Contact Us
Latest Posts:
McGillespie
Tag

productivity

Browsing
Shana Lebowitz
Business

Don’t bother inviting me to catch up over coffee — I’m done networking and I’m starting to think you should be, too

By

by Shana Lebowitz

  • Will networking help you build a successful career? I’ve never been sure.
  • Mostly, traditional networking seems to me like it takes a lot of time and effort.
  • Some experts say building connections is a practical strategy, in case you ever lose your job.
  • Other experts say you’re better off working and developing concrete skills than schmoozing.

A few weeks ago, one of my coworkers at Business Insider created a Slack channel called #lunch-buddy. Anyone who joined the channel would be randomly paired with another BI employee; the two would then meet for lunch, or coffee, or maybe just a walk, and get to know each other.

This initiative seemed to me a brilliant idea. Generally speaking, my coworkers are lovely people, but I know only a sliver personally. And when it comes to employees in other departments — say, product or finance — I’m curious to know what they do all day because, as it stands, I have no clue. (I imagine the feeling is mutual.)

I typed “#lunch-buddy” into the Slack search bar. And then I closed out of it. It was a Monday morning and, already, I was behind on work. I imagined that, by the time my buddy and I arranged to meet up, I’d be even farther behind. Inevitably, I’d wind up nibbling nervously on a sandwich while sneaking glances at my phone to make sure no one was Slacking me. This buddy business was not going to work out, at least not for me.

I should mention that, when the email about the lunch-buddy program went out, I was in the middle of reporting a story about networking. My specific goal was to figure out whether networking was good for your career, as so many influencers would have it, or bad. Good because you meet interesting new people who can introduce you to interesting new job opportunities, clients, and projects. Bad because you spend so much time schmoozing that you forget to, you know, work.

I wasn’t sure where I stood on the subject. As the lunch-buddy incident had made clear, I theoretically supported networking, but wasn’t very adept at practicing it. On LinkedIn, I posed the question to my connections. Unsurprisingly for a networking website, several people who commented said their relationships had always benefited them in their career.

And maybe they’d benefited mine, too. A few years ago, I was looking for a new job and mentioned as much to an old coworker (who’d become a friend) when we got together for drinks. Days later, she emailed me a Business Insider job posting that I’d missed in my search and, well, the rest is history.

Does that count as networking? I’m not sure. I like to think it’s better defined as being a human being with human friends who are willing to help you out.

Read the Whole Article

Do you find these posts helpful and informative? Please CLICK HERE to help keep us going!

by
Keep Reading
SV3-Course
Communication

Recommended Course on Scrivener 3.0

By

I was thinking of creating a course on Scrivener 3.0 when I found an excellent one by Karen Prince. Now that Karen has made this one I might focus on teaching advanced tips (if making one, at all):

Scrivener 3 Full Course on How to Use Scrivener 3 for Mac by Karen Prince.

The subtitle of the course is “Master all the Major Features of Your Scrivener Writing Software to write eBooks and Paperback books”. Karen specifies the Mac version but there’s few differences between the mac and pc versions.

Karen has an excellent teaching style (and voice) and the course will take you way beyond the point of being productive with the software. My only gripe about the course is the length of her videos (which some might view as a plus). I would prefer videos be kept to bite-sized chunks of 5-minutes or less whereas Karen’s are often in the double-digits in this scrivener course.

I purchased the course on sale for $20 though it’s listed for $80 between sales.

BTW, if you’re a writer and don’t yet use scrivener you’re almost certainly wasting time, writing worse, or writing less than you might. I made the switch two years ago and it was more than worth the week it took to come up to speed on the workflow.

by
Keep Reading
la sainte bible du chanoine
Church

On Idolizing the Bible

By

On Idolizing the Bible

Commentary on “How the Bible Became an Idol” by Paul Rosenberg

I’ll refer to the author as Rosenberg to distinguish him from the apostle Paul.

“Again I am raising a difficult subject, but again, it’s something that needs to be said. And my title is true. The Bible – the holy book of more or less all Christians – has become an idol. And yes, I do mean idol as in “false god.”

A book, no matter how good, remains a book and should be treated as a book. A deity is something far different.

Not every Christian uses the Bible as an idol of course, but many millions do – probably a majority in North America – including nearly all of the TV preachers.

The Bible is 66 books with ~40 authors written over ~1500 years put between one cover and referred to as “a book”. None of the books are deities nor are they above, or outside of, Reality.

A Christian may hold the Bible to be the most important “book” in the world but it’s not a substitute for God unless He’s absent from their lives (which is probably the crux of the matter, here).

What is an Idol?

An idol is something you hold above reality.

