distraction Apple 'Distraction Control' Tool May Block Ads By www.infopackets.com Published On :: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 16:31:09 +0000 iPhones and iPads could soon let users permanently hide parts of web pages including pop-up windows. The move has proven controversial with suggestions it could also be used as an ad-blocker. The new feature is called Distraction Control and is in the development beta stages (i.e. test version) of the Safari web browser in the upcoming iOS 18 update. It also appears to be on the way in Safari for Mac computers. The feature lets users tap a page menu button marked "Hide Distracting Items". That will bring up a list of elements on a web page such as pop-up windows, autoplay videos and banners ... (view more) Full Article
distraction Top 10 Driving Distractions: What to Avoid to Stay Safe By ccm.net Published On :: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:00:17 +0100 These are some of the most dangerous things that you can do whilst driving, and why you should avoid them. Full Article
distraction Distractions By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2014-05-11T19:20:44+00:00 In her talk to St. Anthony's in Bergenfield, NJ, Frederica addresses the problem of distractions while praying. Full Article
distraction Passions for Distractions By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2016-11-30T12:42:11+00:00 Jesus tells the parable about a man who is doing so well, he has to tear down his old barns to build bigger barns. And God confronts him with his mortality! This is the only way to avoid the Passions for Distractions! Full Article
distraction St. Paisios and Salvation from Distraction (Sermon July 12, 2015) By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2015-09-15T18:17:11+00:00 On the occasion of the first feast of the newly-canonized St. Paisios the Athonite, Fr. Andrew discusses the saint's advice on praying free of distractions. Full Article
distraction This Present Moment: Practicing Orthodox Spirituality in an Age of Distraction - Introduction By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2019-06-04T16:43:30+00:00 Dn. Michael Hyatt returns to his Sunday school class and begins teaching through Time and Despondency: Regaining the Present in Faith and Life.. Full Article
distraction Protected From Distraction By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2017-10-22T20:43:14+00:00 Full Article
distraction Our Distractions Determine Our Lives By www.ancientfaith.com Published On :: 2022-05-18T01:55:25+00:00 Dr. Albert Rossi reflects the impact that our distracted minds and hearts have on our lives and the lives of others. Full Article
distraction The Worship Podcast (Episode 19): Holy Distractions Batman! - Dustin Smith & James Galbraith By www.allaboutworship.com Published On :: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:42:44 -0500 Today Dustin and James talk about all those pesky little distractions during worship. Is flag waving, pottery and painting true expressions of worship? I mean…really? Can someone be too loud during our praise and worship sets? Are these really distractions to us? Take a listen and let’s find out. ----------------- The Worship Podcast is powered by All About Worship in partnership with WeAreWorship. Subscribe to the podcast: theworshippodcast.com linktr.ee/theworshippodcast You can also connect with The Worship Podcast on social media: The Worship Podcast on Facebook The Worship Podcast on Instagram The Worship Podcast on Twitter Full Article Podcasts
distraction Tips on distraction, seat belts and aggression By www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com Published On :: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 -0400 Keep these tips in mind to stay safe when driving. Full Article
distraction Avoid cellphone distractions while driving By www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com Published On :: Sun, 28 Mar 2021 00:00:00 -0400 Transportation-related incidents accounted for 49,430 on-the-job injuries in 2019, according to Injury Facts, a National Safety Council statistics database. One reason for these injuries? Workers who are driving distracted. Full Article
distraction Can a strong ‘working memory’ help prevent on-the-job distraction? By www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com Published On :: Wed, 01 May 2024 00:00:00 -0400 Ann Arbor, MI — “Working memory” may play a key role in helping workers avoid getting distracted, results of a recent University of Michigan and Google study suggest. Full Article
distraction Kenny Chapman: Top distraction traps holding you back By www.pmmag.com Published On :: Tue, 07 Jun 2022 00:00:00 -0400 From being able to get things done to staying on track, distractions can sabotage productivity in ways that we don’t even realize. Full Article
distraction Eliminating workplace distractions with Joe Boyle, CEO of TRUCE By www.ishn.com Published On :: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 00:00:00 -0500 ISHN Magazine sat down with Joe Boyle, CEO of TRUCE, to discuss strategies for eliminating workplace distractions. The following are excerpts from that conversation. Full Article
distraction Healthy Workspaces Minimize Noisy Distractions By www.facilitiesnet.com Published On :: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:00:00 CST Full Article
distraction “Distraction,” Simplicity, and Running Toward Shitstorms By www.43folders.com Published On :: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 23:49:56 +0000 It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience. —Albert Einstein, “On the Method of Theoretical Physics” (1934) Context: Last week, I pinched off one of my typically woolly emails in response to an acquaintance whom I admire. He’s a swell guy who makes things I love, and he'd written, in part, to express concern that my recent Swift impersonation had been directed explicitly at something he'd made. Which, of course, it hadn’t—but which, as I'll try to discuss here, strikes me as irrelevant. To paraphrase Bogie, I played it for him, so now I suppose I might as well play it for you. (n.b.: Excerpted, redacted, munged, and heavily expanded from my original email) There are at least a couple things that mean a lot to me that I'm still just not very good at. Make nuanced points in whatever way they need to be made; even if that ends up seeming “un-nuanced” Never explain yourself. I want to break both these self-imposed rules privately with you here. [Editor’s Note: Um.] Because, I hope to nuance the shit out of some fairly un-nuanced points. And, to do that, I'll also (reluctantly) need to explain myself. But, here goes. First [regarding my goofing on “distraction-free writing environments”] I think there are some GIANT distinctions at play here that a lot of folks may not find nearly as obvious as I do: Tool Mastery vs. Productivity Pr0n – Finding and learning the right tools for your work vs solely dicking around with the options for those tools is just so important, but also so different. And, admittedly, it’s almost impossible to contrast those differences in terms of hard & fast rules that could be true for all people in all situations. But, that doesn’t make the difference any less qualitatively special or real. Similarly… Self-Help Vs. “Self”–“Help” – Solving the problem that caused the problem that caused the problem that caused the symptom we eventually noticed. Huge. Arguably, peerless. Viz.: How many of us ignore the actual cause of our problem in favor of just reading dozens of blog posts about how to “turbocharge” its most superficial symptoms? Sick. Focus & Play – Yes, focusing on important work is, as Ford used to say, Job 1. But, that focus benefits when we maintain the durable and unapologetic sense of play that affords true creativity and fosters an emergence of context and connection that’s usually killed by stress. BUT. Again, what conceivable “rule” could ever serve to immutably declare that “THIS goofing-off is critical for hippocampal plasticity” vs. “THAT goofing-off is just dumb, distracting bullshit?” Impossible. Because drawing those kinds of distinctions is one of our most important day-to-day responsibilities. Decisions are hard, and there’s no app or alarm gadget that can change that. Although, they certainly can help mask the depth of the underlying problem that made them seem so—what’s the parlance?—“indispensable”. Think: Elmo Band-Aids for that unsightly pancreatic tumor. Reducing Distraction through Care (Rather than braces, armatures, and puppet strings). Removing interruptions and external distractions that harm your work or life? Great. Counting on your distraction-removal tool to supplement your non-existent motivation to do work that will never get done anyway? Pathetic. Frankly, this is a big reason I'm so galled when anyone touts their tool/product/service as being the poor, misunderstood artist’s new miracle medicine—rather than just admitting they've made a slightly different spoon. Because, let’s be honest: although most of us have plenty of perfectly serviceable spoons, everybody knows collecting cutlery is way more fun than using it to swallow yucky medicine. Using a System Vs. Becoming a System. Having a system or process for getting work done vs. making the iteration of that system or process a replacement for the work. This is just…wow…big. But, maybe most importantly to me… Embracing the Impossibles. Getting past these or any other intellectual koans by simply accepting life’s innumerable and unresolvable paradoxes, hypocrisies, and impossibilities as God-given gifts of creative constraint. Rather than, say, a mimeographed page of long division problems that must be solved for a whole number, n. I just can’t ever get away from this one. For me, it’s what everything inevitably comes back to. The very definition of our jobs is to solve the right problem at the right level for the right reason—based on a combination of the best info we have for now and a clear-eyed dedication to never pushing an unnecessary rock up an avoidable hill. YET, we keep force-feeding the monster that tells us to fiddle and fart and blame the Big Cruel World whenever we face work that might threaten our fragile personal mythology. “Sigh. I wish I could finally start writing My Novel….Ooooooh, if only I had a slightly nicer pen…and Zeus loved me more….” All that stuff? That there’s a complex set of ideas to talk about for many complex reasons—not least of which being how many people either despise or (try