<p>I will choose to disagree with Ben on Advice #16. I am waiting to get back in to Pasadena so I can pre-order Zelda and FF12.</p>
<p>Also playing video games with other Techers is a fairly common social activity for some. Although between #14 and #15, I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not.</p>
<p>It might be the same as with alcohol perhaps (which you pre-froshies shouldn't be drinking under rotation rules). Drinking socially is much more accepted and less destructive than alcoholic behaviours like drinking alone in your room sulking.</p>
<p>I plan on buying the Wii when it comes out, played it at E3 (which is now gone, we had a group here that would go, which was really awesome). dLo where are you preordering from?</p>
<p>Gamestop up on Lake probably. I'm still not sure if I'm going to get a Wii.</p>
<p>Yeah, I can't believe I missed the last ever E3. I guess my consolation prize was finishing 52 on time.</p>
<p>Playing NCAA basketball has been a dream of mine. Unfortunately, I've only played house league b-ball and nvr played in high school. I'm thiinking of coming to caltech to fulfill my dream. Ive got passion.... btw im not afriad of getting inevetibly raped by some ginormous black guys.</p>
<p>(which some of you non-prefroshies shouldn't be drinking under legal rules, too.)</p>
<p>korinfox, no, not exactly. What you may not realize is that if you want to play video games socially you can always find someone playing or someone to convince to play. So you can very easily decieve yourself into thinking you're playing just as much as everyone else (because you only play socially) when in reality you're spending 2 or 3 times as much time.</p>
<ol>
<li> It is NOT the same as the stephen hawking bet. In the stephen hawking bet he wasn't betting against something that he could change the outcome of; even though he was betting against what he believed the truth to be.</li>
<li> Mean.</li>
<li> Really mean.</li>
</ol>
<p>Be nice!</p>
<p>Edit: I have plenty of female friends, you're just not one of them /grin</p>
<p>
[quote]
korinfox, no, not exactly. What you may not realize is that if you want to play video games socially you can always find someone playing or someone to convince to play. So you can very easily decieve yourself into thinking you're playing just as much as everyone else (because you only play socially) when in reality you're spending 2 or 3 times as much time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>alleya -- I agree 100%. Relatedly, one of the standard warning signs of alcoholism is an increase in seeking opportunities for social drinking (pouring people drinks, etc.), so that you can tell yourself that you are drinking "socially" instead of alone in a classically alcoholic way.</p>
<p>It's the same exact thing with video games. The several brilliant people I've seen flame out through gaming always justified it as a social activity and a healthy way to spend time with friends. The flameout monster doesn't care.</p>
<p>Since 14 and 15 are obviously kind of opposites, here's how to decide which one to give priority to. If you naturally try to avoid social interaction and feel more comfortable hiding and working (even after you arrive at Tech), pay more attention to #14. If you naturally and easily make lots of friends and enjoy spending a lot of time around others (especially after you arrive at Tech), pay more attention to #15. In short, emphasize becoming good at the one that doesn't come naturally to you.</p>
<p>Ben, your advice about video games is weak in that the "time is money" argument applies to anything that isn't work, including sleep. I know we're talking about the same group of burnouts, and, yes, that was a trainwreck, but you're not a gamer, so you don't see the large number of Techers who play video games on a regular basis and don't act like they can't put down the crackpipe. TV or websurfing or ignoring #15 are just as likely to cause problems.</p>
<p>Steel -- good points. To clarify, the money references were just to show that the value of our time has gone up, so what might have made sense to do when you were in middle school might not necessarily make sense anymore. But yes, which things still make sense and which don't should be considered on a case-by-case basis.</p>
<p>The video game stuff was just based on personal experience, and your mileage may certainly vary... I personally have found that the few times I've brushed with them again they've appeared to be much more addictive than other non-work activities. But I might be extra prone to this particular crack pipe.</p>
<p>I guess the appropriate generalization of the advice is -- if you find there's something that seems to exert a stronger-than-other-things pull on you and makes it hard to stop, seriously consider being very cautious with that particular thing. For some people it's video games, for others it's booze, for others it's living in a particular lounge...</p>
<p>Thanks for keeping me honest.</p>
<p>The "time is money" argument does not apply to sleep any more than utilitarianism (necessarily) says to divide fruit equally. Activities that can't be justified on their own merit can still be justified on their effects on others.</p>
<p>Sure it does. If you spend less money on modafinil than on the time you lose while sleeping...</p>
<p>Assuming no long-term negative side effects of that plan (say, actual sleep really is important for the brain, or productivity doesn't quite scale)... would you actually disagree with that conclusion, though? I don't see the point in sleeping more than is necessary.</p>
<ol>
<li>Be a good boss for yourself. Let me describe someone I know. She works 80 hours a week, by which I mean that she always has a book open nearby or some papers or Mathematica running on her computer. She is often visibly stressed, feels like she should be working more and better, and complains about the lack of time off. Indeed, she rarely has any time off. She is always thinking about how much work she has to do and/or trying to get it done. Even over vacations.</li>
