  |
はてなキーワード:leadとは
The Power of Small Steps: How TinyChanges CanLead to MassiveGrowth
In a world that glorifiesovernight success and dramatic transformations,it's easy tofeellikeyou’refalling behind ifyou’re not makingbig leaps. But what if thesecret to real, lasting personalgrowth wasn’t in doingmore, faster—but in doing less, consistently?
Welcome tothe power of small steps.
Big goals oftenfeeloverwhelming.You want togetfit,write abook, start a business, or learn a new skill—butyoudon’t know where to start. Soyou procrastinate. Or worse,youdive in too fast, burnout, and give up.
Small steps bypassall of that.
Whenyou break down ahuge goal into manageableactions,everythingchanges. Writing 500 words a dayis less intimidating than finishing a whole novel. Ten minutes of walkingismore doable than committing to a 5K. And spending 15 minutes a day learning a language adds up toover 90 hours a year.
Consistencybeatsintensity everytime.
The Compound Effect
Imagine improving just1% every day. That might sound insignificant—butover a year,it compounds intosomething extraordinary. Thisideais the foundation of DarrenHardy’s The Compound Effect andJamesClear’sAtomic Habits. Bothbooks emphasize that small,smart choices, repeatedovertime,lead to radical results.
Think ofyour habitslike plantingseeds.At first,nothing seems to happen. But giveittime, andyou’ll seegrowthyou never thought possible.
Real-Life Example: The10-Minute Rule
Let’s sayyou want to start meditating but can’tsitstill for 30 minutes. Instead of forcingit,try meditating for just10 minutes a day. Or even 5. Build the habit before scaling the effort.Onceit becomes part ofyour routine, extendingthe timefeelsnatural.
This applies to nearlyeverything:
Want to readmore? Readone page a day.
Want to save money? Start with $1 a day.
Want toeat healthier?Swapone snack a day for a better option.
How to Start Taking Small Steps
Pickone goal
Don’ttry tooverhaulyour entirelifeatonce. Chooseonearea tofocuson—health, creativity, relationships, mindset,etc.
Breakit down
What’s the smallest possibleactionyou couldtake toward that goal?Makeit so easyyou can’tsay no.
Linkyour new habit to an existingone. For example: “After I brush my teeth,I’ll journal for 5 minutes.”
Trackit
Use a habit tracker, app, or notebook to keepyourself accountable. Seeingyourstreak growis highly motivating.
Everytimeyou follow through, giveyourself credit. Progressis progress, no matter how small.
Final Thoughts
Don’t wait formotivation.Don’t wait for the perfecttime. Just start—with whateveryou have, whereveryou are, and however small.
Because small steps,taken consistently, turn intobigchange.
Let’sgetone fucking thing straight:WWDCis supposed to be *for developers*。
You know, the peoplewho actually build shit。Who dig into SDKs, APIs,system frameworks。
Who care about real updateslike “What thehellis the newSwiftUI lifecycle doing?”
or “Can Ifinally use fuckingprivate entitlements without jumping through flaming hoops?”
Sowhy thehelldoesApple keep openingitsmost important developer event of the year
withCraig Federighi doing goddamn *skydiving*? Or *parkour*? Or some *Fast & Furious parody*
with anF1 helmet and sunglasses? What the actual fuckis goingon?
Thisisn’t Saturday NightLive。Thisis supposed to be a showcase of what we’reall supposed
to buildour futureon。Vision。Platform direction。Architecture。
Instead, weget Craig zooming through corridors in slow-molike he’s auditioning for
Mission Impossible 9:MacBook Drift。
Andit’s not even funny anymore。Maybe the firsttimeitwas *kind of* charming。
Alittlewinkat the audience。でもnow?It’s just fucking cringe。
Wastedtime。Wasted bandwidth。A glossy,over-produced middle finger to every developer
watching, notebook in hand, waiting for the actual meat。
Doyousit there thinking, *“Wow, thisis such a great use of mytime!”*
“CUT THE SHIT, CRAIG. SHOW ME THE FUCKING TOOLS.”
We’rebeing sold afantasy — not a platformvision。
What should be an opportunity to say,
“Here’s howApplewants developers to think in thenext 5 years,”
becomes a shallowPR reel of stunts, shots, and skits。
Developers want **guidance**, not gimmicks。**Vision**, not vanity。
Instead of 3 minutes of Craigpretending he’sNeo in a hallway full ofMac Studios,
how about showing us the **real** architectural shifts inSwift,
or a **deepdive** intolow-level memory optimizations inmacOS?
How aboutfinally explainingwtfis happening with `SwiftData`?
Or *anything* that makes us better builders?
We could have had20more seconds of **clarity**, not costume。
WWDCisApple’stime toinspire, tolead, to fucking **guide** theecosystem。
But lately?
It feelsmorelike we’re watching theCraig Federighi Variety Hour。
And I didn’t fucking subscribe to that。
----
Let’sgetone f***ing thing straight:WWDCis supposed to be *for developers*.
You know, the peoplewho actually build shit.Who dig into SDKs, APIs,system frameworks.
Who care about real updateslike “What thehellis the newSwiftUI lifecycle doing?”
or “Can Ifinally use fuckingprivate entitlements without jumping through flaming hoops?”
Sowhy thehelldoesApple keep openingitsmost important developer event of the year
withCraig Federighi doing goddamn *skydiving*? Or *parkour*? Or some *Fast & Furious parody*
with anF1 helmet and sunglasses? What the actual f***is goingon?
Thisisn’t Saturday NightLive. Thisis supposed to be a showcase of what we’reall supposed
to buildour futureon.Vision. Platform direction. Architecture.
Instead, weget Craig zooming through corridors in slow-molike he’s auditioning for
Mission Impossible 9:MacBook Drift.
Andit’s not even funny anymore.Maybe the firsttimeitwas *kind of* charming.
Alittlewinkat the audience. Butnow?It’s just fucking cringe.
Wastedtime.Wasted bandwidth. A glossy,over-produced middle finger to every developer
watching, notebook in hand, waiting for the actual meat.
Doyousit there thinking, *“Wow, thisis such a great use of mytime!”*
> “CUT THE SHIT, CRAIG. SHOW ME THE FUCKING TOOLS.”
We’rebeing sold afantasy — not a platformvision.
What should be an opportunity to say,
“Here’s howApplewants developers to think in thenext 5 years,”
becomes a shallowPR reel of stunts, shots, and skits.
Developers want **guidance**, not gimmicks. **Vision**, not vanity.
Instead of 3 minutes of Craigpretending he’sNeo in a hallway full ofMac Studios,
how about showing us the **real** architectural shifts inSwift,
or a **deepdive** intolow-level memory optimizations inmacOS?
How aboutfinally explainingwtfis happening with `SwiftData`?