to) deny the unavoidable impact of ol' number six. But, here’s the thing: as much as saying so pisses anybody off, I think the topics we're NOT talking about whenever we disappear into Talmudic scholarship about “full-screen mode” or “minimalist desks” or whatever constitutes a “zen habit”—those shunned topics are precisely the things that I believe are most mind-blowingly critical to our real-world happiness as humans. In fact, I believe that to such a degree that helping provide a voice for those unpopular topics that can be heard over the din is now (what passes for) my career. I really believe these deeper ideas are worth socializing on any number of levels and in many media. Even when it’s inconvenient and slightly disrespectful of someone’s business model. So, that’s what I try to do. I talk about these things. Seldom by careful design. Often poorly. But, always because they each mean an awful lot to me. […] But, no matter how I end up saying whatever the hell I say, I believe in saying it not simply to be liked or followed or revered as a “nice guy” who pushes out shit-tons of whatever to “help people.” Because, believe me, friend, a great many of those apparently “nice guys” swarming around the web “helping people” these days are ass-fucking their audience for nickels and calling it a complimentary colonoscopy. And, while I absolutely think that in itself is empirically wrong, I also think it’s just as important to say that it’s wrong. Sometimes, True Things need to be said. Which in this instance amounts to saying, a) selling people a prettier way to kinda almost but not really write is not, in the canonical sense, “nice”—but, far worse, b) leaving your starry-eyed customers with the nauseatingly misguided impression that their “distraction” originates from anyplace but their own busted-ass brain is really not “helping.” Not on any level. It is, literally, harmful. “Helping” a junkie become more efficient at keeping his syringe loaded is hardly “nice.” It’s the opposite of nice. And, it’s the opposite of helpful. These are my True Things. And, to me, saying your True Things also means not watering down the message you care about in order to render it incapable of even conceivably hurting someone’s feelings—or of even conceivably losing you even one teeny-tiny slice of that precious “market share.” Well, that’s the price, and I'm fine paying it—best money I've ever spent. But, it also means trusting your audience by letting each of them decide to add water only as they choose to—by never corrupting the actual concentrate in a way that might make it less useful to the smartest or most eager 5% of people who'd like to try using it undiluted. Because, at that point, you're not only abandoning the coolest people you have the honor of serving—you risk becoming a charlatan. And, that’s precisely what you become when you start to iteratively inbreed the kind of fucktard audience for whom daily buffets of weak swill and beige assurance are life’s most gratifying reward. Sure. Those poor bastards may never end up using any of that watery information to do anything more ambitious than turbocharging their most regrettable symptoms. But, who’s the last person in the universe who’s going to grab them by the ears and tell them to get back to work? Exactly—that same “nice guy” whose livelihood now depends on keeping infantalized strangers addicted to his “help.” Holy shit—no way could I ever live with that. It’s so wrong, it’s not even right. ESC, ESC, ESC! […] Okay. So anyhow, there’s a really long-winded, overly generous, and extremely pompous way of trying to say I don’t know how to do what I do except how I do it. But, I do genuinely feel awful when innocent people feel they have been publicly humiliated or berated simply because I'm some dick who hates people. Which has to be my favorite irony of all. When I was a kid, I thought my Mom was “mean” not to let me play in traffic on busy Galbraith Road. Today, I'm not simply grateful that she had the strength and resolve to be so “mean”—I actually can’t imagine how sad it would be to not have people in your life who care enough about your long-term welfare to tell you to stop fucking around in traffic. To where you eventually might start even seeking 12x-daily safety hacks from some of the very same drivers whose recklessness may eventually kill you. Wow. […] Admitting when life is complicated or things aren’t shiny and happy all the time strikes me as a wonderfully sane and adult way to conduct one’s life. That there are so many folks offended by even the existence of this anarchic idea is not a problem I can solve. No more than I can wish useless email away or pray hard enough that it never rains on anyone’s leaky roof. All out of scope. And, then, I jizzed on at length about how much I admire the recipient’s work. Which I do. Good work doesn’t need a cookie I may admire your work, too. Especially if you care a lot about that work and don’t overly sweat peoples' opinions of it. Most definitely including my own. For these purposes, it doesn’t really matter whether we're friends and, honestly, it doesn’t even matter whether I love, use, or agree with everything you do, say, or make in a given day. It doesn’t matter because good work doesn’t need me to love it. Like tornadoes and cold sores, good work happens with total disregard to whether I'm “into it.” But, conversely, let’s stipulate that the points-of-view undergirding our opinions—again, including mine—will and should survive either agreement or lack of agreement with equivalently effortless ease. Because, like really good work, a really good point-of-view doesn’t require another person’s benediction. Guess we'll have to disagree to agree Now, to be only vaguely clearer here, I'm not posting this circuitous ego dump in the service of altering your opinion of either me, my friend, his work, or practically anything else for that matter. But, I would love it if we could all be more okay with the fact that real life means that we do each have a different, sometimes incongruous, and often totally incompatible point-of-view. Yes. Even you have a point-of-view that someone despises. Ready to change it now? Jesus, I sure hope not. Then, to be only slightly more clear, I'm also not advocating for that fakey brand of web-based kum ba ya that gets trotted out alternately as “tolerance” or “inclusion” or some styrofoam miniature of “civility.” I'm absolutely not against all of those things when authentically practiced, but I'm also really skeptical of the well-branded peacemakers who are forever appointing themselves the Internet’s “Now-Now-Let’s-All-Pretend-We're-Just-Saying-the-Same-Useless-Thing-Here” den mothers. Because we're not all saying the same things. Not at all. And, it infantalizes some important conversations when we tacitly demand that any instance of honest disagreement be immediately horseshat into a photo opp where some thought leader gets to hoist everyone’s hands in the air like he’s fucking Jimmy Carter. Nope. Not saying that. Who will you really rely on? What I AM saying is that alllllll this seemingly unrelated stuff is absolutely related—that the pattern of not relying on other people for anything you really care about is arguably the great-grandaddy of every useful productivity, creativity, or self-help pattern. Where’s this matter? Pretty much everywhere you have any sort of stake: Don’t rely on other people to remove your totally fake “distractions.” Don’t rely on other people to pat your beret, re-tie your cravat, and make you a nice cocoa whenever that mean man on the internet points out that your “distractions” are totally fake. (Which they are) Don’t rely on other people to tell you when or whether you have enough information. Don’t rely on other people to define your job. Don’t rely on other people to “design your lifestyle.” Don’t rely on other people to decide when your opinions are acceptable. Don’t rely on other people to tell you when you're allowed to be awesome. Don’t rely on other people to make you care. Don’t even rely on other people to tell you what you should or shouldn’t rely on. Yes. I went there. Because that’s the point. These hypocrisies, paradoxes, and ambiguities that people get so wound up about—that many of us are constantly (impotently) trying to resolve—cannot be resolved. Because, yeah: all of these harrowingly unsolvable problems are immune to new notebooks and less-distracting applications and shinier systems and “nicer” self-“help” and pretty much anything else that is not, specifically, you walking straight into the angriest and least convenient shitstorm you can find and getting your ass kicked until the storm gets bored with kicking it. Then, you find an even angrier storm. Then, another. And, so on. “Get the fuck off of my obstacle, Private Pyle!” Doing that annoying hard stuff is how you grow, get better, and learn what real help looks like. Even if that’s not the answer you wanted to hear. You get better by getting your ass out of your RSS reader and fucking making things until they suck less. Not by buying apps. You don’t whine about distractions, or derail yourself over needing a nicer pencil sharpener, or aggravate your chronic creative diabetes by starting another desperate waddle to the self-help buffet. No. You work. And, for what it’s worth, just like you can’t get to the moon by eating cheese, you'll also never leave boot camp with your original scrote intact by telling your drill sergeant to try using more honey than vinegar. No. That sergeant’s job is to make you miserable. It’s his job to break down your callow conceits about what’s supposed to be easy and fair. It’s his job to emotionally pummel you into giving up and becoming a Marine. You? You're not there to give the sergeant notes; you're there to sleep two hours a night, then not mind getting beaten for 20 hours until a decent Marine starts to fall out. Who knows? He may even surprise you by introducing a surprisingly effective “distraction-free learning environment.” “Tee ell dee ahr, Professor Brainiac.” Like most humans, I like things I can understand. Like most readers, I love specificity. Like most thinkers, I love clarity. Like most students, I love relevance and practicality. And, like most busy people, believe it or not, I actually do really like it when someone gets straight to the point. But, here’s the problem. If my 2-year-old daughter asks me about time travel, and I blithely announce, “E=mc2”, I will have said something that is entirely specific, clear, relevant, practical, and/or