So I’ve read X. Now what?

StoryCode uses a whole series of user-coded information to match books by similarity. Intriguing, with sometimes useful, sometimes awkward results.

Keeping up

I don’t know exactly how it works, nor do I want to:

MyProgress.com is a set of powerful Personal Progress Management (PPM) tools with built-in intelligence to automatically observe and analyze all essential aspects of your life. With MyProgress, you can watch your progress and discover your productivity at any period, any time, any place. Read More…

MyProgress.com

Watch your financial progress

Track your personal finance with MyProgress while intelligent technologies calculate your ranks (by occupation, age, and location), grant titles, build forecasts and provide analytics for you.

MyProgress.com

Track your skills & knowledge

While spending time on your passions and pastime, you can hardly realize how good your skills really are and how much experience you obtain. Track your time with MyProgress and get your ranks and titles, watch top, lowest, and average statistics of MyProgress community.

MyProgress.com

Figure your wealth progress

MyProgress will calculate how wealthy you are using actual currency exchange rates and compare it with the average database figures by global, local, age, and occupational categories.

(Emphasis added.)

As if you’re not awesome enough already

100 Great Tips to Improve Your Life.  I like #21, but mostly because it sounds like a teaser for the 11 o’clock news.

Remember that old “if it sounds too good to be true” saying? Wasn’t it CRAZY?

Or maybe it wasn’t crazy at all. In fact, does anyone say that anymore? They ought to. Because, if it does, it is. From a press release on the FBI’s web site:

The sales pitch was seductive: the young visionary behind Brown Investment Services in Virginia guaranteed investors he would double their money in 30 business days by tapping into the complex world of foreign currency trading.

Just for future generations, let’s translate:

“guaranteed” = “ha ha ha (etc.)”

“complex world of foreign currency trading” = “fraud”

In case you were wondering.

Burnout

It is possible something is the matter here. Just as there were deep flaws in the work ecosystems of the caring professions, noticed by researchers in the seventies, it’s possible there’s something wrong with our professional environments—and perhaps, more broadly speaking, our culture of work. Isn’t this worthy of examination? Work, after all, is a form of religion in a secular world. Burning out in it amounts to a crisis of faith.

I came across this article in New York Magazine eight months ago or so, and despite being intrigued by the topic, put off reading it until now. Why? Because it looked fairly long, and I didn’t feel like I had time to read it, then. Of course, the author writes about how we’re always hurried, and waiting. That’s a secondary point, however, and first and foremost the article is interesting for its direct perspectives on burnout, burnout apparently being a relatively recent and little-researched concept.

But today, says Maslach, corporate settings are cautiously, slowly, cracking their doors, letting people like her in, because they recognize that something’s gone awry. “Like in Silicon Valley,” she says. “It used to be the case that people would say, ‘You’re burned out? You don’t like the job? So quit. I don’t run a country club,’ ” says Maslach. “But what was happening was the best and the brightest wanted to opt out. They started saying, ‘I can’t do this; this is not a life.’ They’d go to the Midwest and start a pet-food store.” Maslach adds that when she did interviews at nasa, she noticed similar problems there. “So suddenly, these places were saying, ‘Whoa, what do we need to do to get these people?’ Getting the most out of people didn’t actually mean getting the best. That’s when there was a new wave of interest in burnout.”

Admittedly, I don’t quite understand the “I don’t run a country club” bit, but I like the rest. There are interesting anecdotes, and also facts and figures (which you can take with however much salt you like):

  • According to a survey in the Netherlands, 10% of the workforce is burnt out at any given time;
  • Younger workers are more likely to burn out than older workers;
  • Single are more likely to burn out than married;
  • and people in strongly individualistic societies are more likely to burn out than… well, those in less individualistic societies (though I’m not sure how exactly that distinction is made for the purposes of the fact).

If you don’t have enough time to read the article in its entirety, this last bit’s a good one to go out on:

As Schaufeli, the Dutch researcher, notes, one of the strongest predictors of burnout isn’t just work overload but “work-home interference”—a sociologist’s way of saying we’re receiving phone calls from Tokyo during dinner and replying to clients on our BlackBerrys while making our children brush their teeth.