</ol>
<p>The particular person I'm thinking of is at one of HYP, but there is a lot of this at Caltech, too. I have a strong feeling that one reason for the phenomenon is bad management.</p>
<p>Imagine you come to work in the morning and your boss tells you to really give all you've got to finish an important project. You do it very efficiently and finish earlier than expected. Then, at 3 P.M. he says, "Since you worked so hard and efficiently, here is another project. Keep working late into the evening."</p>
<p>There is a reason that not many people could stand a manager like this (and not many firms would keep one). The lack of prompt, small rewards for good performance rapidly demotivates any worker. Once you realize that no matter how hard you work you'll never get any real rest, you are less motivated to finish early and efficiently.</p>
<p>Yet many people manage themselves exactly like the evil manager manages his employee. It just feels less insidious when you do it to yourself. Maybe it occasionally seems to be a mystery why some Techers find it hard to get themselves to sit down and work on time. But it's no more a mystery than the reason the employee above stops working hard.</p>
<p>Economists have recently invented a bipartite model of the individual – each person has a little worker and a little planner inside of him, who behave pretty much like a normal worker (think manual labor) and manager. The worker is a creature motivated by the short term, likes rest and rewards. The manager is motivated by long term success and wants something to get done.</p>
<p>The advice: be a good manager. Your job as a manager is to split up big projects (like problem sets) into clear, achievable, small-scale goals (i.e. on timescales of a few hours) for your employee. Your job is also to keep your employee (you) happy. In particular, when the employee is doing a good job executing your plan, you need to reward him regularly with the things he likes. And you need to make sure he gets enough rest to come to work motivated tomorrow morning. </p>
<p>So allow the employee (yourself) to stop working and go rest when a goal is achieved. Do not keep pushing for just a little more time, especially when work is going well. The employee will become resentful and lazy. Once worker and manager are on good terms, the worker will get a reasonable amount of work to do, working reasonable hours. When done with the assigned work, the worker will be allowed to relax.</p>
<p>This analogy might seem hokey to you, but try it. If you really keep asking "am I treating myself like a good, smart, output-maximizing boss would", you will be able to avoid much procrastination and internal conflict.</p>
<p>Heh, how many Techies actually consume modafinil to pull all nighters?</p>
<p>And Ben, you seem to be somewhat patriotic about Caltech. =P Have you ever criticized any of Caltech's policies?</p>
<p>"Your refusal to accept women as friends also suggests that you're sexist."
neapolis: lizzardfire was a cool friend to me -- and he also sent me a delightful pic of you. So, take back the allegation.</p>
<p>Ben -- tell us what you like most and least about Caltech. Other than writing for CC, let us know what YOU do for fun (I'm still wondering how you have time/energy/inclination for all this CC stuff).</p>
<p>Oh, and does it make any difference to Caltech admissions if one is a NMSF? I'm presuming not, as probably most applicants are, but I'm hoping to hear otherwise.</p>
<p>magd -- NMSF is not a huge plus, but is a plus. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Ben -- tell us what you like most and least about Caltech. Other than writing for CC, let us know what YOU do for fun (I'm still wondering how you have time/energy/inclination for all this CC stuff).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Most: [ul]
[<em>]uniformly very smart people (no ballast or pity admits or legacy admits);
[</em>]fun, openminded people who are fun to talk to and who do odd, entertaining things like add Hollywood stars with the names of Nobel laureates to the Hollywood walk;
[<em>]general absence of social elitism within the community; very egalitarian social environment;
[</em>]general agreement that physics and math are very powerful ways of thinking about the world and many other endeavors are somewhat flakier; (fits well with my scientific chauvinism)
[<em>]general respect for intellectual pursuits, high standards, and furious refusal to compromise those standards;
[</em>]world class faculty and their accessibility; opportunity to do world-class research and learn to think for real;
[li]lack of academic competition or pettiness about grades and such nonsense.[/li][/ul]</p>
<p>Least: [ul]
[<em>] insularity of some social groups;
[</em>] failure of some undergrads to have ambitions as impressive as their abilities; lack of curiosity of some undergrads; shyness;
[li] lack of aggressiveness of the institute about promoting its virtues and mission in the broader society;[/li][/ul]</p>
<p>What I do for fun:
[ul]
[<em>]Read poetry (A.E. Housman, T.S. Eliot, Robert Frost) fiction (Philip Roth, recently) and nonfiction (Slate, Harper's, The New York Times, other newspapers, books about mathematics, social policy, education).
[</em>]Spend time with my wonderful girlfriend (sometimes by flying to MIT in the middle of the term, yum).
[<em>]Argue about interesting issues.
[</em>]Watch The West Wing.
[<em>]Play table tennis (recently! great fun)
[</em>]Run (distance) for fun.
[li]Recently: learn to salsa (the form of dance, not the thing you eat with chips)[/li][/ul]</p>
<p>May I avoid personal ads from now on and stick to things I am better at? Pretty please? :-)</p>
<p>Oh Ben... do you enjoy long walks on the beach, too? We could be perfect together!!</p>
<p>lol j/k.</p>