straight-to-the-point. For somebody. But, not so much for my daughter. And, to be honest, not even to any useful degree for me. She'd probably either laugh derisively at me (which she’s great at), or she'd pause and ask, “Whuh dat?” (which she’s even better at). Thing is, her understanding that jumble of characters less than me—and my understanding it WAY less than Professor Al—has zero impact on the profundity, truth, beauty, or impact of the man’s theory. Sure. You could quite accurately fault me for being a smartass and a poseur, and you could even berate my toddler for her unaccountably shallow understanding of Modern Physics. But, in any case, you can’t really blame either Albert or his theory. You're turbocharging nothing Specifically, Albert can’t begin to tell us what he really knows if we don’t understand math. So, let’s say this theory you've been hearing about really interests you. And, let’s also pretend, just for the sake of the analogy, that you haven’t completed Calculus III (212) or Quantum Mechanics (403) or even something as elementary as, say, Advanced Astrophysics II (537). I know you have. Obviously. But, let’s pretend. Where do you start? Well, you could read some tips about learning math. You could find a list of 500 indispensable resources for indispensable math resources. You could buy a new “distraction-free math environment.” Heck, there’s actually nothing to stop you from just declaring yourself a “math expert.” Congratulations, Professor. Thing is: you still don’t know math. Which means you still can’t really understand the theory—no more than a pathetic Liberal Arts refugee like me or a dullard Physics ignoramus like my kid can really grok relativity. Difference is, you will have blown a lot of time hoping that actual expertise follows non-existent effort—while my daughter and I get to remain total novices without charge. Only, we don’t get all mad at the theory as a result; a staggering number of fake math experts do. I mean, be honest—after all that recreational non-work and make-believe dedication almost trying to kinda learn math sorta—you might actually get frustrated at how brazenly Al defies your fondness for shortcuts by continuing to rely on so many terms and proofs and blah-blah-blah that you still just don’t understand. So annoying. You may simply decide that Albert Einstein’s a huge dick for never saying things that can be completely understood solely by scanning a headline. EPIC EINSTEIN FAIL, amirite? You never really know what you didn’t know until you know it But, Al just told the truth. Problem is, Al’s truth not only requires fancy things in order to be truly understood—the more of those fancy things you take away from his truth, the less true it gets. And, by the time it’s been diluted to the point where you're comfortable that you understand it? You'd be understanding the wrong thing. Even I can understand that. But, not one bit of any of this is Al’s fault. Al doesn’t get to control who uses, abuses, gets, or doesn’t get what he said or why it matters. Especially since he’s been dead for over fifty years. All I know is, regardless of who has ears to hear it on a given day, it would be to Al’s credit never to mangle something important in order to get it into terms everybody’s ready to handle without actually trying. And God bless him for never agreeing that your “distractions” to learning math are his problem. So, yeah, if you only need to hand in a crappy 5-page paper, you could certainly Cliff’s Notes your way through Borges, Eliot, or Joyce in an afternoon, and feel like you haven’t missed a thing. Trouble is, if you did care even a little, it’s impossible to even say how much you're missing since you can’t be bothered to soldier through the source text. The text itself is the entire point. Even the wonderfully cogent and readable layman’s explanations Einstein himself provided don’t really get to the nut, the application, and the implications of his real theory. That all takes real math. That “single datum of experience” matters Sometimes, complex or difficult things stop being true when you try to make them too simple. Sometimes, you have to actually get laid to understand why people think sex is such a thing. Sometimes, you need to learn some Greek if you really want to understand The Gospel of John. And, yeah, sometimes, you're going to have to just work unbelievably hard at whatever you claim to care about before anyone can begin to help you get any better—or less “distracted”—at it. The part I really know is what doesn’t work. Reading Penthouse Forum won’t help you CLEP out of Vaginal Intercourse 101. Watching a Rankin-Bass cartoon about the Easter Bunny will teach you very little about the intricacies of transubstantiation. And, if you can’t be troubled to care so much about your work that you reflexively force distractions away, dicking around with yet another writing application will merely aggravate the problem. Ironic, huh? These quantum mechanics of personal productivity are rife with such frustrating “paradoxes.” These are True Things. Achieving expertise and doing creative work is all horribly complicated and difficult and paradoxical and frustrating and recursive and James Joyce-y—and any guide, blog, binary, guru, or “nice guy” that tries to suggest otherwise is probably giving you a complimentary colonoscopy. Do the math. Want a new syllabus? Sure: Run straight into your shitstorm, my friends. Reject the impulse to think about work, rather than finishing it. And, open your heart to the remote possibility that any mythology of personal failure that involves messiahs periodically arriving to make everything “easy” for you might not really be helping your work or your mental health or your long-standing addiction to using tools solely to ship new excuses. Learn your real math, and any slide rule will suffice. Try, make, and do until you quit noticing the tools, and if you still think you need new tools, go try, make, and do more. If you can pull off this deceptively simple and millennia-old pattern, you'll eventually find that—god by dying god—any partial truth that’s supported your treasured excuses for not working will be replaced by a no-faith-required knowledge that you're really, actually, finally getting better at something you care about. Which is just sublimely un-distracting. Dedication This article is dedicated to my friend, Greg Knauss. No, he’s not the app guy–he’s just a good man who does good work, who accidentally/unintentionally helped me write this rant. He also happens to be a fella who could teach anyone a thing or two about writing with distractions. Thanks, Greg. ”“Distraction,” Simplicity, and Running Toward Shitstorms” was written by Merlin Mann for 43Folders.com and was originally posted on October 05, 2010. Except as noted, it's ©2010 Merlin Mann and licensed for reuse under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. "Why a footer?" Full Article Creative Work Distractions Features
distraction Stay Alert, Stay Alive: Texting While Walking is a Dangerous Distraction By www.medindia.net Published On :: Watch out! Texting while medlinkwalking/medlink can turn even safe roads into danger zones, warns a new study. A new UBC study analyzing actual Full Article
distraction Distraction Control for the Web By www.lukew.com Published On :: Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Browsing the Web on your smartphone these days can feel like a gauntlet: accept this cookie consent, close this newsletter promo, avoid this app install banner. This morass of attention-seeking actions makes it hard to focus on content. Enter Apple's Distraction Control feature. There's more than 7 billion active smartphones on the planet. This is the Web they are getting. I won't get into how the Web became a minefield of pop-ups, banners, overlays, modals, and other forms of annoyance. For that you can take a look at my Mind the Gap presentation which goes into depth on why and what designers can do about it. But it's pretty clear the average mobile Web experience sucks. And when things suck, people usually decide to do something about it. In this case, with iOS 18, Apple is giving average folks a chance to fight back with Distraction Control. When turned on, this new feature allows anyone to remove distracting elements on Web pages complete with a satisfying animation. Newsletter pop-up? Boom, gone. Mobile app banner? Boom. Interstitial ad? Boom. Is it perfect? No. Elements might come back after you remove them if the page is reloaded. Accessing the control takes a few taps. But it's a way for people to fight back against Web clutter and we need more. Full Article
distraction Your stone-age brain in the screen age [electronic resource] : coping with digital distraction and sensory overload / Richard E. Cytowic. By darius.uleth.ca Published On :: Cambridge, Massachusetts : The MIT Press, [2024] Full Article
distraction Tangled in a web of distractions? By www.thehindu.com Published On :: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 17:00:32 +0530 The power to enter and exit lies in your hands. Full Article Education Plus
distraction BJP’s infiltration distraction: Using Jharkhand to hide failures in Assam By indianexpress.com Published On :: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 12:05:38 +0000 Full Article Columns Opinion
distraction Grand distraction called river-linking By indiatogether.org Published On :: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0000 The idea of interlinking rivers is appealing because it is so grand. But this is also the reason it is nothing more than a distraction from the business at hand, writes Sunita Narain. Full Article
distraction Pink Supermoon -- distraction we need from COVID-19 By www.rediff.com Published On :: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 08:47:54 +0530 Looking to catch a break from all the events surrounding coronavirus, then here's some amazing images from the pink supermoon that occurred on Tuesday night, enthralling all! Full Article Reuters American Museum of Natural History's Department of Astrophysics PTI Photo Moon Jackie Faherty Burj Khalifa Pink Supermoon United Arab Emirates Getty Images Reichstag Building Charles Christopher Maja Eduardo North America Dylan
distraction Conscious computing: 4 apps to fight distraction and to focus your mind By www.mnn.com Published On :: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 17:44:20 +0000 It's time to quit multitasking. Plug in and sharpen your attention with these four meditative programs. Full Article Gadgets & Electronics
