Chat Thread

It's not so much forcing yourself to be concentrated for 1-4 hours, it's more like eliminating the stuff you do that isn't really work and cutting back stuff that isn't essential. It's more like streamlining, you could probably still do the same work in 1 hour bursts.

I'll have a look at that book, might read it once I'm done with this one. It looks quite interesting.

With the last bit, what if a book advises you to do the other things? It can inform you in ways to change your brain chemistry.

Zzonked wrote:It's not so much forcing yourself to be concentrated for 1-4 hours, it's more like eliminating the stuff you do that isn't really work and cutting back stuff that isn't essential. It's more like streamlining, you could probably still do the same work in 1 hour bursts.

I'll have a look at that book, might read it once I'm done with this one. It looks quite interesting.

With the last bit, what if a book advises you to do the other things? It can inform you in ways to change your brain chemistry.

Isn't that the exact same thing though? You stop doing the shit that distracts you from actually working (ie. Exercise self control) and then you work more efficiently? It's obvious that you need to do that, the difficult part is actually doing it which comes back to brain chemistry. It sounds a lot like that fucking Steve Peters book about the "chimp paradox" the basic principle of which is that we have several sides to our personality and we should exercise more control over the less rational parts. If we do this we'll be more successful because the smart parts of our brain are smarter than the emotional ones. It takes obvious shit that everyone already knows, dresses it up in technical language and has a published with the title "Doctor" and everyone thinks it's a masterpiece. Thankfully that quack has now been exposed.

It's very very good, although his next book knocked the socks off it. It took me about 8 months to read, but I based a dissertation and several exams off it and it completely changed my view of the world. It's not really relevant here, but I'd recommend it to anyone who will shortly have a lot of time on their hands.

Well sure, but if I recommend that Vel goes and gets some Ritalin from his doctor, and he does, I haven't changed his brain chemistry, the Ritalin has.

So isn't the title of the book a little misleading? You're basically completing your allotted work for the day in 3-4 hours but you're still AT work till 5-6(or whatever) PM?

Like dena for example, I assume once you complete your work at 11:30 baring a lunch break, you still have to stay at your desk/place of work until hometime?

Zzonked wrote:Still at uni doing my masters degree atm, got about 2 weeks until my last deadline.

o cool. in what?

Tbh Im too much of a lazy kent to even read a book on how to stop being a lazy kent.

Sean wrote:Tbh Im too much of a lazy kent to even read a book on how to stop being a lazy kent.

+1

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Zzonked wrote:It's not so much forcing yourself to be concentrated for 1-4 hours, it's more like eliminating the stuff you do that isn't really work and cutting back stuff that isn't essential. It's more like streamlining, you could probably still do the same work in 1 hour bursts.

I'll have a look at that book, might read it once I'm done with this one. It looks quite interesting.

With the last bit, what if a book advises you to do the other things? It can inform you in ways to change your brain chemistry.

Isn't that the exact same thing though?  You stop doing the shit that distracts you from actually working (ie. Exercise self control) and then you work more efficiently?  It's obvious that you need to do that, the difficult part is actually doing it which comes back to brain chemistry.  It sounds a lot like that fucking Steve Peters book about the "chimp paradox" the basic principle of which is that we have several sides to our personality and we should exercise more control over the less rational parts.  If we do this we'll be more successful because the smart parts of our brain are smarter than the emotional ones.  It takes obvious shit that everyone already knows, dresses it up in technical language and has a published with the title "Doctor" and everyone thinks it's a masterpiece.  Thankfully that quack has now been exposed.

It's very very good, although his next book knocked the socks off it.  It took me about 8 months to read, but I based a dissertation and several exams off it and it completely changed my view of the world.  It's not really relevant here, but I'd recommend it to anyone who will shortly have a lot of time on their hands.

Well sure, but if I recommend that Vel goes and gets some Ritalin from his doctor, and he does, I haven't changed his brain chemistry, the Ritalin has.

Not necessarily stuff that is distracting you outright, but things that masquerade as work for example checking email 5 times a day or constant pointless meetings.

You still had value in the process though by telling him what to do.

Keyser Söze wrote:So isn't the title of the book a little misleading? You're basically completing your allotted work for the day in 3-4 hours but you're still AT work till 5-6(or whatever) PM?

Like dena for example, I assume once you complete your work at 11:30 baring a lunch break, you still have to stay at your desk/place of work until hometime?

Yeah you got it, but the purpose of the book is to finish your work like that, increase value to the company, then to try and secure remote working placements and built 'mini-retirements'. It is also for entrepreneurs/business owners who can do that without permission. I would say the only professions where you can't follow these rules are the absolute menial ones like taxi driver or construction worker. It isn't really for them. That said, I'm not at that part yet though, so I can't really explain how properly.

Zzonked wrote:Yeah you got it, but the purpose of the book is to finish your work like that, increase value to the company, then to try and secure remote working placements and built 'mini-retirements'.

I think I get it. So in the short term it's not really a 4 hour work week but if you actually manage to do it right and do it for a considerable period of time then your boss (or you might even end becoming your own boss) might be inclined to give you perks that in the long run will compensate to a 4 hour work week.

will check it out

out here grindin

vel wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:
I can try.  What is the issue?

What do you do to manage your time properly? I assume you're a model student so hopefully you can give me some tips.

