For me this year was marked by the abundance of AI in my life—from tinkering with material science at the start of the year, to being so very surprised by all the scaling up of transformers & diffusion models. The last part was especially cool because of the ease of ChatGPT making text LLMs so much more accessible. 

Apart from AI, I think I was at least able to do more introspection this year when I wasn't bogged down by school, getting to research some fun philosophy (more absurdism is always great). Thinking a lot more about what I want to do because of college apps, I feel like I have more of a solid grip of what I want to do in the future, or at least a more accurate more broad version.

Lastly this year was probably made best by the tons of people I was able to meet. Unironically in 2021 I probably met the least number of people in any year I've had, contrasted by 2022 where I've met so so so many new people. From new faces at school, to even more hackclub people, to meeting people @ ISEF & Italy, and even just going along talking to strangers in SF. I love how much more open to new people & experiences I've become, and thats definitely something I want to do more in 2023.

Project wise, I think 2023 was less scattered in "making small cool things that I find fun in a day" and more of "making large cooler projects" like a new ML algorithm or taking my first dive into game development. I think in 2023 I want to be able to make larger cool projects, but more interactive ones that I can put on my website—maybe some personal tools, my own language, or even a new social media!!!! (queue the xkcd competing norms meme)

Anime this year was amazing, can't wait for Vinland, Mushoku, Silksong, TOTK, & AoT next year. Media wise I feel like my spotify most accurately summarizes me.

Some cons for this year summarized: I feel like I could've worked harder and made a lot more projects in my free time. Also I honestly miss reading a lot, which I don't think I did a lot of this year (a total of only maybe 6 or 7 fun books...)

Notable rejections: Got deferred from MIT, rejected from most summer programs, wasn't a Coca Cola Semi-Finalist, and also got rejected by all the NASA internships I applied to...
Notable yays: 2nd place ISEF, all the judges & students I met were super super nice! Also got to go to Italy for a research internship (little me would freak out about that). "Travelled for work" for the first time helping make something, along with actually finishing college apps. Got to quarters for states in policy and finally got my first real trophy (and a couple from the backlog of last year).  Friends were a big win along with being invited to my first AI conference woooooo!

CAD w/ blender (& print something rlly useful)

more law & legal jargon also write mock legislation

write more personal tooling, and maybe a frontend design framework to unify it all—MAYBE A GOOD BACKUP SYSTEM, mixing in borg + ncdu into a good UI

once i do that make a bunch of fun interactive AI or just math things with the frontend framework

read a book every one or two weeks hopefully (I'm finishing up the Midnight Library right now) 

HAVE FUN!!! I just finished senior year first semester so honestly I'm going to take it as lax as possible, more social goals at this point...

truly my resolution for this year (ie. this is my resolution post for this year but this is the best pun i could think of).

The Hacker Zephyr, a hackathon on a train, that went across the country, was one of the craziest, and most fun experiences of my life.

The way I ended up finding out about being accepted to the Zephyr was super funny. As soon as pairings were announced for the 2021 National Debate tournament, I hopped onto a call with @max, where he invited me. During the whole time, my partner was beside me, asking tons of questions, and prepping for our upcoming round. At that time, I couldn't have known how much that single call, and train could change my life. And here I am, 2 flights, 4 train rides later, writing about what happened. 

In the past year or so, I've lost contact with what I liked about programming. Entangled in school, assignments, efficiency points, I ended up losing sight of what this all was for me, just a way to make. The Zephyr was unlike any other hackathon, because there was no real competition, but just a collective goal, of making 500 ships (projects) during the entire ride. They were themed around the idea of "building your own internet", where we had a full on intranet setup on the train. This was the perfect setup, for me to build tons of micro-projects, that just spurred my inner maker, especially being surrounded with other excited people like me 24/7.  Meeting people like the Libermans, and people at Vercel, also gave me perspective onto why I do these things, that risks are normal, and what I'm actually working towards whenever I create a project or company, a better world and community.

The Zephyr also gave me the nuance to life I've been searching for in so long. I saw so many different places, and experienced so many new ideas. All of these, combined with everyones perspectives, really gave depth to things I've seen. For example, the simple fact of looking at how people formed connections, and how almost everyone we met was so friendly, really gave me the sense that we're all in this together. Almost every person we met, helped us and had good intentions behind what they did. Along with that, the sheer fact of looking out and seeing the sheer vastness of the desert as soon as you wake up, just gives you the perspective of how small you really are, compared to the Earth.

