Summary of “The simple words that save lives”

The conversation between the caller and the dispatcher quickly spiraled out of control.
The caller, increasingly exasperated, refuses to give straight answers to many of the dispatcher’s questions.
Thirteen minutes later paramedics were sent to the home where the woman in question was pronounced dead. “He didn’t hear that the nurse’s questions were about helping the mother as best as possible,” says Tanya Stivers, a sociologist at the University of California Los Angeles, US. “The nurse was trying to establish some basic information about the mother. He found her questions antagonistic. Sometimes things that are transparent to one party, the nurse in this case, are not to another.”
How could an emergency call have gone so wrong? The failings on both parts subtly shows how the way we ask questions can have a big impact on the answers.
The researchers were able to test the effectiveness of the words “Any-” and “Some-” when used in open-ended questions.
Kevoe-Feldman collaborates with dispatchers taking real life emergency calls to find better ways of handling those calls.
One of the problems is that callers often misinterpret why they are being asked questions in the first place.
“There were multiple things where it went wrong with the Dallas call but at the heart of it call takers ask a lot of questions and callers sometimes act like this is gate keeping,” says Stivers.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Stop Pretending You Really Know What AI Is and Read This Instead”

You’ve probably heard the news: AI is going to take your job.
AI is already totally smarter than us at, like, all the smart things.
Let’s consider for a second what we talk about when we talk about AI. Because I’m not sure many of us really know-or, at the very least, we’re not talking/arguing/worrying about the same things.
“You are right to be confused,” says Harvard computer scientist Leslie Valiant, because the terms artificial intelligence and machine learning “Are suddenly being used interchangeably in the popular press.” Even Trevor Darrell, a leading artificial-intelligence researcher at UC Berkeley who’s also part of a DARPA-funded project on “Explainable AI” admits that “There is no precise distinction-they overlap greatly.”
Artificial intelligence is the general label for a field of study-specifically, the study of whatever might answer the question “What is required for a machine to exhibit intelligence?”.
If the experts don’t really know what they talk about when they talk about AI, is it any wonder that you and I don’t, either?
At the very least, we might want to avoid the word “Intelligence” when referring to software, because nobody really knows what it means.
Even Alan Turing, the genius who mathematically defined what a computer is, considered the question of defining intelligence too hard; his eponymous Turing test dodges it, essentially saying “Intelligence is as intelligence does.”

The orginal article.

Summary of “Hugh Grant Might Be Doing the Best Work of His Career”

“My parents, I can remember, if the subject of homosexuality came up, they had that kind of 1950s, 1960s attitude. It was sort of, ‘Well, it happens, darling. And it’s a little bit disgusting. We don’t talk about it very much,'” Grant says.
Watching Grant’s Thorpe dig himself further and further into an irredeemable hole, one can’t help but feel some pity for him, despite everything.
“It’s helpful to find the tragedy of the character you’re playing,” Grant says.
Something else happened during Grant’s time away from the screen-he became a father, ultimately five times over.
Grant talks about his family life much like he talks about his political activity-the real stuff, the important counterpoint to everything else.
“I’m just speaking off the top of my head, but the acting gene seems to me to come from people who have a relatively flimsy grasp of who they are. I’m not going to name names, but if you said to me, ‘What do you think of X?’ I’ll say, ‘Well, I have no idea who that person is.’ Because they’re always performing. They perform brilliantly, but you’ve no sense of them. And I think that’s a miserable way to live.”
The brilliance of Grant’s performance in A Very English Scandal may very well be that he has portrayed Jeremy Thorpe as such an actor, a person “Cursed,” as he says, to be an empty vessel, a cultivator of surfaces.
“I’ve come to terms with the fact that I am that person,” Grant replies frankly.

The orginal article.

Summary of “9 CEOs Share Their Favorite Productivity Hacks”

A study published in Harvard Business Review found that each week CEOs work an average of 62.5 hours and attend 37 meetings.
Moskovitz wants managers to be makers some of the time, so NMW ensures they get some flow time, too, he said.
“At the rate at which StockX is growing, it’s a 24-hour job and I spend 70 to 80 percent of my time on the road across varying time zones, which can be hard on your body. I take 11-minute naps once or twice per day and find that it makes for increased energy and efficiency.”
Katia Beauchamp, cofounder of Birchbox, says one of her best productivity tricks is something simple: She insists that her team includes a deadline in their email.
“Having fewer things to do is the best way to get things done. I’m very careful with my time and attention-it’s my most precious resource. If you don’t have that, you can’t do what you want to do. And if you can’t do what you want to do, what’s the point?”.
“The way to solve this is allow free flow of information between all levels. If, in order to get something done between depts, an individual contributor has to talk to their manager, who talks to a director, who talks to a VP, who talks to another VP, who talks to a director, who talks to a manager, who talks to someone doing the actual work, then super dumb things will happen. It must be ok for people to talk directly and just make the right thing happen.”
LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner sends fewer emails to receive fewer emails.
“If you have a list of 20 things to do, you end up realizing, ‘I don’t need to do 20 things,'” Chesky said.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Why don’t Americans talk about child care?”