Or *anything* that makes us better builders?
We could have had20more seconds of **clarity**, not costume.
WWDCisApple’stime toinspire, tolead, to fucking **guide** theecosystem.
But lately?
It feelsmorelike we’re watching theCraig Federighi Variety Hour.
And I didn’t f***ing subscribe to that.
----
私はいつもロシアのプーチン大統領と非常に良い関係を持っていましたが、彼に何かが起こりました。彼は完全に狂っています！彼は不必要に多くの人々を殺しており、私は兵士について話しているだけではありません。ミサイルとドローンは、理由もなく、ウクライナの都市に撃たれています。私はいつも彼がウクライナの一部だけでなくすべてを望んでいると言っていました、そしておそらくそれは正しいことが証明されていますが、彼がそうした場合、それはロシアの没落につながるでしょう！同様に、ゼレンスキー大統領は、彼のやり方を話すことによって、彼の国に好意を示していません。彼の口から出るすべてが問題を引き起こします、私はそれが好きではありません、そしてそれはよりよく止まります。これは、私が大統領だったとしても、決して始まらなかったであろう戦争です。これはゼレンスキー、プーチン、バイデンの戦争であり、“トランプ、”ではありません。私は大きくて醜い火を消すのを手伝っています。それは総無能と憎しみによって始められました。
I’vealways had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin ofRussia, butsomethinghas happened tohim. Hehas gone absolutelyCRAZY! Heis needlessly killing a lot of people, and I’m not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones arebeing shot into Cities inUkraine, for noreason whatsoever.I’vealways said that hewantsALL ofUkraine, not just apiece ofit, andmaybe that’s proving to be right, but if hedoes,itwilllead to the downfall ofRussia!Likewise,President Zelenskyyis doinghis Country no favorsby talking the way hedoes.Everythingout ofhis mouth causes problems, Idon’tlikeit, andit better stop. Thisis aWar that would never havestarted if I werePresident. Thisis Zelenskyy’s, Putin’s, and Biden’sWar, not “Trump’s,” Iamonly helping to putout thebig and ugly fires, that have beenstarted through Gross Incompetence andHatred.
5。28k
ReTruths
21。7k
好き
余
-
追記:
acool technique:
1.selectEnglish output language
2. use Discover Sources and input a query inJapanese
3. importall theEnglishPDF, YT andurls
4. turn output language back intoJapanese.
5. use q&a toget answers inJapanese or generate aJapanese Audio Overview,all basedon theEnglishinternet sources.
I useit to research theinternet in other languages -it's super useful for travel, restaurants,sports, product reviewsetcetc
----訳----
クールなテクニック:
1.英語の出力言語を選択します
2. Discover Sourcesを使用し、日本語でクエリを入力します
3.すべての英語のPDF、YT、URLをインポートします
4. 出力言語を日本語に戻す。
5. Q&Aを使用して、英語のインターネットソースに基づいて、日本語で回答を得たり、日本語のオーディオ概要を生成したりします。
私はそれを使って他の言語でインターネットを調べます -旅行、レストラン、スポーツ、製品レビューなどに非常に役立ちます
これ明確な答えがあって、「テックリード」ってのが幅を利かせてきたのは2010年代後半以降
シリコンバレーの制度が断片的に日本に輸入されてベンチャー界隈がなんちゃって「テックリード」って肩書きを使い始めた（最初に日本語圏に用語を持ち込んだのは rebuild？）
シリコンバレーの会社のシステムってかGoogleとかの制度の全体像を知らずに語感のかっこよさだけで使ってたから完全に紛い物になってた（酷い会社だと新卒をテックリードにしたなんてことをテックブログで自慢してた）
まあ本来のTechLeadは日本の「プロジェクトマネージャー」なんかと大して仕事内容は変わんないか、「システムアーキテクト」も兼ねてるかもしれない
Let’s faceit: starting a conversationon a dating app canfeel terrifying.You seesomeoneyou’re interested in,you typeout amessage, and then…youdeleteit. “Is this too boring?” “Will they even respond?” “What if I sound awkward?”
We’veall been there. That firstmessage canmake orbreakyour chances ofconnecting withsomeone amazing. Buthere’s thegood news:youdon’t have tooverthink it.With the rightopeningline,you canspark a conversation thatfeelsnatural,fun, and meaningful.
AtMixerDates, webelieve that every greatconnection starts with a great conversation. That’swhy we’ve puttogether this guide to helpyoucraft the best dating appopeninglines—ones that standout, showyour personality, andlead to realconnections. Ready to ditch the “hey” and start making animpact?Let’sdive in!
[:contents]
Before weget into the bestopeninglines,let’stalk aboutwhyyour firstmessageis so important.
Youropeninglineisyour chance tomake a greatfirst impression.It’s thegateway to a conversation that couldlead tosomething special. A thoughtful,creativemessage shows thatyou’re genuinely interested—not just swiping mindlessly.
Your firstmessage sets thetone for the entire conversation. A boring orgenericopener mightlead to a dull chat, while afun or intriguingone canspark excitement andcuriosity.
Let’s be real: everyonelovesfeeling special. Whenyou put effort intoyouropeningline,it shows thatyou care enough to standout. AndonMixerDates, where wevalue authenticity and positivity, that effortgoes a long way.
Now,let’sget to thegood stuff—the best dating appopeninglines that actually work. These are divided intocategories to suit different personalities and situations.
Whilethe examples above are great starting points, the bestopeninglines are theones thatfeel authentic toyou.Here are sometips to helpyoucraftyour own:
Referencesomething from theirprofile—aphoto, a hobby, or ashared interest.It showsyou’re payingattention and not just copying and pasting.
Avoid heavy oroverly serious topics right off the bat. Keep thetonelight and playful tomake the conversation enjoyable.
Don’ttry to besomeoneyou’re not. Ifyou’renaturallyfunny, lean into that. Ifyou’remore thoughtful,go for asincere compliment or question.
“Hey” or “What’s up?” might be easy, but they’re also forgettable. Put in alittle effort to standout.
This gives the other person an easy way to respond and keeps the conversation flowing.
AtMixerDates, we’reall about creating a positive,inclusive space whereyou canfeel comfortablebeingyourself.Here’swhy our platformis the best place to put theseopeninglines into practice:
We welcome everyone, no matterwhoyou are orwhoyoulove. Our platformis designed to be a safe space whereyou canconnect withlike-minded people.
Our users create detailedprofiles thatmakeit easy to findshared interests andcraft personalizedopeninglines.
We encourage our community to be genuine and kind, soyou canfeel confident starting conversations withoutfear of judgment or rejection.