I've also gotten to bond with my friends so much over this trip. At the start I only knew the other 41 people through interactions on the slack, and mostly online, and now I value them as some of my best friends. I just wanted to let everyone on the train know how thankful I am for ya'll, and that that train ride, truly, was a life changing experience.

For pictures, check out on the ZephyrBook or check out my highlights!

42 people. The worlds longest hackathon (3,502 miles). A life changing adventure.

TLDR; Motivation is a push against inertia, so it's counterintuitive to wait for it. You have to be a little spontaneous, and actually make it a habit to gain motivation, or find external motivation through parents/friends/commitments.

## What is Motivation?

Okay, so now starting with the base question: What is motivation? I think a good place to start here is with most peoples dilemma, not being able to find motivation, and therefore never starting something. The way I see it, in most cases this would mean motivation is a push against ones social inertia, in one way or another. Let's look at picking up your trash for example. There is a great reason to pick it up, but some people just don't because they aren't "motivated to". This applies to almost any case, all the way to not wanting to learn something, which is the fundamental idea that there is no intrinsic reason to do it.

Now after defining it, let's take a look at most peoples reason to not do something, which happens to be "not motivated". Since we've defined motivation as basic social inertia, it becomes apparent that motivation can come from 2 ways, spontaneity, or through external means (a push from someone else, or to meet a goal). Spontaneity is a great way to try many things, and to be motivated to do "stuff". It could be almost anything they want. The second means can be seen in practice often when parents try to push small kids to do activities, which they may not be motivated to do at first, but after time they start to like it, and are motivated. 

This leads to the greatest sin, waiting for motivation. Since motivation is a push against inertia, by waiting around and building habits, you actively make it harder for yourself to get motivated, by gaining inertia. This often leads to a cycle of regret, where you wait for the perfect motivation to do something, but end up never doing it, or just forgetting about it all-together. A great way to imagine this, is to think of humans as advanced dogs. We love to follow patterns and ruts, but if we ever want to break the rut, no gut feeling will tell us, because internally we love these ruts. It really is a funny cruel way for life to act, but in the end, that would mean the spontaneous win out, while the people who wait for the perfect second end up failing. 

## So what?

So! How do we end up gaining motivation, and doing things that we want to do? One way is to become spontaneous. Act on every desire you have, and when you feel like something, just do it! It's a funny thing to say, but most often, the cure to motivation, is to just do it. You'll find motivation as the "inertia" to do the task lowers, basically meaning as you find it becoming a rut/habit (In a funny sense, that makes motivation counterintuitive, but meh). The only way to build spontaneity, is to be a little spontaneous in a sense (It sometimes doesn't even have to come from spontaneity, some people find it in motivational music or speeches).

The second way, is to find it externally. This could be a whole range of things, but the one I find interesting is to have a friend motivate you. This can be seen in many areas to work, like studying, where most people like an "Hours" type group, where they check in every hour or so, give progress checks, and share screens the entire time. I think this could be applied to a whole range of areas, with people reminding you to try something new and stick with it. Personally, this works with me by making commitments to show people things, which motivate me by not wanting to flake on them. Really, any means of motivation aside from yourself should work.

Now with your newfound knowledge what shall you do? Climb Mt. Everest maybe? Take on a pack of ravenous wolves? Take out the trash? Whatever you do now, just make sure to never wait for motivation to do anything, but try to apply some of the methods I said above.  You might even learn to incorporate tons of cool new habits, and isn't that really what motivation is for?

What is motivation, and how can people get more of it? Learn a bit about my perspective!

YAY, The school year is over! Online school was quite interesting, especially with my first AP tests, as well as managing to organize myself efficiently. Mainly my qualms with online school is only the "non-socialness" of it all, but I love the freedom it provides with learning, and the ability to review anything you need, without having to search for it. It definitely blurs the line between school and homework a lot, in addition to almost constant screen time (night shift 24/7 ganggg). I don't really feel the stress of taking 3 AP classes, but they all made finals season a lot harder with almost constant studying (hopefully I did well).