Almost half of all parents miss work at least once every six months because child care goes off the rails.
Why don’t we talk about child care? Because we take for granted the women who are underpaid and overworked who care for our children – but not so we can march off to work in search of fulfillment.
The women who care for our children come in all colors, of course, but are often brown or poor or elderly or dismissed in a culture that romanticizes motherhood but still disdains the very real needs of working mothers.
The yearly cost of center-based child care for babies ranges from $6,615 in Arizona to $19,805 in the District of Columbia.
Infant care is more expensive than in-state public college tuition in 33 states and D.C. When we do talk about child care, we do it privately: We argue at home when balancing the budget.
We don’t publicly engage in the way we talk about health care and economic equality and concussion safety in organized sports.
Child care needs to be easier to find and easier to afford.
Child care is creeping toward the surface in national politics in part because candidates have included language around the issue in their platforms.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Running Conversation in Your Head”

Fernyhough, a professor at Durham University in the U.K., says that inner speech develops alongside social speech.
Inner speech, Fernyhough writes, isn’t bound by many of the conventions of verbal speech.
One researcher the book cites clocks inner speech at an average pace of 4,000 words per minute-10 times faster than verbal speech.
Julie Beck: In your view, is there a difference between “Inner speech” and just thinking? Is inner speech a subcategory of thought or are they one and the same?
Beck: Obviously there’s going to be a wide variety of what people report their inner speech looks like and acts like, but have you been able to determine any overarching, seemingly universal qualities to people’s inner speech?
We think inner speech varies according to how much it’s like a conversation between different points of view.
Depending a bit on their language experience will say they have a more acoustic inner speech that’s probably like your and my inner speech, but others will say it’s much more sign-y, it’s much more of a visual thing going on.
The idea is that when somebody hears a voice, what’s happening is that they’re actually producing some inner speech but for some reason they don’t recognize that speech as having been produced by themselves.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Stop Imitating The Habits Of Successful People”

Stuff like: “This behavior separates successful people from average people.” Or how about articles that list the habits of Millionaires or Billionaires? It’s so predictable.
We were talking about how a lot of people love to dissect success.
“There’s a difference between studying success and actually building a business or career that matters. It’s the same as talent and hard work. I know a lot of talented people who never contributed anything to the world.”
“And I also know a lot of people without talent who did wonderful things in life. Knowing how to be successful will not guarantee success. I believe it’s the opposite. People who don’t assume they know everything often accomplish the most.”
My mentor tried to make me aware that success doesn’t happen by imitating others.
No matter how many habits of successful people you might have, it doesn’t mean anything.
That’s why I find it odd that people try to imitate successful people.
That’s not the most important reason I don’t care about imitating success.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Stop Imitating The Habits Of Successful People”

Stuff like: “This behavior separates successful people from average people.” Or how about articles that list the habits of Millionaires or Billionaires? It’s so predictable.
We were talking about how a lot of people love to dissect success.
“There’s a difference between studying success and actually building a business or career that matters. It’s the same as talent and hard work. I know a lot of talented people who never contributed anything to the world.”
“And I also know a lot of people without talent who did wonderful things in life. Knowing how to be successful will not guarantee success. I believe it’s the opposite. People who don’t assume they know everything often accomplish the most.”
My mentor tried to make me aware that success doesn’t happen by imitating others.
No matter how many habits of successful people you might have, it doesn’t mean anything.
That’s why I find it odd that people try to imitate successful people.
That’s not the most important reason I don’t care about imitating success.

The orginal article.

Summary of “After Five Miscarriages, I Finally Opened Up About My Fertility Struggles”

I’ve done two rounds of intrauterine insemination, two egg retrievals, and four embryo transfers, in two rounds of IVF. I’ve had five miscarriages.
After each miscarriage I went through the same old motions, but I felt like a completely different person, as if I were watching my life go on while holed up in some little corner of my brain.
I was sharing all of this, but I wasn’t sharing the biggest thing happening in my life-the thing taking up the most brain space.
How could I possibly look at Sunny and think she wasn’t enough? I felt greedy wanting more.
With each seemingly “Normal” Instagram I posted, I felt more and more like a fraud.
So many people sharing a similar experience, so many women suffering physical and emotional trauma, but no one’s talking about it.
Why does something so important feel so hard to talk about on social media?
We had talked about sharing our story once I was pregnant again, but in the moment it still felt like a lot.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How Ed Catmull Spent His Last Day as Head of Pixar”

Earlier this spring I had the chance to witness two of the “Farewell talks” that Ed Catmull gave to the people of Pixar.
Catmull shared – over and over again – what he believed the whole company should be thinking about as it looks ahead. Catmull has always been unusually reflective about the challenges of leading creative organizations, and generous in sharing the practices he finds effective.
How many consider it important to talk with every team in the company? Catmull talked to everyone, including hundreds of people who had never sat in meetings focused on high-level strategic issues – but whose efforts make Pixar films possible.
With so many people to connect with, Catmull made the sensible decision to do many talks.
Catmull started out drafting his talks around what he saw as Pixar’s “Tentpole” issues – technology leadership, storytelling excellence, and more.
Appropriately, Catmull left plenty of time at the end of his comments for his colleagues to speak up and pose questions of their own.
Catmull ended each talk with a complete digression into territory he personally found fascinating.
Why were these conversations valuable to the company? First, Catmull provided Pixar employees with his well-informed perspective on the challenges ahead. Second, he gave them a launching point and maybe even the framework for future conversations, among themselves, about how Pixar will continue to thrive.

The orginal article.