The Bible uses the word “idol” to refer to that which a man holds above, or in place of, God. Since only that which created Reality could be above (outside, beyond) it, Rosenberg’s use of the word is roughly the same.

A true God – a creator of the universe, for example – should be held above reality, since he created reality. If, however, we hold something else above reality, we make it an idol. A created thing should be considered a part of reality, not held above it.

So, when I say the Bible has become an idol, I mean people hold it above reality, putting it into the position of a god.”

The Bible refers to the gods being worshipped in the OT and NT (represented in stone, wood, or gold idols) as real and created by God.1 These created gods, as well as the Bible, “should be considered to be part of reality, not held above it”.

Not a Book-Based Religion?

As long as the relationships between people and their Creator are replaced (avoided) with rituals we’ll be stuck with the word, “religion”.

“Christianity very clearly did not start as book-based. When Jesus “preached the good news,” he quoted just a small number of scriptures and usually as a necessity, answering people who questioned him. And several of those were of the “you’ve heard it said… but I say” variety. He read a few lines from Isaiah in his hometown synagogue once, but we see very little more than that.

Even the very literate Paul uses Greek poets in his sermons almost as much as Old Testament passages. (He uses some scriptures in his writings.)”

The New Testament refers to the Old Testament 2,572 times including allusions, echoes, citations, and quotations.2 Here’s the total breakout as well as that for Jesus and Paul.

nt_ot

Jesus’ use of the OT is consistent with, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Mt 5:17) One astounding aspect of that fulfillment was His abiding by the laws while supplanting them with grace.4 His scripture was the Septuagint (A Greek translation of the Hebrew canon made in 250 BC.).

While Jesus fulfilled the laws, Paul documented much of that fulfillment in canonical extension, later to become known as the New Testament. Paul’s use of the Septuagint is consistent with writing eight to thirteen of the 27 books of the NT.

Stating the Obvious, Extrapolating the Unnecessary5

Those writing, copying, and assembling books of the New Testament did not, themselves, have access to completed copies. To therefore conclude, somehow, that books not yet written were unimportant to those writing them is to extrapolate the unnecessary after stating the obvious.

In that sense, neither is Judaism a book-based religion. The Old Testament was written and assembled into canon over a period of ~1000 years. It was then translated into Greek to make it accessible to Jews who had been in exile so long they’d lost touch with their own language. Does a project requiring 33 generations to complete imply apathy?

The first Christians valued Christ over everything. Their first independent actions were to spread the word about Him and what He’d just done. They weren’t apathetic about writing things down. A remarkable aspect of the NT is how little time had passed from the actual events to the time the 27 books were written and then assembled into canon. They were documenting what they’d witnessed while simultaneously risking their lives to spread a faith that would become the largest in the world.

I do agree with Rosenberg that the apostles and first Christians weren’t risking their lives for a book (or books) but for what they’d just seen. Also, even without completed copies of what has become the New Testament the early Christians were, no doubt, more effective and consistent than most modern Christians.

Facing the Bible

Those of us who’ve read the book know the laws in the Old Testament that no one follows anymore. We know how the apostles disagreed. But – and this is where idolatry comes in – millions of us pretend that we saw nothing and move on. Or if we’re trying to be very religious, we come up with creative interpretations to resolve the flaws.

Conjuring up “creative interpretations to resolve the flaws” is worse than a waste of time. It degrades integrity and faith. It also avoids some of the best opportunities for spiritual growth.

Do the “Bible is the word of God people” think the Author needs their help in deflecting attention away from weak parts of an otherwise stellar attempt to reach mankind?

The Laws that No One Follows Anymore

I’m no expert on Judaism. Still, I doubt that anyone, other than Jesus and a few prophets and priests, managed to abide by all 613 commandments of the law.

There are orthodox Jews who still believe they must abide by most of the laws. They claim to be excused from the sacrificial laws (159 of the 613) because the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. But, how were they released from the remaining 454? If they don’t recognize Jesus as their messiah how (and when) did these laws become inactive?

The Apostles Disagreed

The most famous disagreement among the apostles arose when Paul publicly admonished Peter for observing Judaic laws after Jesus had fulfilled them. Bob Deffinbaugh’s exposition of the disagreement, and Peter’s capitulation, is excellent.

Using the Bible to Prove Everything

And let me be clear on this: Trying to prove everything by the Bible is a deviation from actual growth. If you’ve done this for any length of time, you’ve hindered yourself.

Rosenberg may be referring to the often lazy habit of quoting Biblical text as self-proving. To a non-believer this is recursive reasoning. It’s much more effective to quote applicable verses and explain why you think they’re true in the context of the discussion.