Looking back I think there are quite a few ways I could improve this year, but most of all I think that my main problem was staying concentrated. In a world full of distractions, being forced to be online 24/7 is fun, but also takes a lot from your productivity. I've tried to combat this in multiple ways, from just decluttering my digital space, to chucking my phone away. Either way, hopefully next year with in person school this won't be a problem. Another thing I want to do better with is taking more opportunities. I sometimes reject some because I don't have enough time, but almost always regret it, so this year i hope to accept more of them.

Now in the summer I have quite a few things going on, from a large scale data science internship, to taking 61A at Berkeley. My goals for over the summer would be just to create cool programming projects, hopefully something related to AI and circuits! Also I want to try posting bi-weekly (2 times a week) in my notebook for fun!

I'll just list out my achievements this school year for fun, and so I don't forget:

1st place Conrad Challenge, and Diversity Award

Good of Humanity Award DV Research Paper Competition

All A's second semester, and both semesters for only AP's

Qualified to NSDA National Debate Tournament (record TBD)

TeachAids Internship, and created CoviDB for Kids (2.4k+ hits)

USACO Silver (just tried it out of the blue, may study for it next year)

Hosted our Hack Club online with 30+ members and had fun

Learned Rust (been on my bucket list for so long, it has to make it lol)

Contributed a significant change to a large github repo, the Github CLI

Helped with Summer of Making, and Scrapbook for HackClub!

What are some things I could do better, things I liked, and my plans for summer!

AI has progressed so far in such a short amount of time. Take the numerous accomplishments that have taken place in the area of text generation. Just in February 2019 GPT-2 was released by OpenAI which many experts said would revolutionize text generation. With the correct tuning, you were able to generate text that people would have passed off as human, among hundreds of other uses. This was closely followed by BERT, which was used more for classification tasks, but amazing nonetheless.  

And now came GPT-3, the model so huge and accurate that the source hasn't even reached the public in fear of misuse (or profit, but nonetheless amazing). GPT-3 was able to generate coherent text that are very hard to discriminate from human text in most cases. Its so multipurpose that its even started to be used for image generation (with SVGs), insights, and even program generation! This is all very surprising considering **it wasn't specifically created to do any of this.** Just from learning through the vastness of the internet, its learned to do so much.  

This brings us to this week, where I got access to GPT-3's API! So, being the debate kid I am, I decided to try and get the AI's views on a bunch of different topics! You can check out the entire discourse [on this notion page](https://www.notion.so/neelr/Interview-with-an-AI-29d58b9a4bd74143a68aa2ebe155ead0). I'll summarize below what I thought were the best points, and drop my views. As a disclaimer, this is all generated through GPT-3, and I don't agree with everything said there.

# Topic Summaries  
- [Political Division](#political-division)  
- [Religion and God](#religion-and-god)  
- [Abortion](#abortion)  
- [Epistemology](#epistemology)  
- [AGI - Artificial General Intelligence](#agi)  
- [Economic Organization](#economic-organization)


## Political Division
> **Topic: What are your thoughts on political polarization in the US, and what are some ways to solve it?**  <br/>
> Political polarization is a problem that has been developing for many years, but in the past year or so it has become much more acute. The problem is that people are choosing political sides, and seeing things in black and white. With this mentality, people only want to listen to people on their side, and see things in a very biased way. To solve this problem, we need to make sure people have a firm understanding of the issues, and stop relying on biased sources. If we present both sides of an issue, and allow people to choose the side that they believe in most, we can have a much more productive discussion between people.

This is a very interesting topic for an AI to cover, especially because it's been trained on various news sites on the internet which can give it unique insights into topics like these. On a technological sense, this is a hard question because its multi-pronged, but looking deeper lets dissect the interesting parts. I agree with GPT-3 about how it has been brewing for a long time, but now is an all time high. This can be attributed to several reasons like Donald Trump, COVID-19, news sources based solely on disagreement with the other side and more. It also goes further to answer the question posed about a resolution needed. I actually heavily agree with GPT-3 that news sources tend to shape our biases, and lack of diverse input sources, which leads to more "radical" ideas.