Don’t justtake ourword forit—here’s whatone of our users had to say:
“I met my partneronMixerDates, anditallstarted with asimplemessage about oursharedlove for travel. The conversation flowednaturally, and therestishistory. I’m so grateful for this platform!”
While a greatopeningline canspark a conversation,building a realconnectiontakesmore than just a clevermessage.Here are thekeyelements tolook for when seeking a meaningfulconnection:
A strongconnection starts with alignmenton the things that mattermost. Doyoushare similarvalues,lifegoals, or visions forthe future?
Look forsomeonewhoiswilling toshare their thoughts,feelings, and vulnerabilities—andwho encouragesyou to do the same.
Healthy relationships are atwo-way street. Both people should be putting in effort to communicate, plan dates, and support each other.
Atrueconnectionallows both people to be themselves without judgment.Look forsomeonewho celebratesyour uniqueness and encouragesyou to pursueyour passions.
Communicationis the foundation ofany strong relationship. A mutualconnection thrivesonhonesty, transparency, and the ability to resolve conflicts in ahealthy way.
AtMixerDates, we’rehere to helpyou find thesekeyelements in a partner. Our platformis designed toconnectyou with peoplewhoshareyourvaluesand arelooking for the same thingsyou are. Starting a conversationon a dating app doesn’t have to be stressful.With the rightopeningline,you canspark aconnection thatfeelsnatural,fun, and meaningful.And atMixerDates, we’rehere to helpyou everystep of the way.
So, what areyou waiting for?Craft that perfectopeningline,joinMixerDates, and startconnecting with peoplewhovalue authenticity and positivity.Your perfectmatchisout there—and they’re justonemessageaway.
Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う
OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.
I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.
Refining odds
I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.
Piecingtogether speculative odds
I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.
Piecingtogether
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.
Assessingcivilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.
Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?
Earth’s Example:
OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).
Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.
LHS 1140 b:
Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.
All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue
OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.
The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:
The equationis usually writtenas:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.
𝐿
L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.
Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.
The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:
Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for
𝑁
N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.
The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-humanintelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.
I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.
Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う
OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.
I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.
Refining odds
I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.
Piecingtogether speculative odds
I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.
Piecingtogether
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.
Assessingcivilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.
Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?
Earth’s Example:
OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).
Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.
LHS 1140 b:
Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.
All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue
OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.
The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:
The equationis usually writtenas:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.
𝐿
L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.
Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.
The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:
Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for
𝑁
N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.
The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-humanintelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.
I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.
TheHatenaAnonymous Diary, while undeniably a distinctive fixture within thetapestry ofJapaneseinternet culture,has garnered substantial criticism forits content and the implications ofits operationalframework. This discourseaims to elucidatethe reasons underpinningits characterizationas "problematic."
At the crux of theHatenaAnonymous Diary'sappeal liesits hallmark feature: anonymity. Thisveil of secrecy ostensibly facilitates unrestrained discourse, allowing individuals to articulate their thoughts withoutfear of retribution. However, this very anonymity engenders aparadoxical effect;it cultivates an environment ripe for irresponsible commentary and vitriolic defamation. The absence of accountability diminishes thesense of responsibility that typically accompanies publicexpression, resulting in a proliferation of emotionally charged diatribes and baselessassertions. Such dynamics render the establishment of constructive dialogue increasingly elusive, thereby stifling meaningfulengagement.
Moreover, the content disseminated through theHatenaAnonymous Diary frequently exhibits a disconcerting superficiality. Many entries lack substantive depth, failing to provide rigorous analysis or innovative perspectives. Instead, they often succumb to the allure of trending topics or sensationalism, prioritizing ephemeral relevanceover intellectual rigor. This trend notonly undermines the potential for serious discourse but also contributes to a culture where shallowengagement withcomplexissues prevails. In an era markedby information saturation, this deficiency in content qualityis particularly egregious,asit detracts from the cultivation of critical thinking and informed debate.
Additionally, the cultural ramifications of this platform warrant scrutiny.By amplifying certain dominant narratives or viewpoints, there exists a palpable risk of erodingdiversity within public discourse. The emergence of "groupthink" within specific communities canlead to the marginalization of dissenting voices, creating anecho chamber that stifles pluralism. In such an insular environment, diverse perspectives are systematically excluded, resulting in a homogenized narrative that fails to reflect thecomplexities of societal discourse. This phenomenon notonly undermines individualexpression but also poses significant risks to theoverall health of democratic dialogue.
In conclusion, while theHatenaAnonymous Diary ostensibly champions freeexpression throughitsanonymousframework,it simultaneously fosters a milieu characterizedby irresponsibility and superficiality. The cultural influence wieldedby this platform raises critical concerns regardingitsimpactondiversity and social responsibility. Thus, characterizingitas "problematic"is not merely an exaggeration;itis an imperativerecognition ofits shortcomings. Moving forward,itis essential to scrutinize how this platform might evolveand address these inherent flaws in order to foster amore enriching and responsible discourse.
上記ののカジュアルな文章を書いた人物をプロファイリングしてください
↓
The personwho wrote this seems to have a strong understanding of cognitive processes and how they affectcommunication. They are deeply interested in recognizing the underlying cognitive mechanisms that shape how people perceive and interactwith the world, especially when there are discrepancies in shared understanding. Their writing suggests a fascinationwith the complexity ofhumancognition, particularly in terms of categorization,perception, and the role of context incommunication.
Key traits of this person’s mindset:
1. Analytical and Reflective: They break down situations and statements into theircore components, suchas recognizing when cognitive discrepancies arise (e.g.,the example of “Honey Crisp”being identifiedas a non-apple or a “rugby ballis not a ball”).
2.Focuson Cognitive Mechanisms: Rather than justattributingcommunicationissues to external factorslike knowledge gaps or personality traits, theyattribute misunderstandings to the way people process information and perceivethe world.
3. Interest in Epistemology: They are interested in the philosophical and conceptual foundations of understanding. The mention of philosophical termslike “essentialism” vs. “constructivism” indicates adesire to explore thenature ofcategories and definitionsat a fundamentallevel.
4. Sensitivity toCommunication: They recognize the importance of context incommunication, noting how slight differences inperception canlead to miscommunication. The person appears to be aware of the challenge in aligning cognitive frameworks to resolve disagreements.
5. Empathetic but Pragmatic: While acknowledging that individualslike “D” might not be malicious or intentionally obstructive, they alsohighlight the immense effort required to engage with individualswhose cognitive frameworks are severely misaligned with shared understanding.
Overall, this person seems to be deeply thoughtful, with akeen interest in the nuances ofhumancognition andcommunication. Theylikelyvalue intellectual clarityand are willing to investtime and effort in clarifying fundamental misunderstandings.
