one piece of insight that is probably obvious but isn't until you actually fucking think about it is what you said "its often much easier to do stuff in the morning/when you wake up". yes i am feeling refreshed and am not bombarded with conflicting interests or emotions because ive been asleep
Right, like today, maybe I had 2-3 hours in the morning to do whatever I wanted. What I ended up doing was reorganizing this forum, trying to send the link to a few of my friends via pidgin, setting up my portable firefox, and trying to make a christmas music playlist in infrarecorder (it crashed and I lost all my work when I tried to sort the resultant playlist by length).
Also arguing with Kaz over the merits/demerits of SC2, and responded to some threads (here) I had lost track of.
Now should I have abstained from these tasks? Planned them for other times, smaller amounts? Done something more important and good for me with my "golden morning time"? That's the Q. I could have read for 30 minutes first, or meditated. I could have walked. But I didn't. The computer took it all. It takes too much, but it still seems like things I want to do. I need to network my internet friends, keep in touch, etc. It just needs some limits and maybe I should do something different for 20 mins before I touch the computer.
edit: I never watch TV and the next step for me is to have hard limits on the internet usage. Daily use isn't necessary, and if I can shave 30-60 mins off of it, on the days I do use it, I think that will mean huge increases in my more productive tasks.
In my yesterday these ideas persisted, and today I woke up with the idea--with the regret of untempered computer usage in my "bulk time" I have in the morning. So today I did not get on the computer right away. I went to a separate room, where I listened to a single song that I identify with. Then I practiced German for about a half hour.
I then wanted to come here and offer this update. I would be against coming to this site simply to check for any responses because I already did this so recently, however coming here to record a shift--for myself--seems worth it, as if I don't do it now it will not happen this way.
However, now that I see you have made other responses, it makes sense to go through them. I have already thought about what I would do on the computer before practicing the German. After touching base here I plan to find some forums to join.
find a group of intelligent people that you want to be around (technology forum, or economics forum, or physics forum) and then spend your time in their General Forum sub-section.
[the below can be ignored]
you need to have a focus when looking for/at forums
do you want to read about
a) science (space flight, computers, technology, bioscience)
b) politix (local, global), economics
c) health, fitness, beauty
d) music (creation, artists, media)
e) comedy (news, funny articles)
g) spiritualilty, drugs, pseudoscience
f) general forum
note that for real interesting shit , with an intelligent and dedicated userbase who actually might have regular decent insight, you would probably wanna target these "specific" forums.
finding a "general forum" that is actually good probably boils down to finding a specific class of people (scientists, doctors, politicians) and just reading their general forum sub-section
I have not had much success finding a suitable forum, but please let me know of any you find notable. I have a few lined up to investigate further but they are strange choices--much different than the ones you are talking about. I kind of gave up finding a good one along those lines.
Organization is useful in the real world, but I find it utterly boring when we attempt to adapt an organized approach to life to the internet.
The internet is meant to be a frontier. They say space is the final frontier, but to me, the internet will always be something beyond - a collective unconscious of all of humanities deepest fears, desires, etc.
And on the frontier, chaos reigns supreme. Take teamliquid for example. It's a lot easier to derail a thread and cause it to erupt into chaos than engage in 15 pages of meaningful discussion.
I think we are mostly talking about organization in the real world. However, I am not sure why such advantages would not also apply to internet activity.
The disadvantages of the internet are things like the anonymity and casualness it seems to engender. Neither of these are necessary parts of it; where needed they can be completely or partially eliminated to whatever degree we desire.
I'm not sure I follow the connection between organization and the moderation that was my downfall. IMO moderation is not bad per se; moderation per se is nothing more than an authorized use of force. With the right organizational design and safeguards, it can be quite acceptable.
Done carelessly, it almost always ultimately ends in, relative to the scale on which they act, tragedy. In the case of TL, banning is basically the most extreme force they have available to them, so the mass banning is a bit like their own version of genocide.
I would hate to see what such unprincipled bullies would do with real power. That's why it matters to try to change their minds. You don't know where they, or those who they influence, will end up in the future. The point is that bad ideas about the use of force are out there, and you have to try to resist these ideas through education wherever you encounter them.
I agree with you that moderation can be quite effective with the right organizational design and safeguards. Unfortunately, it is rare for an individual to reach that level of sophistication (self control), and rarer still for a society to reach such a state, as evinced by the eventual decay of the Teamliquid moderators. It's true that the most effective governments on an absolute short term scale tend to be benevolent dictatorships in that they actually get things done (unlike Democracy) and benefit society (unlike Tyrants).
However, it is exceedingly rare for a society to reach that state, and utterly impossible for it to maintain it for long. I mean, I'd hate to sound cliche here and go with the "power corrupts" argument, but time and time again, that's shown to be the case.
But I secretly enjoy the iron fist of the TL mods.
No, it's not because of any masochistic tendencies (not even subconscious). It's because that without them, people like me can't exist.
Fair enough. I think better design can keep power useful and in check at least in the online world where the "rules of reality" can very much be hard coded. Perhaps this can be achieved in real life as well. I kind of view governance as a kind of technology. Maybe there isn't a very good system yet but that doesn't mean the microchip of governance can't be invented.
Ah, good thinking about government being kind of like technology. Unfortunately, I think the problem with that is that even if a government was truly perfect, I mean, absolutely balls to the walls white washed perfect, then that perfection itself would be cause for concern.
I mean, I wouldn't want to live in a perfect world. Do you?
Well I think it's helpful not to think of perfection in ultimate terms. I just think of government as being able to successfully do what is wanted, and prevent/reduce to a minimum the rest. What you actually want a government to do or prevent, is going to be a matter of choice, debate, etc. There won't be one perfect or ultimate set of goals for government to do, any more than there is a perfect ethical system that tells you what is the right thing to do given any set of circumstances. As you can see such thinking presupposed ultimate or objectively true right and wrong which people might find useful to believe in but are not exactly the kinds of things you come to by careful observation or w/e.
I don't think there are shades of grey; I only said that there isn't a system that can prescribe objective values for all time. I didn't necessarily say that there is some wishy-washy middle ground between this and nothing. I believe that the objective is basically built on agreement about a special case of the subjective, but personal values will not fit into the special case short of radical limits on human freedom (like in BNW).