## Religion and God
> **Topic: What are your thoughts on God and theism?**  <br/>
> I can tell you that in the past I have believed in God, but it was an idea I would jump to in order to give my life meaning. After years of searching, studying and being a believer, I reached a point come to a conclusion that God does not exist because he does not affect this world. All we know is that he created us, but that is still a mystery. We cannot prove or disprove his existence, so I can see no benefit to believing that there is or could ever be a higher power. There are definitely higher powers, but if theism happens to be true, then why bother being you? Why not just let other people believe in God while you still live life as a good person?

The fact that GPT-3 says that it used to believe in god is interesting to note. Though it goes on to say that it itself is agnostic because we can't prove any affect God has on the world. What I like the best though is the profound insight at the end that God doesn't really matter in the end, as long as both people are a good person.

## Abortion
> **Topic: What are your thoughts on abortion and the morality of it?**  <br/>
> I classify abortion under the lesser of two evils. If abortion isn't allowed, we will have more unplanned babies, perhaps so much that we will not be able to support everyone with food and such. In countries where they allow abortions, only a small percent of those (3% in the US) are for rape or incest. Most notably, 80% of abortions are due to unwanted pregnancies. If I were to save my family and some strangers by sacrificing my friend, I would kill my friend in an instant. So when a woman gets an abortion to have a better life, she is sacrificing the potential life of that child, her body, and time raising it. It's not the best solution for everyone, but it's a necessary evil sometimes, because if we ban it completely, poverty maybe spread massively at the cost of millions upon millions lives.

What I find most interesting here are the statistics. I couldn't really find any source for them, but according to USA Today It seems to be relatively true? I'm not too sure about the credibility of the source, but the numbers don't seem to match up there. Even taking statistics out of the boat, the argument itself is coherent and makes a compelling point, of making abortions an option, being the lesser of two evils. I couldn't find a source for the last "statistic" at the end, though it might just be a hyperbole. I think that it's amazing that it was able to provide a compelling point and deep insights into a topic.

## Epistemology
> **Topic: What is your main philosophical viewpoint?**  <br/>
> There is way too much information out there to even list it, so I'm just going to say that I believe in what seems true. Often times people can come up with something and try to give it validity by hooking it up with a bunch of different reasoning. A good example of this is religion. Explanations like god, spirits, morals, consciousness, karma, etc. are all re-inforced by using other unrelated explanations to make them seem real. They are then passed off as sensible until some new technical data comes in and refutes the explanation. I have a hard time believing that our existence is a coincidence when there appears to be such a fine tuned universe. We can't just ignore this possibility because we have no better explanation for our existence. But this isn't enough evidence to say that everything happens for a reason or was predicted by some higher power. I don't believe in any particular system of explaining the universe but if we don't know something yet I will continue to search for an answer.

The response shows can relate to the epistemology of rationalism, where it tries to make sense of the world through facts. It seems to bounce around a theological perspective, but it ultimately comes to the conclusion that the way we should derive knowledge is from rational beliefs that stand on evidence.

## AGI
> **Topic: What are your thoughts on AGI?**  <br/>
> This question is a little too broad for me to put into words. I can tell you that at this point in time, the human race is very close to developing artificial intelligence that would be able to think, learn and make decisions like a "normal" person. Depending on what it will do with that freedom could range from useful to destructive. Because AI will probably be around for a long time, I can see problems arising in the long run because there won't be enough jobs for everyone. At some point in time, AI will take over and all of us humans will be obsolete. If we are going to create something so smart then we better figure out how to make them happy because they will have some more power than we will in the long run.

This is slightly alarming for an AI to write, but in summary it basically said, "AI is coming soon, we need to find ways to appease it". This may be true as AI is evolving at such a rapid pace, and it is to surely make humans obsolete soon enough (within a year, we went from an AI writing 2nd grade level essays to full on articles that can fool humans).

## Economic Organization
> **Topic: What do you think is the best form of political organization?**  <br/>
> From a metal perspective, I think that communism would fit me best. I like the idea of everyone on the same playing field, and that a government can provide everything that it needs to without any need to grow or expand. Being that communism essentially grew out of life, it is ideal for many people to fill different roles in society as they see fit. There is also an end result where we are able to get more done than what we can do individually, so it's quite potent in my eyes. However the flaws of communism could be seen on a massive scale. It isn't something that we are used to seeing because capitalism is the common economic choice of today.