A larger point to understand is that the Bible doesn’t contain all knowledge. Such would be like a map with a scale of 1-to-1: accurate but useless. There are no microwaves, jet planes, toasters, CAD design programs, or even hidden codes in every 70th (or whatever) letter predicting the third Reich. Neither does Ezekiel contain the design plans for an alien spacecraft. The sooner a Christian is disabused of the notion that everything is in the Bible, the better.

The Bible is what God deemed sufficient for the realms it covers. It was not intended to be exhaustive. Exhaustive knowledge is a utopian myth. Humans have to work for knowledge just as they have to work to get food from the ground.

Doing, Or Not Doing?

Readers of the book really should know these things. The core of the New Testament – the recorded words of Jesus – require people to do the things he taught. The “Bible as word of God” people, on the other hand, spend endless hours arguing about who Jesus was, comparing scriptures, finding hidden meanings, proving their interpretations right, and proving the interpretations of others wrong. And so they bypass doing.

Though admonished by one commenter to “stick to subjects he knows about”, Rosenberg could just as well be paraphrasing Paul in 1 Timothy 1:3–7:

“As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.”6

The Sad Part

“The central requirement for any follower of Jesus is to love. Everything else comes second. Jesus not only taught this again and again; he exhibited it in his life. Christians, however, consistently push it aside in favor of other things. (I could tell you stories, but you probably have your own.)”

Indeed, “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Ga 5:14)

“The really sad part of this is that the Bible idolaters – or at least a great number of them – do have experience with the divine impulse, of contact or at least innate yearning for a transcendent ultimate. But they never develop these things, because they’re busy idolizing a mere book, following the traditions and commandments of men.“

Jesus condemned the Pharisees for treating the OT in exactly this way. How much worse for a Christian to do the same with the completed Bible?

What’s Rosenberg Getting At?

Rosenberg sees the Bible as a valuable resource. He greatly appreciates the impact that Judeo-Christian ethics have had on western civilization. He believes there’s a creator of the universe distinct from the created. He has a “divine impulse” and “innate yearning for a transcendent ultimate”. So, why would someone so philosophically, though not theologically, aligned with Christianity be frustrated enough to write about Christians using the Bible as an idol?

At the risk of being presumptuous I’ll put into my own words what I think are some of Rosenberg’s points. If doing so would make fellow Christians consider them then it will have been worth the effort:

  • Because of the enormous, yet squandered, human potential of a third of humanity. If a small fraction of that number patterned their thoughts, will, abilities, beliefs, and expectations on the full range of Jesus’ teachings the world would be so dramatically transformed it might be mistaken for heaven.
  • Because millions of Christians who claim Jesus as their role-model either don’t take him seriously enough, or are afraid to discover, let alone implement, the full breadth of His teachings.
  • Because the Book of Acts describes the behaviors and experiences of Christians before there was a Book of Acts. And yet, the first Christians were more Christ-like, with limited access to fragments of text, than modern Christians are with a completed New Testament.

The Christian Difference

Voltaire is credited with saying, “Show me your redeemed life, and I’ll believe in your Redeemer”. And then there’s the rhetorical question that, “If you were jailed for being a Christian would there be enough evidence to convict you?”.

There’s nothing different about people living inconsistently with their own stated beliefs. You can find them in every house and on every street-corner in the world. Christians are supposed to stand out in such a way as there’s no doubt that something is different about them. Why else would anyone care to learn more about their beliefs?

Can we blame non-believers for concluding that a redemption without fruit is no redemption, at all?

The Christian difference occurs in believers who call Jesus a role model and have the courage to act consistency with the goal of becoming more like Him.

That means diving into his teachings and exposing yourself to the full-spectrum of what you find. No picking and choosing what you, or those around you, might be comfortable with. No strip-mining the supernatural out of the events. No arrogant presumptions that God needs your protection of His Bible because someone sent you a list of “flaws” on Facebook.

Set a goal of nothing short of putting on the mind of Christ. “Aim at Heaven and you will get Earth ‘thrown in’: aim at Earth and you will get neither.”7

Faith without Works

Faith without works is trust without transformation. It’s an attempt to be oriented towards the Creator without “power according to his glorious might”. (Col 1:11) In daily life, it’s hope without joy.

Transformation of Character and Supernatural Power

Dallas Willard, speaking on “Being Church” said:

“When the kingdom of God is present, power flows. And what characterize the people of Christ throughout the ages is transformation of character and supernatural power. Those two things always follow. When Jesus brought the kingdom he brought manifestation.”

That’s what the early Christians had and what many of today’s Christians don’t have. That’s what’s at the core of Judeo-Christian ethics that have transformed the world.