distraction People the world over prefer distractions over their own thoughts By www.mnn.com Published On :: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 14:20:49 +0000 A new international study finds most people would rather be entertained by others. Full Article Research & Innovations
distraction Infotainment systems in cars are distractions for all, but even more so for older drivers By www.mnn.com Published On :: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 16:18:30 +0000 Entertainment systems in cars reveal a design problem, not an aging problem, and it should be fixed. Full Article Gadgets & Electronics
distraction Pikeville Attorney Urges Drivers to Focus on Eliminating Distraction During the Season By www.24-7pressrelease.com Published On :: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 07:00:00 GMT Billy Johnson, a personal injury attorney in Pikeville, KY, said that a greater awareness of the threats facing motorists could reduce the number of vehicle crashes. Full Article
distraction Tech distractions may harm your concentration, but you can reverse it, says psychologist By www.cbc.ca Published On :: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:52:19 EDT Technology isn't permanently harming our ability to concentrate, despite the widely held belief that our devices and the internet are making us worse at focusing, according to a cognitive psychology expert. Full Article Radio/Spark
distraction Mini restoration a farming distraction By www.abc.net.au Published On :: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 11:37:00 +1000 Full Article ABC Mid North Coast midnorthcoast Health:Men's Health:All Health:Mental Health:All Rural:Agribusiness:All Sport:Motor Sports:All Australia:NSW:Wauchope 2446
distraction Country Singer Johnny Jolin Apologizes For 'Twitter Distraction' By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Politically Fueled Debate Leads To A Rogue Social Media Employee Full Article
distraction Michael Phelps Hops Around in a Speedo As Part of the Curtain of Distraction at Arizona State Basketball Game By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 04:00:00 -0800 The 'Curtain of Distraction' is well known at Arizona State University as a hilarious sports tactic. This time Michael Phelps came out Magic Mike style to prevent a few free throws. Just look at those sweet moves, the opposing team was bound to miss. Full Article Michael Phelps speedo Video
distraction With all the distractions at home, low-income students need headphones to study By www.latimes.com Published On :: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:00:41 -0400 Hand sanitizer is not the only coronavirus necessity. Students stuck at home in close and noisy quarters could use headphones to keep out distractions and allow them to focus on their studies. Full Article
distraction Review: 'The Willoughbys' is loud, colorful and frantic, but at least it's a distraction By www.latimes.com Published On :: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 20:07:46 -0400 Netflix's animated adaptation of Lois Lowry's book "The Willoughbys," featuring the voices of Will Forte, Maya Rudolph and Martin Short, is hard to love. Full Article
distraction “Distraction,” Simplicity, and Running Toward Shitstorms By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 23:49:56 +0000 It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience. —Albert Einstein, “On the Method of Theoretical Physics” (1934) Context: Last week, I pinched off one of my typically woolly emails in response to an acquaintance whom I admire. He’s a swell guy who makes things I love, and he'd written, in part, to express concern that my recent Swift impersonation had been directed explicitly at something he'd made. Which, of course, it hadn’t—but which, as I'll try to discuss here, strikes me as irrelevant. To paraphrase Bogie, I played it for him, so now I suppose I might as well play it for you. (n.b.: Excerpted, redacted, munged, and heavily expanded from my original email) There are at least a couple things that mean a lot to me that I'm still just not very good at. Make nuanced points in whatever way they need to be made; even if that ends up seeming “un-nuanced” Never explain yourself. I want to break both these self-imposed rules privately with you here. [Editor’s Note: Um.] Because, I hope to nuance the shit out of some fairly un-nuanced points. And, to do that, I'll also (reluctantly) need to explain myself. But, here goes. First [regarding my goofing on “distraction-free writing environments”] I think there are some GIANT distinctions at play here that a lot of folks may not find nearly as obvious as I do: Tool Mastery vs. Productivity Pr0n – Finding and learning the right tools for your work vs solely dicking around with the options for those tools is just so important, but also so different. And, admittedly, it’s almost impossible to contrast those differences in terms of hard & fast rules that could be true for all people in all situations. But, that doesn’t make the difference any less qualitatively special or real. Similarly… Self-Help Vs. “Self”–“Help” – Solving the problem that caused the problem that caused the problem that caused the symptom we eventually noticed. Huge. Arguably, peerless. Viz.: How many of us ignore the actual cause of our problem in favor of just reading dozens of blog posts about how to “turbocharge” its most superficial symptoms? Sick. Focus & Play – Yes, focusing on important work is, as Ford used to say, Job 1. But, that focus benefits when we maintain the durable and unapologetic sense of play that affords true creativity and fosters an emergence of context and connection that’s usually killed by stress. BUT. Again, what conceivable “rule” could ever serve to immutably declare that “THIS goofing-off is critical for hippocampal plasticity” vs. “THAT goofing-off is just dumb, distracting bullshit?” Impossible. Because drawing those kinds of distinctions is one of our most important day-to-day responsibilities. Decisions are hard, and there’s no app or alarm gadget that can change that. Although, they certainly can help mask the depth of the underlying problem that made them seem so—what’s the parlance?—“indispensable”. Think: Elmo Band-Aids for that unsightly pancreatic tumor. Reducing Distraction through Care (Rather than braces, armatures, and puppet strings). Removing interruptions and external distractions that harm your work or life? Great. Counting on your distraction-removal tool to supplement your non-existent motivation to do work that will never get done anyway? Pathetic. Frankly, this is a big reason I'm so galled when anyone touts their tool/product/service as being the poor, misunderstood artist’s new miracle medicine—rather than just admitting they've made a slightly different spoon. Because, let’s be honest: although most of us have plenty of perfectly serviceable spoons, everybody knows collecting cutlery is way more fun than using it to swallow yucky medicine. Using a System Vs. Becoming a System. Having a system or process for getting work done vs. making the iteration of that system or process a replacement for the work. This is just…wow…big. But, maybe most importantly to me… Embracing the Impossibles. Getting past these or any other intellectual koans by simply accepting life’s innumerable and unresolvable paradoxes, hypocrisies, and impossibilities as God-given gifts of creative constraint. Rather than, say, a mimeographed page of long division problems that must be solved for a whole number, n. I just can’t ever get away from this one. For me, it’s what everything inevitably comes back to. The very definition of our jobs is to solve the right problem at the right level for the right reason—based on a combination of the best info we have for now and a clear-eyed dedication to never pushing an unnecessary rock up an avoidable hill. YET, we keep force-feeding the monster that tells us to fiddle and fart and blame the Big Cruel World whenever we face work that might threaten our fragile personal mythology. “Sigh. I wish I could finally start writing My Novel….Ooooooh, if only I had a slightly nicer pen…and Zeus loved me more….” All that stuff? That there’s a complex set of ideas to talk about for many complex reasons—not least of which being how many people either despise or (try to) deny the unavoidable impact of ol' number six. But, here’s the thing: as much as saying so pisses anybody off, I think the topics we're NOT talking about whenever we disappear into Talmudic scholarship about “full-screen mode” or “minimalist desks” or whatever constitutes a “zen habit”—those shunned topics are precisely the things that I believe are most mind-blowingly critical to our real-world happiness as humans. In fact, I believe that to such a degree that helping provide a voice for those unpopular topics that can be heard over the din is now (what passes for) my career. I really believe these deeper ideas are worth socializing on any number of levels and in many media. Even when it’s inconvenient and slightly disrespectful of someone’s business model. So, that’s what I try to do. I talk about these things. Seldom by careful design. Often poorly. But, always because they each mean an awful lot to me. […] But, no matter how I end up saying whatever the hell I say, I believe in saying it not simply to be liked or followed or revered as a “nice guy” who pushes out shit-tons of whatever to “help people.” Because, believe me, friend, a great many of those apparently “nice guys” swarming around the web “helping people” these days are ass-fucking their audience for nickels and calling it a complimentary colonoscopy. And, while I absolutely think that in itself is empirically wrong, I also think it’s just as important to say that it’s wrong. Sometimes, True Things need to be said. Which in this instance amounts to saying, a) selling people a prettier way to kinda almost but not really write is not, in the canonical sense, “nice”—but, far worse, b) leaving your starry-eyed customers with the nauseatingly misguided impression that their “distraction” originates from anyplace but their own busted-ass brain is really not “helping.” Not on any level. It is, literally, harmful. “Helping” a junkie become more efficient at keeping his syringe loaded is hardly “nice.” It’s the opposite of nice. And, it’s the opposite of helpful. These are my True Things. And, to me, saying your True Things also means not watering down the message you care about in order to