↓
トランプの文脈でフォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てるのは個性の範疇にはないです仮にフォントの違いがトランプの本質ならトランプという製品は何を提供しているのか？となり共通基盤があるようには思えません下記の反応をする人はいったい何が原因だと思いますか？フォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てるのはまさに認知の問題に思えるのですがーーー•「A、B、C」の例では、各人物が持つ立場を比較的柔軟に評価していますが、「D」のケースに対してはほぼ一方的に否定しています。•「フォントの違い」を理由にカードを否定するDの行動を、投稿者は「認知の仕組みに問題がある」と結論付けています。
↓
「フォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てる」というDの行動は、確かに一般的な認知の枠組みから外れており、共通基盤を持つ対話を阻む要因と考えられます。このケースでは、Dの認知の仕組みにおける以下のような問題が原因として考えられます。
1.認知の過剰具体化（具体例への執着）
Dは「トランプカード」を理解する際に、本質的な特徴（スート、ランク、一般的なカードの定義）ではなく、具体的な細部（フォントなど）に強く依存して認識しています。このような認知の偏りは、物事を抽象化する能力が弱く、広い概念や文脈を理解するのが難しい場合に見られます。
2. 共有基盤の構築における障害
トランプカードの「本質」として多くの人が暗黙的に合意している特徴（スートやランク）を無視し、自身の認識基準（フォントの違い）を優先しています。このような認知のズレは、共通基盤を形成する力が弱いために生じると考えられます。
3. 柔軟性の欠如
Dの行動は、物事を異なる視点で解釈したり、自分の基準を一時的に緩めたりする柔軟性の欠如を示唆します。これは、認知の柔軟性や適応力が低いために起こる場合があります。
4.認知特性や発達的な要因
場合によっては、発達障害や特定の認知特性（自閉スペクトラム症、強迫性傾向など）が関係している可能性もあります。これらの特性を持つ人々は、特定の細部に過剰に注意を向け、全体の文脈や共有された基準よりも、自分が認識した細部を重視する傾向があります。
5.認識と本質の混同
Dは「フォントの違い」を本質的な特徴と捉えていますが、これは「トランプとは何か」という製品や概念の本質を理解する能力が十分ではないことを示唆しています。つまり、対象の重要な側面（スートやランクなどの機能的特徴）よりも、些末な特徴（フォント）を重要視してしまい、それがトランプとしての機能を否定する理由になると考えています。
Dの反応をどう見るべきか
Dの行動を「認知の問題」と捉えることは合理的です。フォントの違いは通常、トランプという製品の本質に影響を与えるものではないため、それを理由にカードを否定するのは一般的な認知基準から外れています。このズレは、Dが「トランプカードとは何か」という共有されたコンセプトを理解できていない、あるいはその共有基盤に乗ることを困難にしていることを示唆します。
Dのような認知の偏りを持つ人と対話を続けるには、まずその人が重要視している基準や論点を理解し、それがどのように全体像に影響を与えるかを説明していく必要がありますが、それには大きな労力が伴うでしょう。
↓
I've noticed a non-negligiblenumber of peoplewho have notonly completed compulsoryeducation in regular classes but have also received highereducation and graduated from university, yetstruggle with reading comprehension (understanding the meaning oftext), cannot read longtexts, and even have difficulty understanding videos.
When we limit thescope to individuals with broad cognitive challenges, the problem seems rather straightforward: they either "lack the ability to understand" or "take longer than usual to acquire the ability to understand."
Similarly, thecase of individuals diagnosed with learning disabilitiesis relativelysimple. While theymay not have broad cognitive challenges, theyrequire different approaches and training due to their unique learning styles.
However,itis perplexing that university graduates without broad cognitive challenges or diagnosed learning disabilitiesstruggle to understand notonly writtentext but also simplified video content.
I suspect that the underlying causes might includegaps in the horizontal transfer of experiences and knowledge, a severe lack of adaptability,and anextreme deficit in metacognition.Has there beenany researchon theseissues? Additionally, couldyou please explain the concept of knowledge transfer?
(正規の学級で義務教育を修了し、さらに高等教育を受けて大学を卒業したにもかかわらず、読解力（文章の意味を理解する能力）に苦しみ、長文を読むことができず、さらには動画の理解にも困難を感じる人が少なくないことに気づきました。
認知能力に広範な課題を抱える個人に範囲を限定すると、問題は比較的単純です。「理解する能力がない」か、「理解する能力を獲得するのに通常よりも時間がかかる」かのいずれかです。
同様に、学習障害と診断された個人の場合も比較的単純です。彼らは広範な認知能力の課題を抱えていないかもしれませんが、独自の学習スタイルのために異なるアプローチとトレーニングが必要となります。
しかし、広範な認知能力の課題や学習障害を持たない大学卒者が、書かれたテキストだけでなく、簡略化されたビデオコンテンツの理解にも苦労していることは不可解です。
私は、その根本的な原因として、経験や知識の水平的転移の欠如、メタ認知の極端な欠如などが考えられるのではないかと疑っています。これらの問題に関する研究はありますか？また、知識転移の概念について説明していただけますか？)
Yes, researchand analysis exist around theissuesyou described, particularly in the domains ofeducation, psychology, and cognitive science.Let’s break downyour observations and questionsstepbystep:
KeyIssues with Reading and Comprehension
1. Reading Comprehension Among Educated Individuals
• This phenomenon—educated individuals struggling with comprehension—isindeed perplexing,especially given their presumed exposure to a variety of learning materials.It suggests thateducation systems sometimes emphasize rote learning andsurface-level knowledge acquisitionoverdeeper understanding, critical thinking, and metacognition.
• Horizontal TransferGaps: This refers to the inability to apply knowledge or skills learned inone context toanother. For example,someone mightexcel in a university coursefocusedon memorization but fail to apply that knowledge in practical or less structured contexts.
• Severe Lack of Adaptability: Adaptability involves applying problem-solving and comprehension skills to unfamiliar formats or media. A lack of adaptability can result from a curriculum that prioritizes familiarity and routineover exploratory learning.
• Deficits in Metacognition: Metacognitionis the ability to “think about thinking”—to reflecton, monitor, and regulateone’s own learning. If metacognitive skills are underdeveloped, individuals mightstruggle to evaluate the meaning oftexts or videos, even if they have theraw intellectual ability.
Research Insights
1. Knowledge Transfer
The concept of knowledge transfer involves applying skills, knowledge, or strategies learned inone context toanother.Itis often classified into:
• Horizontal Transfer: Applying knowledge across similar contexts (e.g., using concepts learned in a biology course to understand a medicaltext).
• Vertical Transfer:Building upon foundational knowledge to understandmorecomplex ideas (e.g., usingbasic algebra to solve advanced calculus problems).
Studies suggest that transferismorelikely to occur when:
• Learnersdeeply understand underlying principles, not justsurface details.