The early Christians weren’t risking their lives for unfinished scrolls on parchment or papyrus. And they weren’t risking their lives because Jesus was a smart guy who’d just laid some awesome philosophy on them. They risked their lives to remain true to what they’d just witnessed: Jesus performing miracles all over the place, raising people from the dead and then rising, himself, from being dead. And if that wasn’t enough, walking around and eating meals with them while detailing how He’d just fulfilled their scriptures. It was the resurrected Jesus that told them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”8

In that sense, I agree with Rosenberg, that Christianity is not a book-based religion. It’s a relationship with God centered around His presence in our actual lives. Without transformation of character and supernatural power there will be no great works. But, with them?

The world is yours!9

  1. “My contention is that, if our theology really derives from the biblical text, we must reconsider our selective supernaturalism and recover a biblical theology of the unseen world. This is not to suggest that the best interpretation of a passage is always the most supernatural one. But the biblical writers and those to whom they wrote were predisposed to supernaturalism. To ignore that outlook or marginalize it will produce Bible interpretation that reflects our mind-set more than that of the biblical writers.” Heiser, M. S. (2015). The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible (First Edition, p. 18). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press. ↩
  2. Jackson, J. G. (Ed.). (2015). New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife. ↩
  3. There are four relationships that are used: Citation, Quotation, Allusion, and Echo. These terms are understood as:
    Citation: An explicit reference to scripture with a citation formula (e.g. “It is written,” or “the Lord says,” or “the prophet says”).
    Quotation: A direct reference to scripture, largely matching the verbatim wording of the source but without a quotation formula
    Allusion: An indirect but intentional reference to scripture, likely intended to invoke memory of the scripture.
    Echo: A verbal parallel evokes or recalls a scripture (or series of scriptures) to the reader, but likely without authorial intention to reproduce exact words.
    ↩
  4. “For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.” The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (Ro 6:14). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society. ↩
  5. “Yes – as I have said many times in classes: Scholars have a habit of embracing the obvious (redaction) and then extrapolating to the unnecessary (XYZ “universally accepted” critical theory that actually has significant weaknesses – as though there were no other options).” http://drmsh.com/does-higher-criticism-attempt-to-destroy-the-bible/ ↩
  6. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (1 Ti 1:3–7). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society. ↩
  7. C.S. Lewis, The Joyful Christian ↩
  8. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (Mt 28:18–20). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society. ↩
  9. “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (Ge 1:28). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.” ↩
by
Keep Reading
Markdown-parchment
Business

Markdown is the New Parchment

By

If you want your words to last as long as parchment use plain ASCII text with Markdown. When found, your writing can be republished at the click of a button. It’s digital; make lots of copies.

Markdown is . . .1

… a way to format plain text to show the formatting choices of the writer.

The syntax is natural and the formatted text is readable (Unlike HTML from which Markdown was derived as a form of shorthand). And, since most publishing software can read Markdown, directly, the writer can write once, skip the hassles of formatting, and pass the text directly on to the publisher.

Half of the Markdown syntax is just how a writer would format text, naturally. For example, you type an asterisk or a number in front of bullet points or a list of items, or hit enter to separate paragraphs. Heading levels are marked by the number of “#” signs placed before the heading. Even footnotes, tables and web links are straightforward and the text remains readable after formatting.

Storage

Plain digital text bypasses the problems of paper storage. It also bypasses the format wars of proprietary software. Your writing is created, stored, and published from the same text file. If we can read Egyptian hieroglyphs, today, perhaps people will be able to read ASCII text files, 5000 years from now.

Ideally, you make a (Digital) book available and distribute it to hundreds or thousands of people. Upload it to a website where it will be indexed, and possibly stored, by a third party. Less ambitious writers could put their text on as many mediums as they can find. Put them in a safe, wrapped in a paper printout. Tell your family about them and put it in your will. If your lucky, your progeny will see it and use the search engine of the day to find a copy, somewhere. Otherwise, perhaps one of your digital copies is readable. In terms of survivability, the paper copy is likely the weakest contender after 100 years or so.

How Long Will it Last?

Markdown_table
Markdown_table

 

Search

The presumption, even today, is that if you have the title, or the author’s name, you have a fair chance of finding the book. As more books are published in digital-only formats the odds of being able to find any book will increase.

Write Once, Publish Anywhere

Markdown makes it possible to write once and publish anywhere. Every platform I’ve needed to publish to can receive markdown text. But, it’s even better than that: Most of my writing is outlined, written, edited, and exported directly to the publishing platform and archived in markdown from within one program: Scrivener. The text can then be updated or repurposed from the same place it’s archived! It’s hard to describe the relief of simplicity this workflow provides. It makes for a frictionless writing environment that shifts the focus of the work back onto content. You just keep writing and let the publishing platforms handle the formatting details.