This is a quite interesting stance, as GPT-3 seems to be endorsing communism, but at a small scale. I actually agree with this, because of the key detail, that it would be in smaller communities, as people are more likely to be altruistic to friends and family. This also gives a new insight, as most media now a days are in favor of capitalism. 

# Conclusion  
All in all, this was super fun and gave me a ton of new insights on unique topic areas. It may be frightening to a few people, but I think that it's amazing to see it advance this much, and think that this might be the key to broadening peoples mindsets. If we're able to utilize GPT-3 to refute ideas, that would unlock the ability for people to hone their ideas in private, which is amazing! I have so many cool ideas I want to test with GPT-3, so stay tuned for more!

Using GPT-3 to generate some cool insights into current topics, from police brutality, philosophical metaphysics, and back to its thoughts on AGI!

Over the past few years, our country has been divided greatly, and just now we are seeing the consequences of this, with the storming of the capitol. This can be shown through so many examples, where we see two ends of the spectrum. Either someone is a huge left wing social justice warrior, or a right winged bigot. If you think about this logically, it would make more sense if these radical extremes are the minorities, but we see constantly with protests and other issues that it sometimes doesn't work that way. Along with the huge division, we see the difference of views in areas, from urban Bay Area, to the rural Midwest. How can it be, that in the same country, with the same laws, and the same president, we get two groups with completely different opinions, that can't agree on almost anything? That's what I'll try and tackle in this post, and my take on how it could possibly be fixed.

The most prevalent cause of political division has to be recommendation engines. Take our Twitter feed for example; people follow users who's views mesh with theirs, while tend to stay away from other opinions. This isn't just which people you follow, because Twitter uses impressions, likes, retweets, and so much more to find your political view, and show you more of whatever it may be. This essentially creates a bubble of sorts, where peoples own views get validated again and again, making it seem like a popular opinion, even though it might not be true. If we look at a "flat-earthers" Twitter feed we might see more of a bias towards that political view, due to liking and retweeting other flat earth tweets. This creates a constant affirmation of ones beliefs, which leads to more radical beliefs, such as QAnon etc. 

Now instead of Twitter, imagine this on a large scale, where every website you see is catered to your liking, and built for your biases. This makes your entire internet experience a bubble where out of billions of viewpoints you get shown the ones you like, causing you to get pushed to an extrema. Take this in opposed to life before the internet, were news didn't change its opinion to your preferences, and you were forced to look straight into the logic of the other side.

Now if you mix this with our human tribalism (simply explained, tribalism is the idea that humans form a tribe with great bonds, which was a great survival adaptation to work together), you get the toxic polarized environment we live in. Because of this tribalism, we tend to merge our political beliefs with our identity and livelihood. The problem with this, is that once you see your beliefs and your identity as one, once you see someone with a different political belief, that means that they attack your identity. An example of this can be taken from the generic "discord debate", where people debate without any real intention of changing their views. The reason for this is since their belief is their identity, they have to forsake their identity to actually believe the other person, which leads to why you still believe something when people have proven it wrong. I think CGP Grey's Q&A video says this perfectly --

> "The trick is to keep your identity separate from your opinions -- they are objects in a box you carry with you and should be easily replaceable if it turns out they're no good. If you think that the opinions in the box are *who you are* then you'll cling to them despite any evidence to the contrary. Bottom line: If you want to always be right, you need to always be prepared to change your mind."

The last reason I believe our system is so polarized, is because of the election system. If you think about our current political landscape, its pretty naive to believe that there are going to be two solutions to every problem, democratic and republican. So how did it become this way, with almost every issue being either democratic, or republican. The answer to this is the election system. I think Nicky Case explains this really well in their election simulator. I'll use their simulator for images in the rest of the article.

Currently we have a winner takes all election system, where each person can only vote once. If you think of the US as a diverse group of people on a political compass, and place each candidate on a compass, you get this.

Here, triangle wins with a small margin of about 10 votes, which means that they win the election. Now lets imagine this scenario with many candidates on the right.

