113 karma · joined July 14, 2011
> Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.
“It’s wonderful to have so many hours in my day – I
feel like I can live two lives,” she says.
...
“There’s this social view that short sleeping is a good
thing and should be encouraged – we’re always hauling
out the example of Margaret Thatcher and top CEOs who
don’t need much sleep. In fact, the amount of sleep you
need is genetically determined as much as your height
or shoe size. Some people need very little sleep,
others need 11 or 12 hours to feel their best.”
I don't think sleeping less is only better from a social view - like this lady says, she sleeps 4 hours and she feels like she can live two lives. If I need to sleep 12 hours to feel rested, doesn't it stand to reason that I can only live half a life? Maybe sleeping less than you need to feel your best is a worthwhile trade if you can spend more time living...One study[1] has found that "THC's effects after doses up to 300 mcg / kg never exceed alcohol's at BAC's of 0.08 g %" and that "alcohol impaired performance relative to placebo but subjects did not perceive it", whereas "THC did not impair driving performance yet the subjects thought it had."
Another study[2] finds that "marijuana smokers tend to compensate effectively for their impairment by utilizing a variety of behavioral strategies such as driving more slowly, passing less, and leaving more space between themselves and cars in front of them", although it notes that the combination of marijuana and alcohol can impair even at doses that would be harmless for either drug alone.
I wonder where programming falls on this?