Markdown Benefits

  • Liberates the writer from formatting concerns both during, and after, writing.
  • Liberates the writer from proprietary software jail.
  • Gives the writer the widest number of choices in publishing platforms.
  • Enables the writer to use the same text file to feed multiple software and publishing platforms.
  • Updates and editions are made to one file: The original text file.
  • Enables the text to be read now and for the foreseeable human future.
  • Puts the writing in simple text format which will outlast all software programs currently in use.
  • Text processing programs are everywhere as are publishing software and platforms that can read Markdown, directly. Pick one and start writing.

WYSIWYG Live Preview, Yes!

Ironically, writing in simple text was a big step for me. I worked as a typesetter before, and during, college and have always loved the look of well-formatted text and book design. My professional consulting is replete with word processors, project management software, presentations, adobe frame maker proposals, etc. To make it worse, I’ve relied heavily on HTML and InDesign for the past eight years. Must I do without the inspiration of formatted text to get all the benefits of writing in markdown?

Not at all! Marked reads your text file (Even a Scrivener file!) and displays a fully formatted version of your document in real time. As you type, Marked updates the displayed document. When you’re finished you can export the document from your original text editor or right from Marked, in all the standard formats.

Workflows

Website Articles

  1. Scrivener to WordPress.
  2. Markdownify plug-in within wordpress editor box.
  3. Images stored on dropbox or website image directory.
  4. Marked shows WYSIWYG of Scrivener file, including images, while the article is being written.

Guest posts

  1. Scrivener exported to publisher’s format preference.
    A. Cut/paste of Markdown txt?
    B. Html or pdf export from Marked
    C. Other?

Client Documents

  1. Scrivener to pdf export.
  2. Indesign for special formats only.

Books

  1. Scrivener to first draft.
  2. Edit drafts in Scrivener.
  3. Send to Editor(s).
  4. Make edits in Scrivener.
  5. Final copy to Indesign.
  6. Format for Kindle, PDF, etc.
  7. Succeeding versions in Indesign.

Project Planning & Tasks

  1. Omnifocus (Text only)
  2. Drafts (MD and Text)
  3. Scrivener (MD and Text)
  4. Excel

E-mails

MailMate

Notes

  1. Evernote
  2. Nvalt
  3. Drafts (iphone/pad) to Evernote to Scrivener

Misc. Tools

  • Byword
  • Brett Terpstra’s Markdown services
  • MultiMarkdown Composer

P.S., Nine Months Later

Shortly after starting to use Markdown I began using dictation software to talk words onto the screen. Dictation has now taken such a big place in my daily writing that my typing speed has declined. One thing I haven’t yet done is to train the dictation software to implement markdown syntax. For example, perhaps I could train the software so that saying, “Bold that”, puts double asterisks around the last word?

I no longer need Adobe Indesign or Word for daily writing. I much prefer to use Marked 2 for WYSIWYG of the draft folder of Scrivener. It’s not as good as Indesign but enough to be inspired by the clean text and formatting of what I’m working on.

When writing articles I sometimes use temporary droplink addresses of image files so Marked can show me how the picture will look with the text during the writing process. I also use droplink addresses to compose e-mails to friends (Also in markdown) if they’re to include photos. If I need the images to be viewable in the long-term I use “Transmit” to quickly upload the images to my website image directory and use that address in the markdown syntax.

When composing agendas and client documents I write them all in scrivener using markdown. I then use Marked to convert markdown to the pdf files that are sent directly to the client. Client work is started, and completed, in Scrivener where it remains in its final form. The pdf’s sent to the client are beautiful and archived in Scrivener.

Best Markdown Resources

  1. Invented by John Gruber and Fletcher Penny. ↩
  2. https://www.whalingmuseum.org/explore/library/from-the-vault/cuffe-manuscripts ↩
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutenberg_Bible ↩
  4. David Diringer noted that “the first mention of Egyptian documents written on leather goes back to the Fourth Dynasty (c. 2550–2450 BC), but the earliest of such documents extant are: a fragmentary roll of leather of the Sixth Dynasty (c. 24th century BC) ↩
  5. Jiahu symbols, carved on tortoise shells in Jiahu, c. 6600 BC ↩
by
Keep Reading
Dvorak Keyboard
Health

Dvorak – Your Optimal Keyboard?

By

The QWERTY keyboard most people use was designed for the typewriter in the 1870’s. It’s named after the key sequence on the upper left of the keyboard.

