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

What Great Listeners Actually Do

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 205 posts

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#121

Post by marian111 »

This is my testimony about the good work of a man who helped me..My name is CAROLINE WAYNE. and I am based in NEW YORK , USA. My life is back!!! After 8 years of marriage, my husband left me with our three children. I felt like my life was about to end,and was falling apart. Thanks to a spell caster called papa Justus who i met online. On one faithful day, as I was browsing through the internet, I was searching for a good spell caster that can solve my problems. I came across series of testimonies about this particular spell caster. Some people testified that he brought their Ex lover back, some testified that he restores womb, some testified that he can cast a spell to stop divorce and so on. There was one particular testimony I saw, it was about a woman called Grace,she testified about how papa Justus brought back her Ex lover in less than 72 hours and at the end of her testimony she drop papa Justus e-mail address. After reading all these,I decided to give papa a try.

I contacted him via email and explained my problems to him. In just 3 days, my husband came back to me. We solved our issues, and we are even happier than before. papa Justus is really a talented and gifted man and i will not stop publishing him because he is a wonderful man…If you have a problem and you are looking for a real and genuine spell caster to solve that problem for you. Try the great papa Justus today, he might be the answer to your problems. Here’s his contact: drabeljustustemple@gmail.com Thank you great Justus. Contact him for the following:

(1)If you want your ex back. (2) if you always have bad dreams. (3)You want to be promoted in your office. (4)You want women/men to run after you. (5)If you want a child. (6)[You want to be rich. (7)You want to tie your husband/wife to be yours forever. (8)If you need financial assistance. (9)Herbal care 10)Help bringing people out of prison (11)Marriage Spells (12)Miracle Spells (13)Beauty Spells (14)PROPHECY CHARM (15)Attraction Spells (16)Evil Eye Spells (17)Kissing Spell (18)Remove Sickness Spells (19)ELECTION WINNING SPELLS (20)SUCCESS IN EXAMS SPELLS (21) Charm to get who to love you. (22)Business spell. (23) Find your long lost family. Contact him today on: drabeljustustemple@gmail.com http://www.justushealinghome.com +2347033354868. You can also CONTACT HIM ON whats-app on the same phone number

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#122

Post by scardine »

ethanbond wrote: post #117
andrepd wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is almost comical :p The brain is not a turing machine. You can't make these kind of analysis because the brain isn't just a huge von neumann computer.

Who says it's not? There's no compelling reason that I've ever heard to believe so.

It is hard to prove a negative (it is easier to prove the brain is something else). As much as Turing completeness seems to emerge relatively easy, given how the analog complexity of our nervous system contrasts with the deterministic simplicity of digital computers, it is a bit naive to make parallels about how they work unless you are making some kind of metaphor.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#123

Post by MawNicker »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #101
adrianN wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only on the Internet, I'm afraid.

I believe so too, but I couldn't come up with an obvious example from meatspace when typing my comment, so I decided to mention only the on-line variation of this phenomenon, which should be familiar to everyone here.

It's even more necessary in meatspace (LOL!) but we learn to be subtle about it. This analysis is very insightful. Proper listening is cognitively expensive. In many circumstances it can't happen in real-time. Ideas are big and words are small. Both echoic and working memory are very limited. We have no choice but to optimize. Hashing is very efficient. We can hold a lot in our long term memories. The problem is that your new idea isn't in my head already. We need "idea arithmetic" to utilize our existing ideas without voiding new ones. The concept chicken-burger can be represented as hamburger + chicken - beef. That happened to be a perfect match. If it were Bob's Best Turkey Burger then it would be hamburger + chicken - beef ± ???. This is a more optimal representation than just ???. Each "chunk" saves memory for the most novel and important details. Assuming we continue listening. If we run into a chunk we don't like we're liable to start preparing arguments instead. Sometimes we're just tired and decide the match was good enough. The problems with this algorithm occur when it terminates early.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#124

Post by MichaelGG »

xyzzy4 wrote: post #116
johnfn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand there to be any difference between the two. There's no objective judge of listening. There's only the other person, and how well they feel heard.

There's definitely a difference. You could be perceived as a good listener, while actually not understanding or remembering what the other person is saying. On the other hand, you could appear to not be listening, but if later quizzed on the words spoken you would ace it.

Try describing the concepts without using the word "listen". Most likely you agree and are fighting about irrelevant definitions.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#125

Post by MawNicker »

scardine wrote: post #122
ethanbond wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says it's not? There's no compelling reason that I've ever heard to believe so.

It is hard to prove a negative (it is easier to prove the brain is something else). As much as Turing completeness seems to emerge relatively easy, given how the analog complexity of our nervous system contrasts with the deterministic simplicity of digital computers, it is a bit naive to make parallels about how they work unless you are making some kind of metaphor.

It is necessarily constrained by asymptotic computational complexity. With or without the memory bottleneck implied by the Von Neumann architecture. That it is a turing machine is not merely a pedantic fact. It has both implications and relevance here. At best a different architecture would exploit more concurrency. I don't think it does though; Language processing is extremely recursive. Noam Chomsky suspects our brains have an adaptation specifically for it. Nim Chimpsky implies he's right. I suspect this adaptation has all sorts of parallels with digital turing machines.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#127

Post by ysavir »

It's almost like the word "listening" is being used instead of the more appropriate word "supporting".

Can we just stop using the word "listening", which was never appropriate for this context, instead of debating/evaluating its meaning?

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#128

Post by haddr »

Side note: the hbr.org website is taking over 30% of the screen by showing this thick upper gray bar, which the only function is to show you how far you've already read. What a waste of space & UI.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#129

Post by pizza »

pizza wrote: post #110
amelius wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it a bit odd you categorize methods of listening by computational complexity, rather than by the method itself. Also, the brain is not a sequential machine. And different algorithms can be used to achieve the same effect. For example: - O(n^2) listening: cross-comparing all the things they've said for informational pairings Who says this can't be done in O(n log n)?

I guess I used complexity as a proxy for involvement. And of course the brain isn't a sequential machine - reaction times, voxel fMRI analysis, and lesion or connector studies show that consciousness is a network phenomenon. That said holding in one's mind the illusion (value as determined by observer..) of a list of instructions isn't so far off from how I imagine many would choose to describe the mind-feel of their…

oops too late to edit but 'connector' should be connectome

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#130

Post by burkaman »

RangerScience wrote: post #97
TeMPOraL wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which kind of describes a lot of discussions on the Internet - people pattern-matching what they see/hear to cached thoughts in their brains, and replying to those cached thoughts instead of to what was actually said.

I saw this in person, once. Guy with one of the those super-christian inflammatory signs in the middle of UC Berkeley. Both students and "protester" felt like they were presenting canned arguments "at" each other rather than "to" each other. Now that I think about it, I could totally see a cabal of professors hiring someone to be antagonistic as a teaching moment.

I see this a lot in abortion debates, because to find any common ground you would need to have a really deep philosophical discussion about the definition of life. There's nowhere else to go from "I think it's murder", "I think it isn't". "Don't legislate my body" is completely irrelevant to people who think it's murder, and "stop killing babies" is nonsensical to people who think there aren't any babies involved.
Post reply on HN