There are 168 hours in a week.
I sleep for 49 hours.
I work for 24 hours.
I have class for 18 hours.
Transportation is probably about 10 hours.

That's 101/168 hours. The question now is, how can I use those other 67 hours in a productive way (i.e. socalising, studying, planning, doing assignments, etc)

It's not easy for me to say.  It depends on whether you have an extreme, moderate, or quiet social life, what you are studying, and how you work best.   I'm lucky to have a job where I get to do homework almost the entire time & I don't drink so my social scene is much more laid-back and less draining than that of others.  How intensive is your paid work?  Try to do your reading then if you can, saving the rest of your time for written assignments or extra reading.  I'm afraid I'm not great with giving advice about specific things, but I would say that it's pretty normal to take a semester or two to discover what works best for you.

What do you do?

Im a prick of a student, missed lots of class, did assignments the day before they were due, studied for all tests like a day before them and am sitting on a high 2:1 with the ability to get a first. 

I look forward to never getting my comeuppance.

What does 2:1 mean?

Sean wrote:What do you do?

Me?  Econ/Political Econ with minors in German & History, I hope.

Sean wrote:Im a prick of a student, missed lots of class, did assignments the day before they were due, studied for all tests like a day before them and am sitting on a high 2:1 with the ability to get a first. 

I look forward to never getting my comeuppance.

I definitely feel that I worked harder in secondary school than I do now. I suspect that I was taught to adopt an unhealthy mindset  during that time.  I thought that getting into a university was the be-all and end-all, so I left school a wee bit drained.  Now I realise that I need to work just as hard in university, then I have to again to progress in my career.  I would complain, but that would disregard the fact I am fortunate.

SBSP wrote:What does 2:1 mean?

Well in Uni here we have 4 basic grades

A first which is from 71-100% which is like an A
A 2-1 which is from 61-70 % which is a B
A 2-2 which I think is 40-59% which is the lowest pass
And then of course you can fail.

If that was the case, I would have been a straight A student

Well obviously the grades are harder to achieve, like getting over 90% in an assignment is very rare, you're talking published material potential.

SBSP wrote:What does 2:1 mean?

There are two meaningful grades you can get.  A First or a  2:1 means you can get a job, the other two grades (2:2 and Third) or a fail mean that except in exceptional circumstances you wasted your time going to University and you might as well kill yourself.

Sean wrote:Well obviously the grades are harder to achieve, like getting over 90% in an assignment is very rare, you're talking published material potential.

Yeah, I hear a lot of people complaining about that. People that get A or A* in the A Levels but get to Uni and get 60-70s and can't understand why. I actually saw on some Uni's website a warning page setup for prospective international students warning them not to be disappointed and complain and that achieving a 70 or above is very difficult and akin to an A/90% in their country.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

SBSP wrote:What does 2:1 mean?

There are two meaningful grades you can get.  A First or a  2:1 means you can get a job, the other two grades (2:2 and Third) or a fail mean that except in exceptional circumstances you wasted your time going to University and you might as well kill yourself.

My friend got a 2:2, luckily for him he managed to get a job before he got his results.

just found about this pulpit rock. wtf. twice as high as the sky tower.

Zzonked wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
There are two meaningful grades you can get.  A First or a  2:1 means you can get a job, the other two grades (2:2 and Third) or a fail mean that except in exceptional circumstances you wasted your time going to University and you might as well kill yourself.

My friend got a 2:2, luckily for him he managed to get a job before he got his results.

I know a few people who've gotten a 2:2 and are now in decent jobs, so what RR said isn't really true.

Zzonked wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
There are two meaningful grades you can get.  A First or a  2:1 means you can get a job, the other two grades (2:2 and Third) or a fail mean that except in exceptional circumstances you wasted your time going to University and you might as well kill yourself.

My friend got a 2:2, luckily for him he managed to get a job before he got his results.

Yeah, there are exceptions to every rule.  I had a mate* who got a 2:2 and somehow landed a £20k+ job in commuting distance from his parents' house in a shithole up north.  Pretty much everyone else I know who has got decent jobs, including me, have had to move to London or the South East and this dimwit is doing better than any of us on account of paying no rent and living in one of the cheapest shitholes in Europe.  Not that I resent it or anything.

*Person who was in the same loose circle of friends as me

Have you got a job and all RR?

Sean wrote:Have you got a job and all RR?

Yes, since September 1st I'm working for an IT multinational.  Had to relocate to Reading for it, although I'm looking to relocate somewhere further north at the earliest opportunity.  The difference in cost of living here compared to Preston is staggering, I don't know how people working in shit jobs here survive.

Keyser Söze wrote:So isn't the title of the book a little misleading? You're basically completing your allotted work for the day in 3-4 hours but you're still AT work till 5-6(or whatever) PM?

Like dena for example, I assume once you complete your work at 11:30 baring a lunch break, you still have to stay at your desk/place of work until hometime?

I could leave at 1-2pm but I like being in the office, I find dealing with people face to face easier than e-mail, although e-mail is good to keep a record of everything. I usually leave at 4-4:30... I have work e-mail on my phone so if anything urgent happens when I leave early I can check on it.

Are you an IT guy?

Sean wrote:Are you an IT guy?

Not really, it's more of a business role.  There's an element of IT to it but it's more about knowing the capabilities of the various technologies we're running than actually developing them.