There were no ‘typists’ before the typewriter, so, QWERTY was designed for the typewriter. Many key combinations caused the machine to jam so were placed on the new keyboard to slow them down. This was a good thing because untangling the levers was time consuming. Ironically, you could get more typing done by typing slower! Typists were also taught to strike the key hard and release quickly; another jam avoiding technique.

Today, there are no mechanical limits on typing yet most are using a keyboard designed to slow them down. The widespread use of computer keyboards provides the means to escape from this mechanical prison to whoever wants to be free. In fact, most of the typing world is a few clicks and a decision away from keyboard freedom.

And what does keyboard freedom look like?

It looks like typing as fast as you can think. It looks like being comfortable writing as long as you want. It looks like being able to type for the rest of your life with no arm or hand pain.

The Dvorak Keyboard

You probably have a QWERTY keyboard in front of you. Here’s what the Dvorak keyboard looks like:

Dvorak studied hand shape, letter frequencies and combinations and arranged the keyboard to minimize hand movement and maximize the speed of typing the most common letters and combinations.

For instance, the most frequently used letters in the English language are “ETAON RISHD LFCMU GYPWB VKXJQ Z” (In that order). The first 12 of these letters are used 80% of the time. Notice how 10 of those 12 letters are on the ‘home’ row of the keyboard. You can type thousands of complete words without even moving your hands off the ‘home’ row of the Dvorak keyboard!

Notice how all vowels are on the left side of the ‘home’ row (except for ‘y’) with consonants on the right. Since English words are mostly a pattern of Consonant | Vowel | Consonant | Vowel most words are formed with the letters typed by alternating hands like beating a drum. The most common letter pairs in English are “TH HE AN RE ER IN ON AT ND ST ES EN OF TE ED OR TI HI AS TO”. Looking at the Dvorak layout notice that those letters are either right next to each other or easily typed with alternating hands.

The hardest row to reach is the bottom row. That’s where Dvorak placed the least commonly used English letters. Dvorak also factored in right-handedness and ‘inboard stroke flow‘ (Think of the way we roll-tap fingers on a table top from the little finger to the index finger).

Other Dvorak Layouts

Using the same Dvorak principles there are also Left and Right one-handed keyboards, a layout for C programmers and a keyboard for most latin script based languages.

Reviewing the Options

For English and languages based on Latin script you have the following keyboard options:

  1. QWERTY -English or your language version.
  2. COLEMAN – ‘Improved’ QWERTY meant to ease retraining of QWERTY typists.
  3. Dvorak (English or your language version).
  4. Map your Own Keyboard Layout. – An interesting alternative now possible using Microsoft Keyboard Layout Creator, KbdEdit or Keyman Developer.

(Non-Latin script languages like Chinese, Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Russian, etc. may have to Map their own keyboards if their default hasn’t been optimized).

My Take

QWERTY is not an option for me because it hurts my hands. The faster and longer I type the more it hurts. Coleman is a compromise meant to save on retraining QWERTY typists rather than optimize hand movement for language– No thanks. The idea of mapping my own keyboard layout is fascinating, but, I couldn’t improve on Dvorak and Dealey’s design; They were exhaustive and thorough in their quest to Optimize the keyboard for English.

Speed is One Thing

A fast typer can type as fast as they can think in words. Faster than that is useful for dictation and contests, I suppose. There are four non-speed benefits to optimizing keyboard layout:

  1. Comfort
  2. Long term injury avoidance
  3. Increased daily stamina (And no soreness)
  4. Increased lifetime stamina

Based on soreness near the end of my QWERTY days I’d be in trouble, today, if I hadn’t made the switch.

The Big Picture

Keyboard use is so widespread that almost every job requires it. The more keyboard use the more productivity gains to optimizing it for the user.

Writers, programmers, travel agents, secretaries, bloggers and publishers may get the biggest payoff. However, that list is growing as is the keyboards role in every day life.

Making the Switch

The Dvorak Keyboard is a button push away on on most computers. You change the setting in your preferences and “Voila” the keys are remapped. You don’t need to buy anything.

I switched to Dvorak five years ago because my hands hurt. As a piano player I was a very fast QWERTY typist and my hands ached and cramped at the end of long writing days. If I didn’t do something I would have been in trouble just when I needed to type more than ever.

Actually, Dvorak was not my first choice. Dragonfly was.

Dragonfly

Why type when you can talk?

They say it’s best to write like you talk. People complicate their written words and keep their spoken words simple. I also think more clearly when speaking than writing because of the person I’m talking with. Why not bypass writing, altogether, and go right to the spoken word to capture thoughts and let the computer do the work?

