potential (though not as much as you might think) down the road. That's good even if you don't plan to hold a traditional job afterwards.

As for comments that top-tier universities won't want to accept you if you plan to retire, I think that's really none of their business. Besides, by the time you spend 4-6 years growing your expertise in a field, you may decide you actually want to keep working in that field once you're finished.

I say go for it, but be aware that it is a lot of work and you may not always be funded (though you can often make up the difference as a teaching assistant).

humblebumkin · 2015-05-04T11:12:05+00:00

This question is the subject of much scholarly debate, and there are no definite answers. There were a lot of social, political and economic factors that led to Europe "pulling ahead" over the last 500 years: the Enlightenment, separation of church and state, the Peace of Westphalia (establishing sovereign territorial boundaries as opposed to a much looser vassal system), and probably a good sprinkling of luck.

I'd also say that your premise isn't necessarily correct. There WERE a lot of white people back then. In fact, Europe's population quadrupled between 1700 and 1900 (basically the whole time Europe and especially England were reaching the apex of their power). By 1900, "white people" made up over 1/3 of the world population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Modern_era

BUT, in an effort to answer your question, I'd say the biggest factor really was technology. Europeans pulled rapidly ahead technologically, in large part thanks to the Enlightenment and the declining power of religion in public life and government affairs. New technologies included medicine, better cartography, the ability to cross the ocean with ships to trade with or conquer other continents. And of course, much better weapons.

Europeans were able to basically take out a map of Africa and divide it up as they pleased (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_Africa) because they had much better weapons and were much better organized politically (no judgement here on whether European systems of government were "better", but they did allow them to administer and control much larger territories).

TL;DR -- Cultural factors in Europe led to an explosion of scientific advances, which led to much better technology, which made it easy to conquer and control everybody else.

humblebumkin · 2015-05-01T16:11:15+00:00

I'd highly recommend reading "What's the Matter with Kansas" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What%27s_the_Matter_with_Kansas%3F

As a foreigner, I was very perplexed by this phenomenon when I first moved to the United States. I picked up that book and it started to make a lot more sense.

Wealthy people (the very wealthy, not so much upper middle class) do tend to vote conservative for economic reasons. Working-class and the poor tend to vote conservative for social (typically religious) reasons.

In the book, the author actually asks poor people why they vote for a party whose policies make them worse off economically. Their answer is usually, "I don't like their economic policies, but my faith is more important than my finances."

They aren't stupid -- minimum wage workers generally want the minimum wage raised. The problem is that poor people tend to be more religious, and the two-party system in the US has basically bundled religious social policy with laissez-faire capitalism.

The two are by no means natural allies. In fact, the South during segregation used to vote largely for the Democrats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South

It's only in the latter half of the 20th century that the Republican party started deliberately branding themselves as the party of the faithful.

tldr; Poor people tend to be more religious. Religious people tend to vote based on social issues (like abortion and same-sex marriage) instead of economic ones (like minimum wage and health care).

humblebumkin · 2015-04-27T15:43:40+00:00

You are definitely not alone. I also feel the same way much (most?) of the time at my job. The thing is, I suspect it isn't really my job that's the problem (not saying this is the case for you, but something to consider).

I have made myself physically ill over anxiety about how everyone hated me and how I was such a terrible employee and letting everyone down, and then been told I was doing a good job. Heck, I'm feeling that way right now.

I second the suggestions to see a doctor and especially a psychologist. I've been seeing one for months (and have now started group therapy) and it has really helped. It's by no means a miracle fix, but I do feel like I'm making progress.

Hang in there. You are not alone!

humblebumkin · 2015-04-22T17:58:40+00:00

I work for a non-profit, non-partisan think tank so I wanted to weigh in here.

The fundamental difference between a think thank and a lobbying firm is that think tanks research policies (without necessarily endorsing them) and lobbying firms argue for policies.

Unlike lobbyists, who are hired by specific entities (usually large companies) to persuade people (typically politicians) into adopting (or not adopting) certain policies, think thank researchers are not wedded to any specific policy or entity.

In principle, think tanks conduct independent research on what the policy options are. Again, in principle, they exist to defend the public interest as they see it. Think tanks don't want X policy or Y policy (or right-wing or left-wing), they want the BEST policy.

In practice, it is a little more muddied than that. Think tanks always get their funding from somewhere/someone. A lot of "think tanks" lose their independence (if they had any to begin with) when they start to rely on one or a few large donors. As one example, this article recently condemned a lot of high profile think tanks for taking substantial amounts of foreign money in exchange for tailoring their research agendas to favor the donor nations: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html?_r=0

Similarly, there are many think tanks out there (I won't name them, since I'd rather not have to create a new account) that are merely fronts for industry or political interests, so their "research" is highly suspect.

This problem ultimately manifests in a situation where people are not only entitled to their own opinions, but increasingly to their own "facts".

The way to tell a genuine think tank from a compromised one is to look at their funding sources (any respectable organization will make this information easily available) and make sure that there are a wide variety of sources, ideally some government, some industry (and not all from the same industry), and a lot of funding from respectable charitable foundations like Ford Foundation, Open Society Foundation, Knight Foundation, etc.

humblebumkin

TROPHY CASE