render it incapable of even conceivably hurting someone’s feelings—or of even conceivably losing you even one teeny-tiny slice of that precious “market share.” Well, that’s the price, and I'm fine paying it—best money I've ever spent. But, it also means trusting your audience by letting each of them decide to add water only as they choose to—by never corrupting the actual concentrate in a way that might make it less useful to the smartest or most eager 5% of people who'd like to try using it undiluted. Because, at that point, you're not only abandoning the coolest people you have the honor of serving—you risk becoming a charlatan. And, that’s precisely what you become when you start to iteratively inbreed the kind of fucktard audience for whom daily buffets of weak swill and beige assurance are life’s most gratifying reward. Sure. Those poor bastards may never end up using any of that watery information to do anything more ambitious than turbocharging their most regrettable symptoms. But, who’s the last person in the universe who’s going to grab them by the ears and tell them to get back to work? Exactly—that same “nice guy” whose livelihood now depends on keeping infantalized strangers addicted to his “help.” Holy shit—no way could I ever live with that. It’s so wrong, it’s not even right. ESC, ESC, ESC! […] Okay. So anyhow, there’s a really long-winded, overly generous, and extremely pompous way of trying to say I don’t know how to do what I do except how I do it. But, I do genuinely feel awful when innocent people feel they have been publicly humiliated or berated simply because I'm some dick who hates people. Which has to be my favorite irony of all. When I was a kid, I thought my Mom was “mean” not to let me play in traffic on busy Galbraith Road. Today, I'm not simply grateful that she had the strength and resolve to be so “mean”—I actually can’t imagine how sad it would be to not have people in your life who care enough about your long-term welfare to tell you to stop fucking around in traffic. To where you eventually might start even seeking 12x-daily safety hacks from some of the very same drivers whose recklessness may eventually kill you. Wow. […] Admitting when life is complicated or things aren’t shiny and happy all the time strikes me as a wonderfully sane and adult way to conduct one’s life. That there are so many folks offended by even the existence of this anarchic idea is not a problem I can solve. No more than I can wish useless email away or pray hard enough that it never rains on anyone’s leaky roof. All out of scope. And, then, I jizzed on at length about how much I admire the recipient’s work. Which I do. Good work doesn’t need a cookie I may admire your work, too. Especially if you care a lot about that work and don’t overly sweat peoples' opinions of it. Most definitely including my own. For these purposes, it doesn’t really matter whether we're friends and, honestly, it doesn’t even matter whether I love, use, or agree with everything you do, say, or make in a given day. It doesn’t matter because good work doesn’t need me to love it. Like tornadoes and cold sores, good work happens with total disregard to whether I'm “into it.” But, conversely, let’s stipulate that the points-of-view undergirding our opinions—again, including mine—will and should survive either agreement or lack of agreement with equivalently effortless ease. Because, like really good work, a really good point-of-view doesn’t require another person’s benediction. Guess we'll have to disagree to agree Now, to be only vaguely clearer here, I'm not posting this circuitous ego dump in the service of altering your opinion of either me, my friend, his work, or practically anything else for that matter. But, I would love it if we could all be more okay with the fact that real life means that we do each have a different, sometimes incongruous, and often totally incompatible point-of-view. Yes. Even you have a point-of-view that someone despises. Ready to change it now? Jesus, I sure hope not. Then, to be only slightly more clear, I'm also not advocating for that fakey brand of web-based kum ba ya that gets trotted out alternately as “tolerance” or “inclusion” or some styrofoam miniature of “civility.” I'm absolutely not against all of those things when authentically practiced, but I'm also really skeptical of the well-branded peacemakers who are forever appointing themselves the Internet’s “Now-Now-Let’s-All-Pretend-We're-Just-Saying-the-Same-Useless-Thing-Here” den mothers. Because we're not all saying the same things. Not at all. And, it infantalizes some important conversations when we tacitly demand that any instance of honest disagreement be immediately horseshat into a photo opp where some thought leader gets to hoist everyone’s hands in the air like he’s fucking Jimmy Carter. Nope. Not saying that. Who will you really rely on? What I AM saying is that alllllll this seemingly unrelated stuff is absolutely related—that the pattern of not relying on other people for anything you really care about is arguably the great-grandaddy of every useful productivity, creativity, or self-help pattern. Where’s this matter? Pretty much everywhere you have any sort of stake: Don’t rely on other people to remove your totally fake “distractions.” Don’t rely on other people to pat your beret, re-tie your cravat, and make you a nice cocoa whenever that mean man on the internet points out that your “distractions” are totally fake. (Which they are) Don’t rely on other people to tell you when or whether you have enough information. Don’t rely on other people to define your job. Don’t rely on other people to “design your lifestyle.” Don’t rely on other people to decide when your opinions are acceptable. Don’t rely on other people to tell you when you're allowed to be awesome. Don’t rely on other people to make you care. Don’t even rely on other people to tell you what you should or shouldn’t rely on. Yes. I went there. Because that’s the point. These hypocrisies, paradoxes, and ambiguities that people get so wound up about—that many of us are constantly (impotently) trying to resolve—cannot be resolved. Because, yeah: all of these harrowingly unsolvable problems are immune to new notebooks and less-distracting applications and shinier systems and “nicer” self-“help” and pretty much anything else that is not, specifically, you walking straight into the angriest and least convenient shitstorm you can find and getting your ass kicked until the storm gets bored with kicking it. Then, you find an even angrier storm. Then, another. And, so on. “Get the fuck off of my obstacle, Private Pyle!” Doing that annoying hard stuff is how you grow, get better, and learn what real help looks like. Even if that’s not the answer you wanted to hear. You get better by getting your ass out of your RSS reader and fucking making things until they suck less. Not by buying apps. You don’t whine about distractions, or derail yourself over needing a nicer pencil sharpener, or aggravate your chronic creative diabetes by starting another desperate waddle to the self-help buffet. No. You work. And, for what it’s worth, just like you can’t get to the moon by eating cheese, you'll also never leave boot camp with your original scrote intact by telling your drill sergeant to try using more honey than vinegar. No. That sergeant’s job is to make you miserable. It’s his job to break down your callow conceits about what’s supposed to be easy and fair. It’s his job to emotionally pummel you into giving up and becoming a Marine. You? You're not there to give the sergeant notes; you're there to sleep two hours a night, then not mind getting beaten for 20 hours until a decent Marine starts to fall out. Who knows? He may even surprise you by introducing a surprisingly effective “distraction-free learning environment.” “Tee ell dee ahr, Professor Brainiac.” Like most humans, I like things I can understand. Like most readers, I love specificity. Like most thinkers, I love clarity. Like most students, I love relevance and practicality. And, like most busy people, believe it or not, I actually do really like it when someone gets straight to the point. But, here’s the problem. If my 2-year-old daughter asks me about time travel, and I blithely announce, “E=mc2”, I will have said something that is entirely specific, clear, relevant, practical, and/or straight-to-the-point. For somebody. But, not so much for my daughter. And, to be honest, not even to any useful degree for me. She'd probably either laugh derisively at me (which she’s great at), or she'd pause and ask, “Whuh dat?” (which she’s even better at). Thing is, her understanding that jumble of characters less than me—and my understanding it WAY less than Professor Al—has zero impact on the profundity, truth, beauty, or impact of the man’s theory. Sure. You could quite accurately fault me for being a smartass and a poseur, and you could even berate my toddler for her unaccountably shallow understanding of Modern Physics. But, in any case, you can’t really blame either Albert or his theory. You're turbocharging nothing Specifically, Albert can’t begin to tell us what he really knows if we don’t understand math. So, let’s say this theory you've been hearing about really interests you. And, let’s also pretend, just for the sake of the analogy, that you haven’t completed Calculus III (212) or Quantum Mechanics (403) or even something as elementary as, say, Advanced Astrophysics II (537). I know you have. Obviously. But, let’s pretend. Where do you start? Well, you could read some tips about learning math. You could find a list of 500 indispensable resources for indispensable math resources. You could buy a new “distraction-free math environment.” Heck, there’s actually nothing to stop you from just declaring yourself a “math expert.” Congratulations, Professor. Thing is: you still don’t know math. Which means you still can’t really understand the theory—no more than a pathetic Liberal Arts refugee like me or a dullard Physics ignoramus like my kid can really grok relativity. Difference is, you will have blown a lot of time hoping that actual expertise follows non-existent effort—while my daughter and I get to remain total novices without charge. Only, we don’t get all mad at the theory as a result; a staggering number of fake math experts do. I mean, be honest—after all that recreational non-work and make-believe dedication almost trying to kinda learn math sorta—you might actually get frustrated at how brazenly Al defies your fondness for shortcuts by