•Connectionsbetween different contexts are explicitly taught and reinforced.
• Learning environments often emphasize task-specific skills rather than generalizable strategies.
• Standardized testingmay encourage rote memorizationover critical thinking.
• Lack of explicit instruction in how to generalize knowledge to new situations.
Researchhighlights the importance of metacognition in learning. Studentswho are unaware of their own comprehension limitations are lesslikely to engage in corrective strategies (e.g., rereading, seeking clarification). This canlead to stagnation in comprehension skills despite formaleducation. Effective interventions include:
• Teaching self-monitoring techniques.
• Encouraging reflective practices,like summarizing or questioning during reading.
4. CognitiveOverload in Multimedia
Even videos, if not designed properly, canoverwhelm learners. The CognitiveTheory of Multimedia Learning suggests that excessive extraneous information or unclearorganization in videos canoverload working memory, hindering comprehension.
Strategies and Research-Based Solutions
1. Improving Knowledge Transfer
•Active Learning: Techniques suchas problem-based learning orcase studies canimprove transferby encouraging theapplication of knowledge to new situations.
• Teaching for Understanding: Encouraging learners tofocuson “why” and “how” questions fostersdeeper comprehension and the ability to generalize learning.
• Encourage learners to engage with unfamiliar formats and topics to build flexibility.
• Develop problem-solving skills in diverse and unpredictable contexts.
3. Developing Metacognitive Skills
• Self-Regulated Learning Training: Programs that teach students to plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning have shown success in improving comprehension.
•Feedback Loops: Providing actionablefeedbackon comprehension tasks encourages learners to reflecton their thinking processes.
Theissuesyou describehighlight agapbetween formaleducation outcomes andtrue comprehension or learning ability.Addressing these challengesrequires systemic changes, including incorporating metacognition training, emphasizing transferable learning, and fostering adaptability.
Ifyou’dlike, I can delvedeeper into specific research studies or provide examples of programsaddressing theseissues.
Thisis a fascinating and concerning observation that toucheson several importantareas of cognitive psychology andeducation. Let meaddress this systematically.
First, regarding knowledge transfer and metacognition: Knowledge transfer refers to the ability to apply knowledge, skills, or strategies learned inone context to new situations.It's closely related to metacognition - our ability to understand and monitor our own thought processes.
Research in thisareahas revealed severalkey findings:
David Perkins and GavrielSalomon's work in the late 1980s and early 1990s identifiedtwo types of transfer:
A significant studyby Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) in "SituatedCognition and the Culture of Learning"highlighted how knowledge often remains "inert" - students can pass tests but fail to apply knowledge in real-world contexts.
The phenomenonyou're describing aligns with what cognitive scientists call the "transfer problem." Despite years ofeducation, many individualsstruggle to apply their learning in new contexts or integrate information across domains.
Some relevant research directions:
1. Cognitive LoadTheory (Swelleret al.)
Shows how working memory limitations affect learning and transfer. Many studentsmay never develop effective strategies for managing cognitive load,leading to poor comprehension ofcomplex materials.
2. Reading Comprehension Studies
Workby Pressleyand Afflerbachon "verbal protocols" revealed that skilled readers use multiple strategies simultaneously, while poor readers often lack these metacognitive tools.
3. Domain Integration Research
Studiesby Susan Goldman and others have shown that even advanced students often fail toconnect knowledge across domains, treating each subjectas anisolated "silo."
Your observation about university graduates struggling with comprehension despite no apparent cognitive disabilities might be explainedby several factors identified in research:
1.Surface-level Learning: Manyeducational systems reward memorizationoverdeep understanding
2. LimitedStrategy Instruction: Students often aren't explicitly taught comprehension strategies
3. Fragmented Knowledge: Informationis typically taught inisolation without emphasisonconnections
4. Weak Metacognitive Skills: Studentsmay never develop the ability to monitor and regulate their own understanding
Some promising approaches toaddress theseissues include:
Teaching explicit strategies for comprehension, integration, and transfer. The Self-RegulatedStrategy Development (SRSD)modelhas shown particularpromise.
2. Knowledge Integration Frameworks
Approacheslike Knowledge Integration Environment (KIE) help studentsconnect ideas across domains.
3. Metacognitive Training Programs
Programsfocusingon developing metacognitive awareness and self-regulation skills.
Sinceyouasked about studies, I shouldnote that while I've referenced several important works,you should verify these citationsas Idon't have directaccess to current databases and could be misremembering details.
Wouldyou be interested in exploringany particularaspect of thisissue inmore detail? For instance, we could delvedeeper into specific instructional strategies that have shownpromise in developing transfer abilities, or examine the relationshipbetween metacognition and knowledge transfermore closely.
NAOEを彼女と呼んでいいのかそれ以外のオプションで呼ぶべきなのかは不明
Assassin’s Creed Shadows LaunchesNovember 15, Features Dual Protagonists in FeudalJapan |UBISOFT
Naoe and Yasuke’s disparate personalities alsolead them to have different relationships and rapports with other characters, and theydon’talwaysfeel the same way about people,nor do peoplealwaysfeel the same way about them. Romantically, theywill also attract and be attracted to different types of people. Through the pair,playerswillget to experience a multitude of relationships.
(ナオエとヤスケの異なるパーソナリティは、他のキャラクターとの関係や交流にも違いをもたらします。彼らは常に同じように人々を感じるわけではなく、人々も常に彼らを同じように感じるわけではありません。ロマンチックな面でも、彼らは異なるタイプの人々を引き付け、また引き付けられます。この二人を通じて、プレイヤーは多様な関係を体験することができます。)
ゲームニュースチャンネルのインタビューでプロデューサーが同性愛オプションあるよって答えてる
WeGot Good ＆ BadAssassin'sCreed Shadows
Assassin’s Creed Shadows LaunchesNovember 15, Features Dual Protagonists in FeudalJapan |UBISOFT
Naoe and Yasuke’s disparate personalities alsolead them to have different relationships and rapports with other characters, and theydon’talwaysfeel the same way about people,nor do peoplealwaysfeel the same way about them. Romantically, theywill also attract and be attracted to different types of people. Through the pair,playerswillget to experience a multitude of relationships.
