Scott Adams

It will happen when it has to. Look into Scott Adams law of slow moving disasters. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/04/15/fact-checking-adams-law-of-s… To sum it up, whenever humans see a problem coming in the distant future, they find a way to solve it in time. Y2K is a great example of this: when stories about the effects of Y2K were popularized, some people thought that there would be no way to fix so many millions of lines of code in time and some of the marvels of human civilization like the electrical grid or the banking system might irrecoverably crash. Yet humans found ways to solve the issues and essentially nothing happened.

I was very appreciative of the Scott Adams podcast[1] when he pointed out that any story or study that is too "on the nose", that is, hits our confirmation biases too perfectly, needs to be approached with extra caution. [1] https://www.scottadamssays.com/

Related: Adam’s on why following your passion is BS... > https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/02/21/follow-your-passion/

Medical equipment and software. It's over engineered. It needs to break more. But you could just say the idea is playing to medical regulation and a dumb public. So the answer is any company that pivots. ie. Youtube - https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/308975 OT: Scott Adams tried to sell an idea - https://www.scottadamssays.com/2012/10/01/selling-an-idea/ Read it and follow it up how he went. It might interest you.

Nice!This is insightful and actionable. This reminded me of Scott Adams' advice on writing too: https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/08/22/the-day-you-became-a-better-…

I'd love to believe that myself. I absolutely hate ineffective & irrelevant search results. See Scott Adams, "Confusopoly" (2011): https://www.scottadamssays.com/2011/12/07/online-confusopoly/ I've touched on this: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/243in1/privacy_norms_and… The antipattern is sufficiently widely adopted that I've been. looking for possible dark-pattern justifications.

Not understanding that is at the core of the teachings of the alt-right thought leaders. It's actually formalised under the concept of "The Adams Law of Slow-Moving Disasters"[0] by the Dilbert's creator, who himself is very active in these politics, which is ironic because the law actually recognises the existence of the diverted threats but the application of the law on the current dangers is preached as "relax, nothing will happen no action needed". You can add the Covid-19 to the list when all this is over. They will say, "We were all gonna die but only 4 million people died. It was yet another fear-mongering by INSERT_YOUR_FAVORITE_BOOGYMAN". The 4 million number to be updated, when it was at 50K the argument was "They say it's extremely dangerous but the flu actually killed more people". It's bizarre. It's almost like a form of douchebaggery where you put all your chips on the idea that somehow it will be fixed by experts and simultaneously demand that the solution that the experts propose should not involve you in any way and if that solution alters your current or future way of life, the solution proposal will result in harassment to its creator. [0]: https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/01/22/adams-law-of-slow-moving-dis…

Scott Adam’s says some pretty bizarre things in public on his blog and on his podcast. He wrote about causing his readers to orgasm via his words.[0] The tone was not that of a person with a healthy attitude towards sexuality. I found it unpleasant and gross. He’s also expressed some pretty odd ideas. From the same link: > Regular readers know that I used my background in hypnosis to accurately predict nine-out-nine political events in 2015, while most political professionals got zero right. That makes me the best political pundit of the year. The podcast QAnon Anonymous (which reports on conspiracy theories; it’s not pro-conspiracy thinking) did an episode about him.[1] It’s been a long time since I listened to it, so I won’t try to sum it up because I’d do so poorly. He came off as an unpleasant person who doesn’t seem admirable to me. I wouldn’t link to him in a post about character assassination. [0] https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/12/31/hypnotizing-you-to-have-the-… [1] https://m.soundcloud.com/qanonanonymous/episode-43-scott-adams

All right. Let me respond point by point. > > It's not just the Trump thing. He loves to butt heads with the social justice types in a way that makes him look awful. Wrote some creepy antifemist blog-posts too. > https://ew.com/article/2011/03/30/dilbert-scott-adams-feminist-outrage… That article, about a blog post of his, is a hit piece which takes the most inflammatory-sounding quote and displays it out of context. I think his explanatory post (https://www.scottadamssays.com/2011/03/27/im-a-what/), which includes the whole original blog post, explains everything quite clearly. Note that even the original blog post text includes a clarification that precisely the quoted inflammatory-sounding text does not mean what one might be tempted to believe if one were to read it out of context. > > In the wake of a shooting (can't remember which) he tried to push his WhenHub product as a journalism tool. > https://mobile.twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1155679797223182337 It’s a free app, where people can declare that they have been witnesses to a newsworthy event, and journalists can use the app to find said witnesses and even talk to them using the app. What’s not to like? It’s like mentioning your gas-powered generators rental service during a widespread power outage. It might be slightly self-serving, but it’s useful information, and it’s not like he’s price gouging or taking any specific advantage of people’s misfortune. In fact, the very people who were impacted…

You can listen to some kind of long rambling excuse / doubling down on his podcast here: https://www.scottadamssays.com/episode-2030-scott-adams-welcome-to-the…

Link posted has moved to https://www.scottadamssays.com/why-i-switched-my-endorsement-from-clin…