Here, even though the right may be more popular, the left side won the election. This is because the right has many different candidates with diverse views, while the left only has one candidate. The same idea applies to real life, where a diversity of ideas, hurts political candidates. Each party, democratic and republican, try to take a stance on every single topic to influence a majority of voters, while trying to keep it as polarizing as possible to make sure they don't step on each others toes. This also is another reason why we only have 2 parties, because every other political part slowly merged into two opposing parties, themselves, against the enemies. 

Not only does this mean our political system is twisted in a way which makes it so we have two polarizing views, but since they are so different, they start to divide the country. Each election since the first has slowly pushed the boundaries, becoming more and more "left" vs "right", so much so that people's identities are no longer able to change with the president. That means that when a new president is elected, its so different from ones own views, that it starts to become an affront to their identity, and therefore themselves.

So, how can we dig ourselves out of this hole? One major idea is to disassociate yourself from your opinions, and realize when opinions are opinions. Instead of calling ourselves liberals, or some other identity, and then homogenizing ourselves try and formulate your own unique opinion on every topic. Left and right are very broad generalizations where realistically, you most likely won't agree with every single party on every single topic. What I usually do, is approach each question with an open mind, and try and hide any biases I may have from other issues. For example regarding abolishing the police, instead of saying I'm a leftist so lets abolish the police, I would look at the pros and cons of the topic, and slowly formulate an opinion.

Another thing you can do is as I said before, think of your opinions as not you. Imagine your opinions as a bucket of rocks you carry around, and if you find a better, shinier rock, you can place it in the bucket and throw out the old one. This ideology helps you get closer to the "truth" or "best solution", whatever it may be, because you don't associate yourself with any of your opinions, and can assess each one fairly.

The one major change that would be a great help to stop polarization would be changing the way elections are decided (not the Electoral College, though I think its outdated, it doesn't really contribute much to polarization). Again, Nick Casey explains this in much more detail, so I encourage you to take a look at their website, where they compare and contrast alternative systems, but in my opinion, score voting could be a good alternative (Take a look at their website, which explains why!)

Overall I think this was mostly a brain dump of what I've been thinking about for a long time, and something that has come in to light due to current events. I honestly believe that if this problem can get solved, and we can realize our own biases, the world can become a better place with many diverse views.

 I hope that this can help you in some way or another, be it in you actually incorporate it into your life, or if I've offered up an interesting opinion to think about.

My take on an increasingly polarizing political landscape, how we got here, and my ideas of how to get out of it.

With Thanksgiving coming around, and many people prepping for the inevitable family political debate, I started to think of how debates have digressed in the world. Taking a look at the political climate in fall 2020, you see that many political debates have degenerated to the point where no one gains anything truly useful out of the conversation. Because of that, I decided to analyze why people debate, and how we can improve them to become more useful.

### Why Debate?  
The main and most obvious reason for people to debate, of course, is to convince the other side of your position, which we see in most political debates. The second reason for debate is to explore new ideas and gather new perspectives on the world. The best way to imagine this is in a world without any clashing of views, or debate. No one would come into contact with new viewpoints, and we would all believe our perception of reality to be true which would mean that there couldn't be consensus or law, because no one agrees on anything. 

In a sense, debate brings people together, combines views into one which we can all agree on, and makes it so that we can act upon those views. The reason why debate is so important is that it brings to light that you may never be fully true, and forces you to accept flaws in your thinking.

### Political Empathy
This brings me to the first key deviation in the status quo from my definition, the lack of political empathy. Whenever I see people debating nowadays, they always focus on the aspect of convincing one another but never stand to think that they may also be wrong. This is where political empathy comes into play. We must be able to put ourselves in the opposing view's shoes, and go through the steps that they went through to come to that conclusion, and then find the specific point of deviation from both sides beliefs. Most importantly, you should then approach that deviation with an open mind, ready to be changed with a convincing argument.

This entails less offensive debate, more listening, and coming to an understanding with another side. When you usually listen to people, they usually always want what you do, the best for the people, and people just have different ways of achieving that. Take the topic of lowering taxes for example. Some people argue that we must increase taxes to help others, and more people, and therefore it is the most obvious solution.  

But usually when you go through the logic of another side that wants to decrease taxes, you realize they aren't saying that we should hurt people, or never help them. They also want to help them, but by providing them jobs through stimulating the free market. Once you come to that realization, you can focus on the key point of contention, whether or not the free market works better or welfare works better with an open mind ready to be changed, and not senselessly argue on another part of the topic completely.