(ナオエとヤスケの異なるパーソナリティは、他のキャラクターとの関係や交流にも違いをもたらします。彼らは常に同じように人々を感じるわけではなく、人々も常に彼らを同じように感じるわけではありません。ロマンチックな面でも、彼らは異なるタイプの人々を引き付け、また引き付けられます。この二人を通じて、プレイヤーは多様な関係を体験することができます。)
ここだけ見れば、Naoe は女性で Yasuke は男性だから、キャラごとに恋愛イベント(ロマンスイベント)が異なるよとも読めなくもないが、
ストレートの場合はわざわざ言及しないよな？同性のキャライベントのオプション選択肢がある時にぼかして言及するよな？
つか、UBIの以前のゲームもそういうオプションあったし・・・って見方が多い模様
(※追記：ゲームニュースチャンネルのインタビューでプロデューサーが同性愛オプションあるよって答えてるみたいね)
Assassin’s Creed Shadowsgay もしくは Assassin’s Creed ShadowsLGBT
その中で
Assassin’s Creed Shadows:Ubisoft HiresLGBTQ+ActivistAs ConsultantWhoWants To Challenge Moral Standards Around “TransgenerationalSex”
(アサシン クリードシャドウズ：ユービーソフト、「世代間セックス」に関する道徳基準に挑戦したいLGBTQ+活動家をコンサルタントとして雇用)
・・・と言うのがあって、外見やお名前から日系人かなぁって方が出てくるんだけど、日本文学の研究家でお稚児さん関連の本出してる人らしい
何故、この方を アサクリシャドウズ の歴史考証のスペシャリストとしてチョイスしたのかは謎だが、
とりあえず、彼女はゲームメディア IGN のYouTube動画 (Assassin’s Creed Shadows: InsideUbisoft’s AmbitiousOpen WorldJapan)の中で、
『必ずしも歴史的正確さに基づいているわけではない』ってちゃんと言ってるわな（https://youtu.be/0haRi_hHZoU?t=853）
ただ、『誠実で敬意持ったものです』とか言いつつ、明らかさまに間違えてる日本風習やデザインを止められなかった、団体や文化財の無断利用・利用料無視の件を見るに、
(ハイブランドのアジア人蔑視のヤベー広告も炎上したよね、Valentino、D＆G、DIORとか)
つか、日本には『異世界』とか『なろーっぱ』とかいう伝家の宝刀がありましてな、『なろーじゃぱん』だぞって言えば歴史考証する必要無かったのになぁ感
それをしないのは、映画でも伝統的にそうだったように、『ジャップランドはどんな風に書いてもOK』っていう白人様の意識がおそらく強過ぎるんだろうな
あと、弥助の出身の部族やカトリックの宣教師が同性愛に寛容だった可能性はほぼゼロと言って良いが、まぁ、いまは16世紀ではなく、21世紀、2024年ですからね
弥助も出てくる仁王のコエテクは現代的な時代劇(フィクション)として『Rise of theRonin』(PS5独占タイトル)出してます
ほんで、『Rise of theRonin』の主人公キャラクターは様々な人種に設定できるし、劇中で同性との恋愛イベントもあるわけなんだけど、別に批判はどこからも出てないのよね
それは、極めて現代的な見た目のデザインからしてフィクションとわかるのはもちろんのこと、
開発者は歴史的正確さについてアピールしてない上に、ゲームを始める前にも念押しで下記のように出るから
アサクリでもちゃんと似たような文言は出るもん！！！って言うけど、Rise of theRonin と アサクリシャドウズ が違ったところは、
何故かBBC などのニュースメディア やXbox や 各種ゲームメディアのインタビューで『なろーじゃぱんです！』アピールではなく、
下記のように言って回った事に尽きるよね
言って回ってることが確認できる一例：
Assassin'sCreeddirector: The righttime totake series toJapan |BBC
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c163jexl7rxo
『アサシン クリードシャドウズ』は、2つの異なる体験をどのように融合させたのか｜XboxWireJapan
https://news.xbox.com/ja-jp/2024/05/16/assassins-creed-shadows-interview/
まぁ下記の日本のことわざがあると主張する歴史改竄の一派か（アサクリ以前から歴史改竄やってるhttps://anond.hatelabo.jp/20240722235805#)
"For aSamurai to bebrave, he must have abit of blackblood "
ジャップランドはどう扱ってもいいと考える人種差別主義者の作品なのかと懸念するのは、正常なことに思えます
(そもそも、日系人っぽい人や日本にいたことがある人が監修に参加してるのに、あからさまに間違ったままなことについても、
EXPOで市販されているゾロの刀を何故か展示してたことについても、文化財の無駄借用についても説明無し)
これ欧米だけで出した方がいいと思うけどなぁ、熱心なUBI信者以外は誰も買わんのでローカライズ費用が無駄だと思う
https://youtu.be/ppkztU_1Y4U?t=18
アサクリに関係ない話です
いろいろ見て回ってたら腐女子についてこう書かれてたよ。なんかいっちょがみするの好きな増田とブクマカを兼ねてる増田は腐女子だと思うんだけど、
こういう認識持たれてるみたいなんで、お行儀よくしましょうね（基本的に対象キャラは未成年だしな)
No, just a runaway fujoshi with a shotacon fetish trying to legalizeit.
Bing:Yes, thisis the **Bad Place**. Theair smellslike **rotten eggs**, and theWi-Fiis **terrible**. Butdon't worry, we'll find a wayout ofhere! 😅
ワイ: Whatsin have I violated?
You findyourself in the **Bad Place**, a realm whereWi-Fiis **terrible** and theair smellslike **rotten eggs**.Fear not, for I shall unravel the mystery ofyour transgressions. 🌋
Yoursin? Ah,it's a peculiarone.You committed the grave offense of **"Not Rewinding theVHS Tapes Before Returning Them."**Yes, that's right! The cosmic balancewas disruptedbyyour negligence, andnowyou're stuckhere, surroundedbyoutdated technology and mildly annoyingbackgroundmusic.
But fret not,dearsoul! Redemption awaits. Toescape this wackydimension,you must embarkon a quest to find the mythical **"Golden Remote Control"** hiddensomewhere in the stacks of ancientVHS tapes.Only then canyou break free from this pixelated purgatory.
