3 ms·

- Charisma is a useful thing. It can be developed. - If you haven't already, read more about Aaron Swartz. He was good or became good at persuasion. - If you

by csa 10y ago

- Charisma is a useful thing. It can be developed. - If you haven't already, read more about Aaron Swartz. He was good or became good at persuasion. - If you are "on your own", then you might just be wrong-minded or maybe just a poor communicator. The scope of what is possible on a figurative island is really small (in most fields) compared to what can be done by a group/team. Persuasion, communication, and leadership are high value-add skills. It might be prudent to learn about them and practice them. - Ambitious projects are fine. Needing to develop skills is fine. Focus on taking small steps that you can actually take and succeed in to show that you are moving in an interesting direction. Read the PG essay "startup = growth, specifically the section on compass. He talks about hill climbing and local maxima in an interesting way. Work your way up the hill of good ideas gradually -- don't try to take a helicopter to the summit. - I don't know what space you're working in, but there are almost always small neglected spaces in the sciences that will welcome a young no-name to do meaningful gruntwork that no grant-writing professional scientist can afford to do. Do this work, embrace it, and publish it. You will be loved.

wolfgke 10y ago
> If you are "on your own", then you might just be wrong-minded or maybe just a poor communicator. I would not consider myself as not a poor communicator per se - people say my slide presentations are really great. It's rather that I really don't understand how other people work. > Persuasion, communication, and leadership are high value-add skills. It might be prudent to learn about them and practice them. I surely already read a lot more on this topic than most "good leaders" have. Of no avail (?). I try to convince people all the time to join my projects - of no avail. People tell me the way to get better in leadership, communication, ... is tro practise more (IMHO a rather outlandish advice). I try it all the time - of no avail. I often cannot even imagine how other people think (and I am not able to reverse engineer based on their behavior what their inner thoughts might be). I typically have to go completely against my feelings and gut insticts when talking about or understanding feeling. But treating other people how I want to be treated is often a recipe for doom. > I don't know what space you're working in, but there are almost always small neglected spaces in the sciences that will welcome a young no-name to do meaningful gruntwork that no grant-writing professional scientist can afford to do. Do this work, embrace it, and publish it. You will be loved. I already do this in some sense (doing PhD on some very theoretical questions in some area of applied mathematics that few people on the world actually care about - still the questions are very exciting :-) ). The problem is that I have good reasons to believe that my days in science are numbered - and in the meantime I tend to believe that this might actually not be the worst thing, since how science is organized is IMHO broken in far too many ways and I believe I have found a potential secret emergency exit where I might work afterwards.

by csa 10y ago

wolfgke 10y ago

> If you are "on your own", then you might just be wrong-minded or maybe just a poor communicator. I would not consider myself as not a poor communicator per se - people say my slide presentations are really great. It's rather that I really don't understand how other people work. > Persuasion, communication, and leadership are high value-add skills. It might be prudent to learn about them and practice them. I surely already read a lot more on this topic than most "good leaders" have. Of no avail (?). I try to convince people all the time to join my projects - of no avail. People tell me the way to get better in leadership, communication, ... is tro practise more (IMHO a rather outlandish advice). I try it all the time - of no avail. I often cannot even imagine how other people think (and I am not able to reverse engineer based on their behavior what their inner thoughts might be). I typically have to go completely against my feelings and gut insticts when talking about or understanding feeling. But treating other people how I want to be treated is often a recipe for doom. > I don't know what space you're working in, but there are almost always small neglected spaces in the sciences that will welcome a young no-name to do meaningful gruntwork that no grant-writing professional scientist can afford to do. Do this work, embrace it, and publish it. You will be loved. I already do this in some sense (doing PhD on some very theoretical questions in some area of applied mathematics that few people on the world actually care about - still the questions are very exciting :-) ). The problem is that I have good reasons to believe that my days in science are numbered - and in the meantime I tend to believe that this might actually not be the worst thing, since how science is organized is IMHO broken in far too many ways and I believe I have found a potential secret emergency exit where I might work afterwards.