Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You can't tell people anything (2004)

habitatchronicles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 193 posts

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#101

Post by ericbarrett »

hilbert42 wrote: post #54
joefigura wrote: post #39

This article really frustrated me the last time it was posted, but now I think I have a clear enough idea why to put it into words. You absolutely can tell people things! But to tell someone something, you need to do three things: - Establish enough shared context that they can understand you - Speak about something they actually care about (or convince them to care) - Use a format that works for what you're trying t…

"...you have to put in the work to be understood and to show people it's worth their time to pay attention. Communicating well is part of the job." That's fine and I don't disagree but the problem is that there are very few truly good communicators out there (there is just not enough to go around). Communication is difficult and really effective communication is very difficult. I'll use myself as an example, When I p…

Re windy comments, I sympathize, but I've learned it's ok to be terse. You will never get across to 100% of your readers. Make your prose worth reading for those whom you reach.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#102

Post by xvilka »

Part of it can be explained by the curse of knowledge - many people explain things to others how they would explain to themselves. The key difference is to figure out how to explain it to someone else, not a copy of you.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#103

Post by Jensson »

jerry1979 wrote: post #27
themodelplumber wrote: post #4

There's some pretty astonishing theory out there as to who you can tell things to, in a way that they'll understand immediately. It's pretty interesting and unfortunately very subjective. But one thing I learned from it is that if you can identify specific people who get you, generally speaking, you should then see if you can mold newly-discovered communication problems around this already-functional communications r…

Please tell me there is actually such a theory and that this is not an AI comment.

This is exactly the kind of problem ChatGPT is good at solving. Just ask it and you will get theories. I asked and it gave a list, I think he talked about uncertainty reduction theory since the other things ChatGPT listed didn't make sense in this context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_reduction_theory

Edit: Not sure if that response is really correct, but at least it is a tractable way to try to approach this. ChatGPT let you fuzzy match words or theories much better than Google, and then you have things you can Google.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#104

Post by a2800276 »

travisjungroth wrote: post #89
koyote wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I was in college, it took me two years to realize that I could have easily gotten As and Bs (instead of Bs and Cs) in my various math classes, physics, chemistry, etc. had I simply bothered to do my homework properly--or, to put it differently, had I only properly applied the knowledge which I passively acquired by reading the associated textbook sections. I took this realisation to the extreme and decided to…

> I often struggle with large classroom learning: the pace is either too slow and I get distracted or too fast and I can't keep up. This is a problem for everyone. People may not experience the struggle directly, but it's there. It's the inherent problem with any group class. > I feel like there's always the tendency for people to zone out and not raise an issue when they are either bored or did not keep up/understan…

Not only is this a problem with everyone, it's also one of the "soft" skills you learn to deal with in school. It occurs in professional and social interactions as well and school prepares for dealing with it.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#106

Post by pushedx »

This article has found its way to the HN homepage multiple times, and every time I wonder if it’s because of the poorly worded and misleading title, combined with the phenomenon of HN users not actually reading the article and just saving it because the title looks interesting.

The article would be much better titled as, “It’s more difficult to explain new concepts to people than you think it is.”

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#107

Post by fulltimeloser »

koyote wrote: post #63
zsz wrote: post #51

> I’m totally convinced that a new idea or a new plan or a new technique is never really understood when you just explain it. > People will often think they understand, and they’ll say they understand, but then their actions show that it just ain’t so. Isn't this the very reason that homework assignments exist? When I was in college, it took me two years to realize that I could have easily gotten As and Bs (instead o…

> When I was in college, it took me two years to realize that I could have easily gotten As and Bs (instead of Bs and Cs) in my various math classes, physics, chemistry, etc. had I simply bothered to do my homework properly--or, to put it differently, had I only properly applied the knowledge which I passively acquired by reading the associated textbook sections. I took this realisation to the extreme and decided to…

>I often struggle with large classroom learning: the pace is either too slow and I get distracted or too fast and I can't keep up.

Yes, this is my biggest gripe with learning as well. It's so individual that you almost need one teacher per student.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#108

Post by random3 »

Reposting here - A picture is worth a thousand words – my layman spin on it :)

Our brains build models to interpret (translate) everything.

We use languages to communicate and share things.

When brains share the same models communication is simple. It’s simple to talk about day, night and light with anyone and, similarly, well formed teams (or couples) need few words to communicate even complex ideas because they have shared models.

When models differ the language needs to be adjusted or learned. Identical problem/solutions may sound different in different domains.

However when the model doesn’t exist in someone elses brain to communicate, the model needs to be built. Building models (learning) takes time.

Natural language evolved for natural things. Hence, it’s not very efficient for abstract things that require accuracy. Math (and code) is an accurate language, and (often) effective to communicate models that require accurate replication.

For example. It takes time to build the intuition for some things (e.g. fluid dynamics). Once you build the intuition, the easiest way to explain it is through the formulas. Someone can read the formulas, understand what the model communicates and then build intuition accurately.

You watch and learn to build a mental model, you download the mental model, someone uploads it and builds the model.

This is my mental model for communicating models

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#109

Post by smaudet »

koyote wrote: post #63
zsz wrote: post #51

> I’m totally convinced that a new idea or a new plan or a new technique is never really understood when you just explain it. > People will often think they understand, and they’ll say they understand, but then their actions show that it just ain’t so. Isn't this the very reason that homework assignments exist? When I was in college, it took me two years to realize that I could have easily gotten As and Bs (instead o…

> When I was in college, it took me two years to realize that I could have easily gotten As and Bs (instead of Bs and Cs) in my various math classes, physics, chemistry, etc. had I simply bothered to do my homework properly--or, to put it differently, had I only properly applied the knowledge which I passively acquired by reading the associated textbook sections. I took this realisation to the extreme and decided to…

Classroom experience is so rarely useful, the ONLY time you benefit is when either a) you already studied the subject and the professor is good and mentions something tangential/extra credit, or b) the classroom size is small, so when you don't understand something you can say so without fear of class disruption and the teacher can spend more time tailoring their curriculum to their class.

Otherwise yes, you are often better off with the book and homework and actually completing both.

And this is where I usually go off on my rant how college is useless for education - you can 'learn' peer interaction but even this way nothing forces you to make friends or connections, so the inherent use is close to nill.

Re: You can't tell people anything (2004)

#110

Post by astrange »

eat_veggies wrote: post #14

This is the anarchist theory of the unity of means and ends: you can't tell people anything, including what a better society looks like (nor can you impose it on anyone). You have to try to build and live that society in the present in order to even "get it" yourself. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anarchopac-means-and...

Of course, these anarchist projects all fail (like Occupy) or have murder rates significantly above baseline society (like CHAZ) so this shows… something.
Post reply on HN