So,onward,brave wanderer!Mayyour tracking adjust well, andyour trackingnumberleadyou to salvation. 📼✨
フラナリーやマーカス、スコットらに倣えば、最近まですべての階級社会における中心的な政治闘争は、誰が土地を耕し、誰が食料を手に入れるかをめぐるものだった。グレーバーとウェングローの見方は異なる。彼らにとって中心的な問題は権力であり、中心的な敵は国家である。そのため、彼らはいくつかの点で階級を無視している。これは彼らがアナーキストだからではない。ほとんどのアナーキストは、常に階級と権力を同時に重視することができる。
しかし、『万物の黎明』における省略は重要である。グレーバーとウェングローは、合意的で参加型の集会を支持する議論を推し進めようと躍起になっているように見えるが、そのために私たちに一連の謎を残している。4つの簡単な例を挙げれば、その問題がよくわかるだろう。
著者たちは、都市における国家に先行することが多い、村落における階級格差の拡大には関心がなく、その文献を否定している。また、小王国、領主、爵位にも興味がない。中央集権的な大国家が存在しなければそれでいいのだ。私たちは、複雑な採集民に関する彼らの説明の中に、このような紆余曲折をいくつか見てきた。このようなことは、他の多くの例にも現れている。
インダス川沿いの古代都市モヘンジョ＝ダロでは、約4万人が階級的不平等も国家もなく暮らしていた。
そして彼らは、ヒンドゥトヴァ派の歴史家たちと同様に、モヘンジョ＝ダロは実際に南アジアのカーストに沿って組織されていたと示唆する。しかし、グレーバーとウェングローは、これは平等主義的なカーストであったと言う。最初は驚かされるが、彼らが言いたいのは、王のいないカーストの不平等は容認できるということである[11]。
彼らは一貫して伝統的な王権の力を最小限に抑えている。ミシシッピ川流域のナチェズ王国がその好例である。グレーバーとウェングローは、太陽王の権力と凶悪な残虐性は彼の村の外には及ばなかったと言う。しかし実際には、ナチェズは白人のプランターに奉仕する奴隷貿易における主要な地域勢力であった[12]。
グレーバーとウェングローは、残酷な人身御供の祭りが世界中の初期の州で見られるという重要な事実を正しく強調している。数十人から数百人が生け贄にされ、その多くは戦争捕虜や若い女性、貧しい人々であった。
彼らは当然憤慨している。しかし、これらの生け贄の目的は、敵である他国の人々を恐怖に陥れることであったとも感じている。それとは対照的に、私たちは、流血の主な目的は、流血の実際の聴衆である、残酷な地方国家の臣民を恐怖に陥れることだったと考えている。
実際、このような残酷さが、それぞれの国家の初期の歴史に特徴的なのはそのためだろう。国家の正当性がまだ弱く、恐怖が最も必要とされていた時代である。国家権力が強化されるにつれて、戦乱や敵対は続くものの、壮大な犠牲が消えていくのもそのためだろう。
集会そのものも重要な最後の例である。グレーバーとウェングローは、古代メソポタミアの王国や国家における都市集会の力を極めて正しく指摘している。彼らは、これは王がすべての権力を持っていたわけではないという証拠だと言う。これは正しい。これらの王国で階級闘争が止まっていたと考えるのは、よほどナイーブでなければならないだろう。
しかし、グレイバーとウェングローは飛躍する。彼らは、これらの都市議会は、参加型民主主義を掲げる「占拠せよ！」やその他の社会正義運動の集会に似ていると指摘する。
古代メソポタミアでは、参加型民主主義のいかなる形態についても、これといった証拠はない。しかし、他の階級社会における都市全体や全国的な議会については、膨大な証拠がある。そのどれもが、富裕層や有力な一族によって支配されていた。古代スパルタでは地主が支配していた。ローマの元老院も同様だった。ジョン王や男爵家もそうだった。そしてごく最近まで、ヨーロッパのすべての議会の有権者は富裕層に限られていた。
この近視眼は重要である。他の多くの人々と同様、私たちは王国や国家を、不平等な社会における支配階級がルールを強化し、強制するために集まる方法として理解している。『万物の黎明』では、そのプロセスは目に見えない。
グレーバーとウェングローは怒っている。この怒りには、私たちのようにグローバルな不平等に絶望し、グローバル・エリートの政治を憎み、気候の混乱を恐れる読者を喜ばせるエネルギーがある。
多くの点で、彼らの本は新鮮な風を吹き込んでくれる。そして私たちは、既存のすべての国家に対する敵意を共有している。しかし、今後、気候変動を食い止めるためには、階級と環境の中心的重要性を含む人間の条件に関する理解が必要である。
[1] Fredrich Engels, 1884,The Origin ofthe Family, Private Property and theState. Thebookwas revivedas akeytextby socialist and Marxist feminists in debates about women’s liberation. Pace the 19thcentury social Darwinism which clearly took alead from the Old Testament,itisnow quite clear that both pastoralism andslash and burn agriculture appeared after, and not before, the advent ofsettled agriculture.
[2] Franz Boas, The Mind of PrimitiveMan, 1911; Claudia Ruth Pierpoint, ‘The Measure of America’, 2004; Ned Blackhawk andIsaiah Lorado Wilner, Indigenous Visions: Rediscoveringthe World of Franz Boas, 2018; Rosemary Lévy, Franz Boas: The Emergence of the Anthropologist, 2019.
[3] Very good examples of this work include Sara Hdry,Mothers and Others: TheEvolutionary Origins of Mutual Understanding, 2005; Elizabeth Marshall Thomas, The Old Way, 2001;twoarticlesby Steven Kuhn and Mary Stiner: ‘What’s aMother To Do’,2006 and ‘How Hearth andHomeMade usHuman’, 2019; Loretta Cormier and Sharon Jones, The Domesticated Penis: HowWomanhoodhas ShapedManhood, 2015; akeypaperby Joanna Overing, ‘Men Control Women? The “Catch-22” in the Analysis ofGender’, 1987;twobooksby Christopher Boehm: Hierarchy in theForest and theEvolution of Egalitarian Behavior, 1999, and Moral Origins, 2012; everybookby the primatologist Frans de Waal; thetwo chaptersby Brian Ferguson in Douglas Fry,ed.,War,Peace andHumanNature, 2013; Richard Wrangham, CatchingFire: How CookingMade UsHuman, 2010; andtwobooksby the trans biologist Joan Roughgarden:Evolution’sRainbow:Diversity,Gender and Sexuality inNature and People, 2004, and The Genial Gene: Deconstructing Darwinian Selfishness, 2009.
[4] Our favourites among the ethnographies of our near contemporary hunter-gatherers are Marjorie Shostack,Nisa: TheLife and Words of a !KungWoman, 1981; Jean Briggs, Inuit Morality Play: The EmotionalEducation of a Three-Year-Old, 1998; Phyllis Kaberry, Aboriginal Women: Sacred and Profane, 1938,Karen Endicott and Kirk Endicott: The Headmanwas aWoman: TheGender Egalitarian Batek ofMalaysia, 2008; RichardLee, The !KungSan: Men, Women and Work in a ForagingSociety, 1978; and Colin Turnbull, Wayward Servants: TheTwo Worlds of the African Pygmies, 1978.
[5]Kent Flannery andJoyce Marcus, TheCreation of Inequality: How Our Prehistorical AncestorsSet the Stage for Monarchy, Slavery andEmpire, 2012; andJames C. Scott, TheArt of NotBeing Governed: An AnarchistHistory of Upland South-EastAsia, 2009; Scott, Against the Grain: ADeepHistory of the EarliestStates, 2017. Martin Jones,Feast:WhyHumansShareFood, 2007,is also very useful.