continuing to rely on so many terms and proofs and blah-blah-blah that you still just don’t understand. So annoying. You may simply decide that Albert Einstein’s a huge dick for never saying things that can be completely understood solely by scanning a headline. EPIC EINSTEIN FAIL, amirite? You never really know what you didn’t know until you know it But, Al just told the truth. Problem is, Al’s truth not only requires fancy things in order to be truly understood—the more of those fancy things you take away from his truth, the less true it gets. And, by the time it’s been diluted to the point where you're comfortable that you understand it? You'd be understanding the wrong thing. Even I can understand that. But, not one bit of any of this is Al’s fault. Al doesn’t get to control who uses, abuses, gets, or doesn’t get what he said or why it matters. Especially since he’s been dead for over fifty years. All I know is, regardless of who has ears to hear it on a given day, it would be to Al’s credit never to mangle something important in order to get it into terms everybody’s ready to handle without actually trying. And God bless him for never agreeing that your “distractions” to learning math are his problem. So, yeah, if you only need to hand in a crappy 5-page paper, you could certainly Cliff’s Notes your way through Borges, Eliot, or Joyce in an afternoon, and feel like you haven’t missed a thing. Trouble is, if you did care even a little, it’s impossible to even say how much you're missing since you can’t be bothered to soldier through the source text. The text itself is the entire point. Even the wonderfully cogent and readable layman’s explanations Einstein himself provided don’t really get to the nut, the application, and the implications of his real theory. That all takes real math. That “single datum of experience” matters Sometimes, complex or difficult things stop being true when you try to make them too simple. Sometimes, you have to actually get laid to understand why people think sex is such a thing. Sometimes, you need to learn some Greek if you really want to understand The Gospel of John. And, yeah, sometimes, you're going to have to just work unbelievably hard at whatever you claim to care about before anyone can begin to help you get any better—or less “distracted”—at it. The part I really know is what doesn’t work. Reading Penthouse Forum won’t help you CLEP out of Vaginal Intercourse 101. Watching a Rankin-Bass cartoon about the Easter Bunny will teach you very little about the intricacies of transubstantiation. And, if you can’t be troubled to care so much about your work that you reflexively force distractions away, dicking around with yet another writing application will merely aggravate the problem. Ironic, huh? These quantum mechanics of personal productivity are rife with such frustrating “paradoxes.” These are True Things. Achieving expertise and doing creative work is all horribly complicated and difficult and paradoxical and frustrating and recursive and James Joyce-y—and any guide, blog, binary, guru, or “nice guy” that tries to suggest otherwise is probably giving you a complimentary colonoscopy. Do the math. Want a new syllabus? Sure: Run straight into your shitstorm, my friends. Reject the impulse to think about work, rather than finishing it. And, open your heart to the remote possibility that any mythology of personal failure that involves messiahs periodically arriving to make everything “easy” for you might not really be helping your work or your mental health or your long-standing addiction to using tools solely to ship new excuses. Learn your real math, and any slide rule will suffice. Try, make, and do until you quit noticing the tools, and if you still think you need new tools, go try, make, and do more. If you can pull off this deceptively simple and millennia-old pattern, you'll eventually find that—god by dying god—any partial truth that’s supported your treasured excuses for not working will be replaced by a no-faith-required knowledge that you're really, actually, finally getting better at something you care about. Which is just sublimely un-distracting. Dedication This article is dedicated to my friend, Greg Knauss. No, he’s not the app guy–he’s just a good man who does good work, who accidentally/unintentionally helped me write this rant. He also happens to be a fella who could teach anyone a thing or two about writing with distractions. Thanks, Greg. ”“Distraction,” Simplicity, and Running Toward Shitstorms” was written by Merlin Mann for 43Folders.com and was originally posted on October 05, 2010. Except as noted, it's ©2010 Merlin Mann and licensed for reuse under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. "Why a footer?" Full Article Creative Work Distractions Features
distraction Blaming China Is a Dangerous Distraction By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:50:59 +0000 15 April 2020 Jim O'Neill Chair, Chatham House Chinese officials' initial effort to cover up the coronavirus outbreak was appallingly misguided. But anyone still focusing on China's failings instead of working toward a solution is essentially making the same mistake. 2020-04-15-China-coronavirus-health Medical staff on their rounds at a quarantine zone in Wuhan, China. Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images. As the COVID-19 crisis roars on, so have debates about China’s role in it. Based on what is known, it is clear that some Chinese officials made a major error in late December and early January, when they tried to prevent disclosures of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, even silencing healthcare workers who tried to sound the alarm.China’s leaders will have to live with these mistakes, even if they succeed in resolving the crisis and adopting adequate measures to prevent a future outbreak. What is less clear is why other countries think it is in their interest to keep referring to China’s initial errors, rather than working toward solutions.For many governments, naming and shaming China appears to be a ploy to divert attention from their own lack of preparedness. Equally concerning is the growing criticism of the World Health Organization (WHO), not least by Donald Trump who has attacked the organization - and threatens to withdraw US funding - for supposedly failing to hold the Chinese government to account. Unhelpful and dangerousAt a time when the top global priority should be to organize a comprehensive coordinated response to the dual health and economic crises unleashed by the coronavirus, this blame game is not just unhelpful but dangerous.Globally and at the country level, we all desperately need to do everything possible to accelerate the development of a safe and effective vaccine, while in the meantime stepping up collective efforts to deploy the diagnostic and therapeutic tools necessary to keep the health crisis under control.Given there is no other global health organization with the capacity to confront the pandemic, the WHO will remain at the center of the response, whether certain political leaders like it or not.Having dealt with the WHO to a modest degree during my time as chairman of the UK’s independent Review on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), I can say that it is similar to most large, bureaucratic international organizations.Like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United Nations, it is not especially dynamic or inclined to think outside the box. But rather than sniping at these organizations from the sidelines, we should be working to improve them.In the current crisis, we all should be doing everything we can to help both the WHO and the IMF to play an effective, leading role in the global response. As I have argued before, the IMF should expand the scope of its annual Article IV assessments to include national public-health systems, given that these are critical determinants in a country’s ability to prevent or at least manage a crisis like the one we are now experiencing.I have even raised this idea with IMF officials themselves, only to be told that such reporting falls outside their remit because they lack the relevant expertise. That answer was not good enough then, and it definitely isn’t good enough now.If the IMF lacks the expertise to assess public health systems, it should acquire it. As the COVID-19 crisis makes abundantly clear, there is no useful distinction to be made between health and finance. The two policy domains are deeply interconnected, and should be treated as such.In thinking about an international response to today’s health and economic emergency, the obvious analogy is the 2008 global financial crisis which started with an unsustainable US housing bubble, fed by foreign savings owing to the lack of domestic savings in the United States.When the bubble finally burst, many other countries sustained more harm than the US did, just as the COVID-19 pandemic has hit some countries much harder than it hit China.And yet not many countries around the world sought to single out the US for presiding over a massively destructive housing bubble, even though the scars from that previous crisis are still visible. On the contrary, many welcomed the US economy’s return to sustained growth in recent years, because a strong US economy benefits the rest of the world.So, rather than applying a double standard and fixating on China’s undoubtedly large errors, we would do better to consider what China can teach us. Specifically, we should be focused on better understanding the technologies and diagnostic techniques that China used to keep its - apparent - death toll so low compared to other countries, and to restart parts of its economy within weeks of the height of the outbreak.And for our own sakes, we also should be considering what policies China could adopt to put itself back on a path toward 6% annual growth, because the Chinese economy inevitably will play a significant role in the global recovery.If China’s post-pandemic growth model makes good on its leaders’ efforts in recent years to boost domestic consumption and imports from the rest of the world, we will all be better off.This article was originally published in Project Syndicate Full Article