See also Scott Adams on goals vs. systems. https://www.scottadamssays.com/goals-vs-systems/

As Scott Adam says, ["Analogies are fighting words."](https://www.scottadamssays.com/post/102881499176/analogies-are-fightin…

this could be the link... Analogies are Fighting Words - update - Scott Adams Says https://www.scottadamssays.com/analogies-are-fighting-words-update/ though it looks like the content has been updated(removed)

I think this is a good of example of why Scott Adams says this about analogies: Analogies: Analogies are good tools for explaining a concept to someone for the first time. But because analogies are imperfect they are the worst way to persuade. All discussions that involve analogies devolve into arguments about the quality of the analogy, not the underlying situation. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2016/12/21/how-to-be-unpersuasive/

This is basically the idea espoused by Scott Adams in his "Systems vs. Goals" post years ago: https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/11/18/goals-vs-systems/ It's a very successful life hack - system-based approaches can be less prone to errors because it relies less on willpower and individual conscientiousness, both of which can stumble at random points.

> Target middle school reading level. Short sentences & simple words. Technical audiences want information and don't care much about literary prose. Also, don't bury the lede, but put the main points in the first paragraph, then elaborate on them throughout the rest of the essay. The Abstract in academic papers is a good example - state the problem, explain how you addressed/explored it, and report your conclusions. Don't bury your conclusions in the paper, but use the paper to elaborate in detail on how you arrived at them. As for targeting middle school reading level, Scott Adams has a good writeup on exactly how to do that: https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/08/22/the-day-you-became-a-better-…

There's a bit more detail in his book but this first resonated with me when I read Scott Adams' "How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life". Here are some of his blog posts on it: https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/11/18/goals-vs-systems/ https://www.scottadamssays.com/2014/01/21/goals-are-for-losers-passion… Personally, I don't really think of it as goals and habits being mutually exclusive. Specifically, I wholeheartedly agree with your comment, "The only way to know which habits to cultivate (or rely on) is to have a desired result in mind."

> I’m also short, bald, and near-sighted. People try shaming me for that stuff on a regular basis. But it doesn’t work because I lost all sense of shame some time ago. In my world view, shame is nothing but a filter some people put on their own observations. –Scott Adams https://www.scottadamssays.com/2016/04/01/shame-shaming/ > Trump admitted he was wrong to tweet about Cruz’ wife. This is the first time we have seen him admit wrong. Trump’s opponents are afraid (in the third dimension) that he can’t be shamed into acting appropriately. He just showed that he can. –Scott Adams https://www.scottadamssays.com/2016/04/04/derailing-the-trump-train/

May devolve into a troll war like it does every time, but this is really the essence of the "Systems vs Goals" [1] approach that Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) advocates for. [1] https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/11/18/goals-vs-systems/

That is pure fake news. You may not be intending to lie, but you're spreading them. "To remove all doubt, the President continued with “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay?”" https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/

Weren't everyone's predictions wrong in 2016? I remember news organizations like the New York Times saying that Clinton had a 91% chance of winning the election.[1] 538's Nate Silver said that Clinton had a 99% chance of winning.[2] Scott Adams has many faults, but his 2016 election prediction fared better than pretty much everyone else. Remember he predicted a "win against Clinton in a tight election" in August of 2015.[3] 1. http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2016/10/18/presidential-forecast-u… 2. Silver also noted that such a probability was too high considering the margin for error in polls, calling into question his model: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/11/06/nate_silver_forecas… 3. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/08/13/clown-genius/

Related to this is Scott Adams' Goals vs. Systems - https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/11/18/goals-vs-systems/

It's pretty surreal to have just finished reading the blog post[1] on this topic, that was posted just a little bit higher, then to come here and see it played out. [1]https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/

Sort of, but not exactly. I think he meant this. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/

It could have been cognitive dissonance. Certain segments of the population couldn't possibly be dismissing this virus as no worse than the flu, could they? https://www.scottadamssays.com/2020/03/05/episode-840-scott-adams-conv… "Nobody under 70 has died, and over 700 people infected on that ship. So that's impressive." That's just from randomly seeking through one of his recordings.

Scott Adams did, but not quite 10 years in advance. Check out his blog about a year before the election. Edit: here's just one example. It goes earlier than this. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2015/09/23/the-reason-for-trumps-succes…

Look into goals vs systems. Here's the thought process, at a high level: Goal - I need to shed 5 kgs in 3 months. System - Everyday I eat healthy and do some exercise with no specific focus on what to accomplish. I work toward a healthy living and at some point further, I may shed X amount of weight. Important thing is that I do this activity daily (or whatever frequency I decide upon). Read the scott adams article on this. https://www.scottadamssays.com/2013/11/18/goals-vs-systems/

If China can ever be persuaded to stop building new coal fired power plants, then there would be reason to be hopeful. If the rest of the world was willing to sanction them like crazy over it, China would likely cave and focus their efforts on solar. Despite the current state of affairs, Scott Adams is an optimist about the future... https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/09/23/a-message-for-children-about…