Indeed, that’s her colleagues’ most startling finding of all. Most Americans believe they work more today than they did 35 years ago. Yet according to the American Time Use Survey, an ambitious project that for 41 years has been asking thousands of participants to keep detailed time diaries, Americans now have five more hours of leisure per week (38) than they did in 1965. Certainly, there are academics who reject these numbers—in The Overworked American, published in 1992, the economist Juliet Schor calculated we were working nearly an extra month per year, setting off a rather sharp debate about her methodology—but even those who agree our leisure time is increasing will readily concede that Americans experience their leisure quite differently and therefore may feel as if they’re working more. For one thing, it’s non-contiguous leisure time, time meted out in discrete increments. Human beings have always resisted the fracturing of time. Gleick points out that Plautus cursed the sundial. Now, he says, we gain 90- second reprieves with our microwave ovens. But do we do anything meaningful in those 90 seconds? Or do they vanish in the same particle puff?

(NYMag: “Can’t Get No Satisfaction,” by Jennifer Senior)

Please pass the Hamburger Augmentation Product

A study of UCLA’s Center on Everyday Lives of Families finds that convenience foods aren’t.  Which is to say, families relying on so-called “convenience” foods spent as much time preparing dinner as those families who leaned on, e.g., hot dogs and frozen peas.

(EurekAlert: “Convenience foods save little time for working families at dinner.” [Aug 7, 2007])

Water, water, every where… and much of it to drink

Elizabeth Royte, who wrote the charming eco-logue the Tapir’s Morning Bath, does a piece on New York City’s water supply. It’s interesting, both historically and also in the infrastructural how-it-works sort of gee-whiz way. (It also encourages me to move Royte’s book on garbage further up on my to-read list.)

(If the NYT can make a corny Elia Kazan reference, then I can make a tired Samuel Taylor Coleridge reference, is all I have to say for myself.)

For the organizationally curious

A periodic table of visualization methods, from venn diagrams and cone trees to Gantt charts and Zwicky(‘s) morphological boxes, and a bundle of other things.

(via Cool Tools)

Rant, by Chuck Palahniuk

rant4.jpgChuck Palahniuk ends up telling the same story over and over again in his books. What’s astonishing is how fresh and gut-wrenchingly surprising (sorry) his approaches are. Even in his most tired formulations (sorry, Haunt), it’s still worth reading till the end. It doesn’t hurt that the basic “story” Palahniuk tells over and over again is among the strangest, yet most basically fundamental, things scratched on dead tree.

Rant rates as some of his best work.

It’s not that his writing shines, because it doesn’t. It’s not that the book starts off auspiciously, because it doesn’t, particularly. Or: it does, but of course you’re too wrapped up in preconceived notions to understand how much it’s going to blow you out of the water, by the end. And it’s unfair to say that the writing doesn’t shine, because–preconceived notions.

It’s difficult to say more, or anything.

The basic structure of Rant is that of an oral history, the sub-title tells you. Though you could probably figure it out pretty quickly based on the string of names that pop up, the bold-faced names by occupations and descriptors. Also because Palahniuk spells it out for you on the second page. Just in case you aren’t good at figuring things out. (In which case, incidentally, this book’s probably not for you anyway.) Like any of Palahniuk’s writing, Rant is schizophrenic, with lots of things going on, rapid-fire details vying for your attention, trying to disgust, compel, impress. But Rant is schizophrenic in different sorts of ways than, say, Survivor, or Fight Club. There are the usual things put there to snag your attention, the things that make good soundbites for reviews, jacket copy, blah blah blah. Party crashing, rabies, spider bites, and so on.

Yes, but. These are distractions, mostly. Mind you, the distractions are their own commentary, but they’re not the main show. Figuring out where distraction ends and something else starts is the whole point, or at least part of it. You want the story? Read the book. Just don’t expect applause.

Newsflash: Getting Beat In The Head Is Bad For Your Brain

Seriously, though: apparently boxing, whether amateur or professional, can lead to brain damage. Or might, anyway. This found in a study that looked at amateur boxers for a biochemical marker for brain damage. (The study also looked at soccer players who repeatedly headed the ball, and found none of the biochemical markers. FYI.)

(Science Blog: “Even amateur boxing causes brain damage.” [May 2, 2007])