distraction Blaming China Is a Dangerous Distraction By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:50:59 +0000 15 April 2020 Jim O'Neill Chair, Chatham House Chinese officials' initial effort to cover up the coronavirus outbreak was appallingly misguided. But anyone still focusing on China's failings instead of working toward a solution is essentially making the same mistake. 2020-04-15-China-coronavirus-health Medical staff on their rounds at a quarantine zone in Wuhan, China. Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images. As the COVID-19 crisis roars on, so have debates about China’s role in it. Based on what is known, it is clear that some Chinese officials made a major error in late December and early January, when they tried to prevent disclosures of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, even silencing healthcare workers who tried to sound the alarm.China’s leaders will have to live with these mistakes, even if they succeed in resolving the crisis and adopting adequate measures to prevent a future outbreak. What is less clear is why other countries think it is in their interest to keep referring to China’s initial errors, rather than working toward solutions.For many governments, naming and shaming China appears to be a ploy to divert attention from their own lack of preparedness. Equally concerning is the growing criticism of the World Health Organization (WHO), not least by Donald Trump who has attacked the organization - and threatens to withdraw US funding - for supposedly failing to hold the Chinese government to account. Unhelpful and dangerousAt a time when the top global priority should be to organize a comprehensive coordinated response to the dual health and economic crises unleashed by the coronavirus, this blame game is not just unhelpful but dangerous.Globally and at the country level, we all desperately need to do everything possible to accelerate the development of a safe and effective vaccine, while in the meantime stepping up collective efforts to deploy the diagnostic and therapeutic tools necessary to keep the health crisis under control.Given there is no other global health organization with the capacity to confront the pandemic, the WHO will remain at the center of the response, whether certain political leaders like it or not.Having dealt with the WHO to a modest degree during my time as chairman of the UK’s independent Review on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), I can say that it is similar to most large, bureaucratic international organizations.Like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United Nations, it is not especially dynamic or inclined to think outside the box. But rather than sniping at these organizations from the sidelines, we should be working to improve them.In the current crisis, we all should be doing everything we can to help both the WHO and the IMF to play an effective, leading role in the global response. As I have argued before, the IMF should expand the scope of its annual Article IV assessments to include national public-health systems, given that these are critical determinants in a country’s ability to prevent or at least manage a crisis like the one we are now experiencing.I have even raised this idea with IMF officials themselves, only to be told that such reporting falls outside their remit because they lack the relevant expertise. That answer was not good enough then, and it definitely isn’t good enough now.If the IMF lacks the expertise to assess public health systems, it should acquire it. As the COVID-19 crisis makes abundantly clear, there is no useful distinction to be made between health and finance. The two policy domains are deeply interconnected, and should be treated as such.In thinking about an international response to today’s health and economic emergency, the obvious analogy is the 2008 global financial crisis which started with an unsustainable US housing bubble, fed by foreign savings owing to the lack of domestic savings in the United States.When the bubble finally burst, many other countries sustained more harm than the US did, just as the COVID-19 pandemic has hit some countries much harder than it hit China.And yet not many countries around the world sought to single out the US for presiding over a massively destructive housing bubble, even though the scars from that previous crisis are still visible. On the contrary, many welcomed the US economy’s return to sustained growth in recent years, because a strong US economy benefits the rest of the world.So, rather than applying a double standard and fixating on China’s undoubtedly large errors, we would do better to consider what China can teach us. Specifically, we should be focused on better understanding the technologies and diagnostic techniques that China used to keep its - apparent - death toll so low compared to other countries, and to restart parts of its economy within weeks of the height of the outbreak.And for our own sakes, we also should be considering what policies China could adopt to put itself back on a path toward 6% annual growth, because the Chinese economy inevitably will play a significant role in the global recovery.If China’s post-pandemic growth model makes good on its leaders’ efforts in recent years to boost domestic consumption and imports from the rest of the world, we will all be better off.This article was originally published in Project Syndicate Full Article
distraction Blaming China Is a Dangerous Distraction By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:50:59 +0000 15 April 2020 Jim O'Neill Chair, Chatham House Chinese officials' initial effort to cover up the coronavirus outbreak was appallingly misguided. But anyone still focusing on China's failings instead of working toward a solution is essentially making the same mistake. 2020-04-15-China-coronavirus-health Medical staff on their rounds at a quarantine zone in Wuhan, China. Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images. As the COVID-19 crisis roars on, so have debates about China’s role in it. Based on what is known, it is clear that some Chinese officials made a major error in late December and early January, when they tried to prevent disclosures of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, even silencing healthcare workers who tried to sound the alarm.China’s leaders will have to live with these mistakes, even if they succeed in resolving the crisis and adopting adequate measures to prevent a future outbreak. What is less clear is why other countries think it is in their interest to keep referring to China’s initial errors, rather than working toward solutions.For many governments, naming and shaming China appears to be a ploy to divert attention from their own lack of preparedness. Equally concerning is the growing criticism of the World Health Organization (WHO), not least by Donald Trump who has attacked the organization - and threatens to withdraw US funding - for supposedly failing to hold the Chinese government to account. Unhelpful and dangerousAt a time when the top global priority should be to organize a comprehensive coordinated response to the dual health and economic crises unleashed by the coronavirus, this blame game is not just unhelpful but dangerous.Globally and at the country level, we all desperately need to do everything possible to accelerate the development of a safe and effective vaccine, while in the meantime stepping up collective efforts to deploy the diagnostic and therapeutic tools necessary to keep the health crisis under control.Given there is no other global health organization with the capacity to confront the pandemic, the WHO will remain at the center of the response, whether certain political leaders like it or not.Having dealt with the WHO to a modest degree during my time as chairman of the UK’s independent Review on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), I can say that it is similar to most large, bureaucratic international organizations.Like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United Nations, it is not especially dynamic or inclined to think outside the box. But rather than sniping at these organizations from the sidelines, we should be working to improve them.In the current crisis, we all should be doing everything we can to help both the WHO and the IMF to play an effective, leading role in the global response. As I have argued before, the IMF should expand the scope of its annual Article IV assessments to include national public-health systems, given that these are critical determinants in a country’s ability to prevent or at least manage a crisis like the one we are now experiencing.I have even raised this idea with IMF officials themselves, only to be told that such reporting falls outside their remit because they lack the relevant expertise. That answer was not good enough then, and it definitely isn’t good enough now.If the IMF lacks the expertise to assess public health systems, it should acquire it. As the COVID-19 crisis makes abundantly clear, there is no useful distinction to be made between health and finance. The two policy domains are deeply interconnected, and should be treated as such.In thinking about an international response to today’s health and economic emergency, the obvious analogy is the 2008 global financial crisis which started with an unsustainable US housing bubble, fed by foreign savings owing to the lack of domestic savings in the United States.When the bubble finally burst, many other countries sustained more harm than the US did, just as the COVID-19 pandemic has hit some countries much harder than it hit China.And yet not many countries around the world sought to single out the US for presiding over a massively destructive housing bubble, even though the scars from that previous crisis are still visible. On the contrary, many welcomed the US economy’s return to sustained growth in recent years, because a strong US economy benefits the rest of the world.So, rather than applying a double standard and fixating on China’s undoubtedly large errors, we would do better to consider what China can teach us. Specifically, we should be focused on better understanding the technologies and diagnostic techniques that China used to keep its - apparent - death toll so low compared to other countries, and to restart parts of its economy within weeks of the height of the outbreak.And for our own sakes, we also should be considering what policies China could adopt to put itself back on a path toward 6% annual growth, because the Chinese economy inevitably will play a significant role in the global recovery.If China’s post-pandemic growth model makes good on its leaders’ efforts in recent years to boost domestic consumption and imports from the rest of the world, we will all be better off.This article was originally published in Project Syndicate Full Article