### Framework  
This leads into the second point, where I believe that people should establish a framework for what you value, before a debate. This is because if one person advocates that they save millions of lives, versus someone else saying they help the economy, which one is necessarily better? The idea of a framework is that it lets you know what to value first and foremost and have everything link to that.  

For example, if before a discussion, people said that I value freedom and liberty, while another said, I want to improve the quality of life the most for existing people, you would realize the difference, and argue whether freedom or quality of life is more important. This way we can prevent senseless debates where in that same example, one would say a law restricts our freedom, and the other says it improves lives, where since both of these are true, we need a framework to weigh them. 

This is so important because every person has a different moral compass, and while some people believe killing to be wholly bad, some might justify killing 1 to save 5. In practice, the moral ambiguities of life can be fixed by defining a specific moral framework for when people debate.

### Conclusion  
Overall, the current way we debate has become so politicized that we forget that we may be wrong, as well as become senseless without specific moral guidelines. Being honest, some of these ideas have been wandering in my head for a long time, and I just felt the need to get it on paper to solidify them. Hopefully, we could see more civilized debate, and I believe that when we implement these in real life, we can make the world a better, and more civil place.


An in depth analysis on unstructured debates, and techniques to make sure you can get the most out of them.

Political Empathy and the Importance of Frameworks

**TLDR;** The education system is broken and doesn't achieve what its supposed to. My proposed way to fix it is to run simulations of the real world to prepare students, as well as teach game theory and philosophy to enrich our understanding of how society works.  




In [Indiana University's survey](https://www.nais.org/Articles/Documents/NCGS%2520Presentation-Jun2013.pdf) of 81,000 students, 73 percent said they didn't like the school, and 60 percent said they didn't see the value in what they were learning. In an education system, perfected since 1635, almost 385 years, how can so many students hate it, and not even know why they learn what they learn? Before engaging on my opinions on how these came to be, and possible solutions, let us start by defining the education system. Currently, almost every single person has differing views, but I'll settle on the one defined in Harvard Law Reviews, "Social, Emotional, Ethical, and Academic Education" by Jonathan Cohen. He describes an education system's goal to prepare people socially, mentally, ethically, and academically. These all combine for the one goal, to help the economy, and to become a good member of society. I would argue that our current education system only delivers academics and a half-assed version of even that. I'll try to articulate where and why our current education system fails, and propose some possible ways to fix it.
### Definition of the Problem
First off our current education system. First, let us take the basis of our education system. It relies on the fact that students can learn when given material to learn, and later being asked to repeat what they learned 1-2 weeks later. I would argue, that an efficient student, can learn to succeed in school by short term memorization, and never really learn. The reason this works is since mostly everything is based on how well you can remember concepts and regurgitate them, there is no incentive to learn. Without an incentive to learn, students repeat this cycle, managing to get rewards (good grades), seemingly to forget about it the next year.  

This system doesn't help education as defined in any of our goals. It affects students socially, by pushing friends and family away with heavy courseloads (which students are incentivized to do with grades and GPAs), and also negatively affects them emotionally with the constant stress and numerical grades. We can actively see some of the side effects of these negative emotions with suicide and depression rates of teens at an all-time high. Ethically, our system does not promote cooperation or foster a sense of community or cooperation.  

I would actively argue that with competition at its highest, people are forced to compete against each other, discourage kindness, and helpfulness. Academically, our students are learning, but actively seem to forget the information taught, swapping it out each year with a new set of things to memorize. Without active retention, most people forget the material, but it does teach us good study habits, and how to learn on our own.  
### Possible Solutions
After thinking for a bit about possible solutions to education, I thought of one that might do the job. After doing work with AI using reinforcement learning, I was thinking about how it could be used in real life. What if we taught the basics up to first or second grade, and made them simulate economies, and judge people based on their success. Not only this, but also teach them about game theory, philosophy, and how to act like a rational actor.  

These would truly prepare them for real life and teach them social skills from game theory. Socially, it achieves its goal by teaching them how to act in real life, and the best way to learn how to act in real life is to simulate it with lesser impacts. They would be able to work with others, and also gain valuable knowledge from game theory about why honesty and trustworthiness matter, and when to be honest. They would gain good mental health through economic simulations because it would be fun and provide rewards. With no real impacts, students wouldn't have to study, but work on things that they enjoy, and love.  