Dragonfly is great, but, it slowed the transition to Dvorak since there was less need to type. That’s not a complaint. I felt more comfortable making the switch to Dvorak because my dependency on the keyboard was less. I recommend that transition technique if you don’t mind learning both Dragonfly and Dvorak at the same time.

I stopped using Dragonfly because my aging Windows computer couldn’t run it and the Adobe Suite at the same time. Now that Microsoft has been banished from my life and a beautiful and powerful UNIX machine awaits Dragonfly will soon follow.

How Long Does It Take?

The websites and books on Dvorak say it only takes a few months. It took me six months. During the transition I was using Dragonfly to dictate most writing right onto the screen. Since I wasn’t typing as much there was less practice time on the ‘new’ Dvorak layout. Otherwise, it probably would have taken the normal two or three months.

Labels on the Keys?

I tried putting labels on the keys, but, found it confusing. When logging into the computer the default keyboard is QWERTY. It doesn’t switch to Dvorak until it boots up and reads your preferences. Therefore, you have to type your password using QWERTY. Having the Dvorak labels on the keys made password entry confusing. I took the labels off and printed out a reference diagram for Dvorak forcing myself to find the keys by looking at the diagram. You have to type without looking at the keys to gain any speed. Why not skip the crutch of looking at the keys right off the bat?

What about Phone Keyboards?

Many people wonder if I get confused when using the keyboards on phones since they are all QWERTY. No, not at all. In fact, I prefer that phones have QWERTY because I can visually find the QWERTY keys faster than Dvorak!

Dvorak is in my muscle memory and QWERTY is in my visual memory. That reads much more confusing than it feels. When typing I never look at the keys; I just feel where the letters are. Since the letters are in the Dvorak layout those are where I ‘feel’ the letters. Without the Dvorak labels my keyboard is still, visibly, QWERTY. When tying in my password in the morning to login I look at the keyboard.

What About Using Other Computers?

99% of the time you use your own computer. If you need to use another computer (And the owner lets you!) just temporarily change the keyboard setting. When you’re done switch it back.

I still hunt and peck in QWERTY faster than many can type. However, I have to take my hands off the keyboard and look at the keys. I was a touch QWERTY typist so memory of the keys is still there. What I’ve lost is the muscle memory of QWERTY. My muscle memory is now Dvorak.

It ‘feels’ similar to being bilingual. The idea of knowing two words for everything is only hard to imagine for someone who has not yet learned a second language.

Nobody Wants to Use My Computer!

People start typing on my computer and can’t figure out what’s ‘wrong’ with it. My wife won’t even do quick web searches, technical support frowns, friends shake their heads . . . everybody hates it.

And I love it!

Anything that keeps people off my computer is a good thing. It adds another layer of security for snoops in places where they don’t belong.

Going From Hard to Easy

You may think switching to Dvorak is going from something easy to something hard. That’s backwards: Going from QWERTY to Dvorak is going from something hard to something easy. Sure, the transition will take some effort and probably shouldn’t be done in the middle of a project. However, thereafter your life will be easier, not harder. That goes double if you’re a writer or depend on the keyboard for your work.

Good Reasons to Delay the Switch

After using Dvorak for five years I recommend considering it for Your Optimal Keyboard in English. It’s hard to imagine QWERTY being Optimal in this age of computers unless:

  • Your job requires using many different keyboards not under your control.
  • You must use a dumb terminal that’s not switchable.
  • You share your primary computer with someone not open to switching.
  • You’re in the middle of a pressing project and are waiting for things settle down before making the switch (Referring to a project here, not life).

Otherwise, save your hands and increase your productivity: Either switch to Dvorak or Roll Your Own . . . .

Rolling Your Own

The optimal keyboard layout is specific to the language. Dvorak was originally developed for English after exhaustive studies of language use. To reach the Dvorak level of Optimal in your language would require the same exhaustive studies. This work has already been done in Latin script languages. But, if you’re not satisfied then there’s never been an easier time to roll your own.

Computer now have the option of using any keyboard mapping you’d like. Marcus Brooks has some great tips if you’re interested in developing your own keyboard layout.

by
Keep Reading
Caffeine Curve
Diet

How to Quit Drinking Coffee

By

The best way to quit drinking coffee is to replace it with something else. For coffee you’ll need direct and indirect replacements.

The indirect replacements are for the routines, sights, sounds, textures, tastes, feelings, circumstances and occasions that surround your coffee drinking.

The better your choice of replacement(s) for the drink and all these other things that surround your drinking the easier the quitting will be.

In the rest of this article I’ll tell you what replacement(s) I chose and describe my current experience with quitting.