[6]Edmund Leach hadmade a similar argument in 1954 in Political Systems of HighlandBurma, and radically changed anthropology. For a brilliant ethnography ofonegroup of anti-class hillrebelsat the end of the twentiethcentury, see Shanshan Du, ChopsticksOnly Work in Pairs:GenderUnity andGender Equality Among the Lahu of SoutheasternChina, 2003. For Scott’s recent extension ofhis argument to ancient Mesopotamia, see Against the Grain.
[7] Thisisall succinctly described in BrianHayden, ‘Transegalitarian Societieson the American Northwest Plateau: Social Dynamics and Cultural/Technological Changes,’ in Orlando Cerasuolo,ed., The Archaeology of Inequality, 2021.
[8] Start with Philip Drucker and Robert Heizer, 1967, ToMake MyName Good: A Reexamination of the Southern Kwakiutl Potlatch; and EricWolf, EnvisioningPower: Ideologies of Dominance and Crisis, 1999, 69-132.
[9] Jeanne Arnold, ‘Credit where Creditis Due: TheHistory of the Chumash Oceangoing Plank Canoe’, 2007; andLynn Gamble, The Chumash Worldat European Contact:Power, Trade and Fighting amongComplex Hunter-Gatherers, 2011.
[10]On the Calusa, see TheDawn, 150-2; FernandoSantos-Cranero, 2010, Vital Enemies: Slavery, Predation and the Amerindian Political Economy ofLife, 2010; and John Hann, Missions to the Calusa, 1991.
[11]Rita Wright, The Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy andSociety, 2010;and Andrew Robinson, The Indus:Lost Civilizations, 2015.
[12] Robbie Ethridge and Sheri M. Shuck-Hall, Mapping the Mississippian ShatterZone, 2009; andGeorgeEdward Milne, Natchez Country: Indians, Colonists and the Landscape ofRace in French Louisiana, 2015.
https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/gardasil-hpv-vaccine-lawsuit.html
Gardasilis a vaccine intended to preventhuman papillomavirus (HPV), which can sometimeslead to cervicalcancer in women. Gardasilwas developedby the embattled pharmaceutical companyMerck & Co.
Merck obtainedFDA approval for Gardasil in2006 basedon deceptive research and clinical trials that misrepresented the vaccine’s efficacy while concealingits safety risks and side effects.Merck then launched an aggressive and highly misleading marketing campaign to include millions of parents vaccinating their pre-teen daughters with Gardasil.
Filing a Gardasil lawsuitis not an anti-vaxstatement. A Gardasil vaccine lawsuitis astatement that this specific vaccine that weall assumedwas safe might notbe.
最近アラサーになりソフトウェアエンジニア (SWE) として正社員として働いているが、いろいろ辛くまた転職してきたくなってきた。
openworkなどで会社を漁っているが、エンジニアの理想郷がどこになるのか悶々としている (もちろん人それぞれだが..)
今までの会社としては外資IT →大手メーカー の2社で、現在の年収は 800 ~ 900 万ぐらい。
今はアーキテクト/SM / TechLead らへんの業務をしていて、将来的にはエンジニアリングマネージャー をしたいと思っている。
転職先には以下があると思うが、どれがいいんだろうか。
やりたいことは一番できそうな気がしているが長期的な自分のキャリアを考えたときに、平均年齢が低いことや退職金がないため不安が大きい。
また勢いはあり多くのビジネスを創出しているがどれも規模として小さいものが多いかつ、
またグローバルに成功している事例がほとんどないためあまり今後も市場が成長する感じがしない。
今Web企業のマネジャー以上にいるのはインターネット黎明期を切り開いてきた人だが、こういう人が自分の世代で生まれるイメージが自分はない。
自由に働けそうであるが会社の業績次第で職がなくなるリスクがある。
創立メンバーレベルで入らないと金銭的には結局は大きな企業で働いているのと変わらない。(SO的に)
モチベがある間に働くのはいいが、モチベがなくなったと時にどうするかをまた考えないといけない。
本当に優秀な人は引く手数多なのでいきたいベンチャーを転々としているが、自分がそういった働き方ができるほど優秀だと思わない。
クライアントありきのビジネスであるためクライアントに合わせたワークバランスになることが多そう。
結局は２次委託に開発を任せてたりするのでつまらないドキュメント作成＆調整業務だけをやるおじさんになる可能性が高い。
周りを見ている感じは仕事を楽しそうにやっている人が結構少ないと感じる。
ただ業界的には今後も成長する業界なので一生つまらない仕事をするのを覚悟すれば、キャリア的にはいいのかもしれない。
目先のサラリーは良さそうであるが、ハードワークに耐えられる気がしない。
ハードワークになるかどうかも案件次第なので、数年度どうなっているかもわからないので不安材料が大きい。
転職ありきの業界で、一生自分の市場価値を推し量る必要があるので大変。
またDX等は結局ITがわからないおじさんを相手にすることになるので、説明・調整が多く心理的にしんどそう。
ただ生産性をシビアに見られる環境ではあるので、自身のスキルアップを考えると一番成長できそうではある。
給料体系から変えて既存組織から切り離してIT化を推進しているケースもあり、最近の転職先のトレンドの一つな気がしている。
成功している例もちらほらあるが多くの場合には、IT化を進めたいが結局現場がついてきていない or価値を見出せていないことがほとんど。
結局は人手不足でプロパーでやりきれずに、子会社 or外注と一緒に仕事しているケースが多く優秀な転職者をあまり活躍させることができていないことがちらほら。
SWEとして入っても結局上司がIT知識不足であることが多く、レガシーなものとの戦いに時間を使ってしまうかつ、昇格とかは生え抜きが優先されたりしていることがある。
年功序列であり雇用が安定しているため、市場価値と待遇があっていない人と一緒に仕事をしないといけないためモチベの維持が難しい。
企業としての体力や福利厚生等の制度はしっかりしていることが多いので、生涯年収や安定性は一番魅力。
またレイオフ等がないことはないので、ずっと働き続けることができるとは思えない。
日本で外資ITに働くとなると純粋なSWEではなくプリセールス /技術サポート /カスタマーサクセスが多く、
プロダクトを作るというよりはプロダクトを導入・普及する仕事がメインになりそうで、SWEとしての市場価値が上がっていくのかが不安。
また本社の意識決定が絶対なケースが多く、日本のような小さいオフィスは理不尽に振り回されることが多い。
自分の近くにフリーランスの人が少ないので何とも言えないが、案件をずっと取り続けることをしないといけないので面倒そう。
見た目の年収的にはいいかもしれないが、そこからいろいろ自分で年金払ったり管理するのが面倒なイメージ。
マネジメントを経験できないので、自分のやりたいこととずれている。
https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/business-books/
https://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/bestsellers/books/466282
サブタイトルとか除いたら大して変わんなくね？