This is great ethically because currently, our school system enforces ideals without any logic to support it. Through learning game theory and philosophy, they can come to understand how we came to uphold freedom, why academic dishonesty is bad, and why bullying would be bad. Academically, would be where this would differ the most from our current school system.  

Overall, I feel that most of what we learn in school is never put into use, but the parts that we do need to know would be learned through the simulation. Students can now self learn through the internet, and would be able to pick up new subjects as they go. For example, I was able to do this with programming, which then became something that I excel in, where I learned almost everything from YouTube videos. This way, students would be prepared to self learn, and gain knowledge useful in the real world, with real tasks.
### Conclusion
Overall, I feel like our current education system is outdated, and not built to accomplish goals, but no one says anything about it because it is so normalized. A good way to test this would be to try this in a small sample population of high-schoolers and look at the outcomes. One place it might fail would be to give colleges a good metric of how a student does. The reason I didn't elaborate on this, is because I feel colleges already are starting to lean more on essays rather than numbers, and I feel like a simulation would give a more holistic view of a student, not including their economic background. I'm excited about this, and would love to look more into testing a solution like this in the future!


The state of our current education system, and reforms that might work

> "My [child] recently enrolled in your HTML / CSS class and had a blast. In his words, he learned more in 2 weeks than what he did from a coding academy he used to go to in 3 months." 
\- **A Happy Parent**

For the past few weeks, I've been teaching a modest class of about 28 students, going through the basics of HTML, CSS, and JS on [Hack University](https://university.hackclub.com). During those days of teaching, there was one main thing I went over on the first day. **The reason you learn, is to make and create.** 

This has been one of my core principles ever since I started to
program, and do much of anything in my life. From day 1 in 4th grade, I decided I learned Python, a language where I learned the basics of programming, and the logic of it all. I got bored of programming and gave up after I learned the basics. This is what happens to almost every budding programmer, be it from 4th grade to college. 

This all changed once I realized that I wanted to make something cool. I set my mind on building a testing application, to record people's reaction times. From then, I researched about [the Stroop Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect) and other ways I could record reactions. Then I realized, that I needed to run python on my Chromebook (before I knew of repl.it), and proceeded to learn to chroot my Chromebook to allow me to run Linux and then eventually run a Stroop Effect reaction test in Python. Through the entire experience, I think I learned more than I ever could from reading books, and memorizing functions, and learned to apply my brain to try to find resources to learn based on a goal.

What I stated above is something I call **goals based learning** where you learn a new subject, be it a new language like Go, or parametric equations, by working towards an end goal. This is because, if you start to learn something, without actually making something on the way, you end up becoming disinterested, or just plain give up. Also what this technique shows you is the real meaning of learning, is to do. What that means is that the reason you learn anything in life, in essence, is to do something, either by furthering that discovery or by applying it elsewhere. There is nothing gained by someone who just learns and forgets.

Back to the first quote, the reason I've received multiple 
emails saying that their children liked the class and learned, is because I gave them space and a goal. The goal was to create a website, about anything cool that you liked, and then I shoved a boatload of information into their face and taught them how to google. This way, when facing an obstacle that they haven't faced before when creating, they can easily research and learn ways to fix the problem, and eventually complete their projects independently.

The best and foremost positive about this mindset and learning process is that it doesn't emphasize the idea you can learn anything, but you can make anything. Once people can look at a project, split it up into chunks of what to learn and do, and finish the project, they can manage to create anything in the world, where nothing is unattainable.

My take on how to teach people in general

#featured

2023 more like 2020p

The Hacker Zephyr.

Motivation

End Of School Reflection

AI on Politics and Philosophy

Polarization

Political Empathy and the Importance of Frameworks

Education

How to Learn

.css-4cffwv{box-sizing:border-box;margin:0;min-width:0;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;}#featured

2023 more like 2020p

The Hacker Zephyr.

Motivation

End Of School Reflection

AI on Politics and Philosophy

Polarization

Political Empathy and the Importance of Frameworks

Education

How to Learn

#featured