Should you quit drinking coffee?

Not knowing if or why you want to stop drinking coffee is probably why you haven’t quit, already. Or maybe your why is not enough to motivate you.

In the case of coffee we’re bombarded with conflicting stories about whether its good or bad for us. Both sides of the health argument for coffee are about even and the question will probably never be resolved.

If coffee controls you instead of you controlling it then you should quit drinking it. You’ll know it’s controlling you when you can’t start the day without it. Or, if you get a headache when you don’t have enough.

Replacements

Quitting is a transition to something else. Here’s a few things to keep in mind about picking and using replacements:

The best replacements usually have a lot in common with what you’re trying to quit. Things we have to quit often involve routines, sights, sounds, textures, tastes and feelings surrounding the thing we’re trying to quit. You may need replacements for them, as well. For coffee, there is the taste, the caffeine buzz, the smell, the warm liquid flowing down your throat and the routine of grinding the beans and setting up the machine.

You may need a series of replacements before settling on the final. That means Your Optimal final replacement may not be the best first replacement to use. Your body may have to detoxify or have other reactions and compensations it has to cycle through before you can ultimately quit. In extreme cases that may mean moving from something toxic to something less toxic and eventually to something non-toxic. The final replacement should be something actually good for you.

But, we’re talking coffee, here, not heroin. One or two replacements will probably do it. I used four replacements for coffee: Two for the morning and two others for the afternoon, see below.

It may be best to allow yourself as much of your replacements as you want as long as your replacement is not toxic. It may serve as a psychological reward for following through on the quitting.

My Replacements for Coffee

My first replacement is tea, with caffeine.

For me, it is the perfect first replacement because it has so much in common with the way I drink coffee. Tea is hot, I add milk and stevia to it, it prevents my caffeine withdrawal headache and the physical routine surrounding its preparation is almost identical to making coffee. We have one of those “Instant Hot” water dispensors in the kitchen so I get the added benefit of having the tea ready, almost instantly.

My second replacement is tea, without caffeine. By this time I’ve ramped down on the amount of caffeine in the tea, so, probably won’t get a withdrawal headache any more. If I do then alternating with caffeinated tea is the quick remedy. After about seven days the whole craving for coffee in the morning is gone. That’s surprisingly quick for someone who couldn’t imagine starting a day without coffee only a week ago!

My third replacement, used in the afternoon, is a nap. I was using coffee as a crutch to power through the afternoon without a nap or a break. I decided not to fight afternoon naps any longer and just take one. The benefits of afternoon naps have been enormous! If fact, I feel it gives almost a full extra day of productivity every day! Wow, talk about a replacement.

Every once in a while I have a diet Rock Star after waking up from my afternoon knap. So far, its been a great way to start my ‘second day’. It’s one of those sugar free health drinks that has healthy ingredients. I’m skeptical about the pink, blue and yellow stuff they use in sugar free drinks and prefer stevia. But, for now, I’m enjoying the Rock-Star until I find something better. Leading candidates are pelligrino with a little fruit juice added for taste or some of the exotic teas my wife gets on her trips to China.

How Long Does It Take?

The whole thing took about a week, for me.

As much as I was addicted to coffee it just didn’t take that long to quit drinking it. I had a headache for the first 3 days if I didn’t have enough caffeinated tea. A little bit of tea and “Poof”, headache gone.

One of the surprising things for me was accepting the fact that I’m a slow riser. It takes me a while to leave dreamland and cut over to wakefulness. Because of this I find the routine of making the tea just as useful as the tea, itself. Therefore, when I wake up I go right into preparing the tea and, by the time its ready, I’m ready for the day.

How Will You Know When You’ve Quit?

You’ll know you’ve quit when you can take it or leave it.

Coffee will take its place among the multitude of drink options available to you depending on occasion and mood. You’ll be able to start your day with a clear mind and ready to go to work even though you’ve had no coffee.

A few days ago, we were over at a friends house and I was starting to fade. We were late in getting together and didn’t want to leave, yet. The conversation was interesting and another couple had just walked in the door that we wanted to socialize with. I made myself one cup of coffee. It was just the thing needed to keep the conversation going for a while until it was time to go. One cup of coffee and that was it. No coffee needed the next morning and no problems sleeping that night.

Coffee is now just another drink option. I neither crave it, avoid it or even think about it. If I want a cup I have one. I’ll even just have a decaf since I don’t need the buzz to think clearly, anymore.

Start acting and feeling like this and you’ll know you’ve quit.

 

Copyright © 2008 by Terence Gillespie. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given to McGillespie.com

by
Keep Reading