distraction Blaming China Is a Dangerous Distraction By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:50:59 +0000 15 April 2020 Jim O'Neill Chair, Chatham House Chinese officials' initial effort to cover up the coronavirus outbreak was appallingly misguided. But anyone still focusing on China's failings instead of working toward a solution is essentially making the same mistake. 2020-04-15-China-coronavirus-health Medical staff on their rounds at a quarantine zone in Wuhan, China. Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images. As the COVID-19 crisis roars on, so have debates about China’s role in it. Based on what is known, it is clear that some Chinese officials made a major error in late December and early January, when they tried to prevent disclosures of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, even silencing healthcare workers who tried to sound the alarm.China’s leaders will have to live with these mistakes, even if they succeed in resolving the crisis and adopting adequate measures to prevent a future outbreak. What is less clear is why other countries think it is in their interest to keep referring to China’s initial errors, rather than working toward solutions.For many governments, naming and shaming China appears to be a ploy to divert attention from their own lack of preparedness. Equally concerning is the growing criticism of the World Health Organization (WHO), not least by Donald Trump who has attacked the organization - and threatens to withdraw US funding - for supposedly failing to hold the Chinese government to account. Unhelpful and dangerousAt a time when the top global priority should be to organize a comprehensive coordinated response to the dual health and economic crises unleashed by the coronavirus, this blame game is not just unhelpful but dangerous.Globally and at the country level, we all desperately need to do everything possible to accelerate the development of a safe and effective vaccine, while in the meantime stepping up collective efforts to deploy the diagnostic and therapeutic tools necessary to keep the health crisis under control.Given there is no other global health organization with the capacity to confront the pandemic, the WHO will remain at the center of the response, whether certain political leaders like it or not.Having dealt with the WHO to a modest degree during my time as chairman of the UK’s independent Review on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), I can say that it is similar to most large, bureaucratic international organizations.Like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United Nations, it is not especially dynamic or inclined to think outside the box. But rather than sniping at these organizations from the sidelines, we should be working to improve them.In the current crisis, we all should be doing everything we can to help both the WHO and the IMF to play an effective, leading role in the global response. As I have argued before, the IMF should expand the scope of its annual Article IV assessments to include national public-health systems, given that these are critical determinants in a country’s ability to prevent or at least manage a crisis like the one we are now experiencing.I have even raised this idea with IMF officials themselves, only to be told that such reporting falls outside their remit because they lack the relevant expertise. That answer was not good enough then, and it definitely isn’t good enough now.If the IMF lacks the expertise to assess public health systems, it should acquire it. As the COVID-19 crisis makes abundantly clear, there is no useful distinction to be made between health and finance. The two policy domains are deeply interconnected, and should be treated as such.In thinking about an international response to today’s health and economic emergency, the obvious analogy is the 2008 global financial crisis which started with an unsustainable US housing bubble, fed by foreign savings owing to the lack of domestic savings in the United States.When the bubble finally burst, many other countries sustained more harm than the US did, just as the COVID-19 pandemic has hit some countries much harder than it hit China.And yet not many countries around the world sought to single out the US for presiding over a massively destructive housing bubble, even though the scars from that previous crisis are still visible. On the contrary, many welcomed the US economy’s return to sustained growth in recent years, because a strong US economy benefits the rest of the world.So, rather than applying a double standard and fixating on China’s undoubtedly large errors, we would do better to consider what China can teach us. Specifically, we should be focused on better understanding the technologies and diagnostic techniques that China used to keep its - apparent - death toll so low compared to other countries, and to restart parts of its economy within weeks of the height of the outbreak.And for our own sakes, we also should be considering what policies China could adopt to put itself back on a path toward 6% annual growth, because the Chinese economy inevitably will play a significant role in the global recovery.If China’s post-pandemic growth model makes good on its leaders’ efforts in recent years to boost domestic consumption and imports from the rest of the world, we will all be better off.This article was originally published in Project Syndicate Full Article
distraction Exploring the prevalence of in-vehicle driver distraction in moving traffic : a pilot study / G Ponte, LN Wundersitz. By www.catalog.slsa.sa.gov.au Published On :: Full Article
distraction Rosemary Goring's Country Life: finding distraction and delight, right outside the window By www.heraldscotland.com Published On :: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 05:15:06 +0100 Sunday, April 19, 2020. Full Article
distraction Hydrogen: key to a zero-carbon future, or a costly distraction? By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: 2019-05-13T14:45:36Z The U.K.’s push for a low-carbon economy has some notable successes, but the hardest part of the battle has barely started. Full Article Energy Efficiency News Wind Power Storage Solar
distraction Hydrogen: key to a zero-carbon future, or a costly distraction? By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: 2019-05-13T14:45:36Z The U.K.’s push for a low-carbon economy has some notable successes, but the hardest part of the battle has barely started. Full Article Energy Efficiency News Wind Power Storage Solar
distraction Hydrogen: key to a zero-carbon future, or a costly distraction? By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: 2019-05-13T14:45:36Z The U.K.’s push for a low-carbon economy has some notable successes, but the hardest part of the battle has barely started. Full Article Energy Efficiency News Wind Power Storage Solar
distraction Is Sustainability Talk a Distraction from What Really Matters? By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: 2014-03-19T13:56:00Z Most talk of "energy efficiency" and “sustainability” is insidious or naïve, or even misdirected. We all should switch off the lights when we leave a room, use efficient, gas-fired tankless water heaters (even when they are uneconomical), and work in LEED certified buildings. Intelligent thermostats — Nest, for instance — may regulate our air-conditioning to assure comfort while generating savings, and shaving “peak” load on the electricity grid. Using LED lamps and star rated appliances is admirable too. These solutions and behaviors, while praiseworthy, are beside the point; we should rather favor “supply action” before demand response. Full Article Microgrids Energy Efficiency Hydropower Storage Bioenergy Policy Wind Power Baseload Energy Efficiency Rooftop Opinion & Commentary Solar Geothermal
distraction Hydrogen: key to a zero-carbon future, or a costly distraction? By feedproxy.google.com Published On :: 2019-05-13T14:45:36Z The U.K.’s push for a low-carbon economy has some notable successes, but the hardest part of the battle has barely started. Full Article Energy Efficiency News Wind Power Storage Solar
distraction Pondering the big question of consciousness is a welcome distraction By www.newscientist.com Published On :: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:00:00 +0000 Our best mathematical theory of consciousness is sparking a rethink of one of science’s hardest problems – how simple matter gives rise to a complex mind Full Article
distraction Pondering the big question of consciousness is a welcome distraction By www.newscientist.com Published On :: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:00:00 +0000 Our best mathematical theory of consciousness is sparking a rethink of one of science’s hardest problems – how simple matter gives rise to a complex mind Full Article
distraction Doom Eternal review: A welcome adrenaline-inducing distraction By www.newscientist.com Published On :: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 14:00:31 +0000 Doom Eternal does contain gratuitous violence, but the evidence suggests violence in video games doesn't affect people's behaviour in the real world, says Jacob Aron Full Article
distraction This 3,000-piece Harry Potter jigsaw puzzle is the perfect lockdown distraction By www.standard.co.uk Published On :: 2020-04-29T10:08:28Z A magical time filler Full Article
distraction Water safety campaign launches to help save 'wholly preventable' child drownings, limit adult distractions By www.abc.net.au Published On :: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:04:00 +1100 Royal Life Saving Society Australia is warning parents to limit distractions and be vigilant with water safety, as new data shows one-year-olds are at the greatest risk of drowning compared to any other age group. Full Article ABC Radio Sydney canberra sydney darwin brisbane adelaide hobart melbourne perth Community and Society:Death:All Community and Society:Family and Children:Children Community and Society:Family and Children:Children - Preschoolers Community and Society:Family and Children:Children - Toddlers Community and Society:Family and Children:Parenting Disasters and Accidents:Accidents:Other Health:safety:All Lifestyle and Leisure:All:All Sport:Swimming:All Australia:ACT:Canberra 2600 Australia:NSW:Sydney 2000 Australia:NT:Darwin 0800 Australia:QLD:Brisbane 4000 Australia:SA:Adelaide 5000 Australia:TAS:Hobart 7000 Australia:VIC:Melbourne 3000 Australia:WA:Perth 6000