> Or maybe it’s that “good advice” itself is fuzzy. It depends entirely on the person receiving it.
Slate Star Codex agrees https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/24/should-you-reverse-any...
> The biggest gains come from combining disciplines.
Someone else said it's a good trick to be good at two things, because there are N things but there are N-squared pairs of things, so it allows you to specialize in a smaller niche without spending a lot of effort on gaining new skills. Can't remember who.
Sometimes advice is like this:
In Zion National Park, there's a hike called Angel's Landing. You wind up going along a ridge, with a dropoff of 1000 feet on one side, and a dropoff of 500 feet on the other side. And the ridge isn't very wide - sometimes only a couple of feet.
Mistakes in life often come in pairs. "Don't fall off that cliff!" That's good advice. But the problem is, there's more than one cliff. And if you move too far away from the cliff you're worried about, you may fall off the other cliff.
And the biggest danger is that we come in with our own bent, our own bias. Therefore the advice that most resonates with us may not be the advice that we actually need.
Which like, if only there was a computer program slurping up my entire digital footprint and could give me the advice I actually need and not just what I want. Hmm...
That is an excellent metaphor, thank you for sharing.
It's Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert
https://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/07/car...