mush intro: m20 dropout from switzerland

[mush]

Haven't actually dropped out of school, this is more of a click-bait.

Greetings everyone! My name on this area of the internet will be mush. I am a 20 year old male from Switzerland. More particularly, I live in a town of the French speaking part.

What do I do, who am I:

I finished more or less high school in Switzerland. Actually did one year of high school, one year of an software developer apprenticeship and finally two years to finish high school somewhere else. Finished it in 2021 knowing that I'm very likely not to spend the next years in college, having developed an aversion for not learning by myself.

Most of this comes from the fact that I have serious trouble finding sense in studying a very precise subject that will not really benefit anyone, including myself, for a very long time. This overlaps with my inability to be motivated for something more than a year or so. This means that I need variety in my life. Sadly, variety and the foremost qualities seem like something that has been completely removed from most study and work options in order to provide it at home on-demand on TV. Short, fun and varied content.

Now I had a year or so of traveling and hanging at home. I also had various small job experiences (animal pension keeper, French teacher online, handyman). This I believe must end to either evolve to more intense traveling, or to more intense working, as I know it's either an investment for more fulfillment later, or more enjoyment.

Hobbies/interests:

I travel mostly by hitchhiking. Although I also love bicycle touring, hiking and walking. I truly believe I can spend most of my life enjoying traveling on a very low budget—sleeping outside and dumpster diving. Now, because of my intermittent personality, I must adapt to this and find a way to provide security even if I want to leave all my engagements at once.

I like—by order of time put in each at the current time, although not necessarily reflecting on length of interest:
hanging out with SO and family, language teaching, linux/gnu, listening to music, martial arts, watching movies and TV shows, ham radio, fixing up stuff, running.

I would like to have more experiences—by order of importance to me, not necessarily all at once:

1. develop my understanding of the world [I can improve that without a bachelor's degree in physics, although not quiet the same]
- explore my consciousness [lifelong, intermittent] → meditate, live slowly outside, have little possessions, music*, experiment nature in the great outdoors*
- traveling/living slowly around the world [lifelong, intermittent] → hitchhiking, sailing, cycling, hiking
2. enjoy life respectfully
- stay healthy [lifelong, continuous] → martial arts, hiking, walking, running, swimming, eating veggies not meat
- improve other people's life [lifelong, continuous] → give a hand, be welcoming/sincere/grateful, discover/experiment/spread better lifestyles for using the commons we all need (including animals)
3. have fun
- all the rest [intermittent, not necessarily lifelong] → ham radio (not necessarily always compatible**, I forgot the word Jacob uses), guitar, whatever comes

*Those are most of the times where I cry, considering it rarely happens
**I guess you can call this a web of goals. I wrote it more to give an idea in the areas I generally delve into, as it often changes.

Although I am a very laid back person, I am only like this when I'm feel like I'm making progress in any of the above areas. Because I can not, for crying out loud, picture my life ending without experiences in all of these. Also, these ideals provide opportunities for lifelong learning.

How I got into all this:

As can be seen here, I joined this blog, after reading some journals, to have more in depth, but also down to earth discussion about the topics of ERE, frugality, ecology. I have seen a the forum members, while not sharing the exact same interests, share a lot of my ideals (but I might be more extreme about certain fields, while less extreme on others).

I told my parents I wanted to be a hobo when I was 16. At the time, my apprenticeship and most of what came before didn't make any sense. I still believe it's a straightforward, but complicated alternative to reach some of my ideals if the rest doesn't work out. Then, I realized, with the help of family and friends that I didn't have the maturity and independence necessary to do so. I winged high school after accepting it was inevitable that I do something of this kind. I was sincerely hoping to travel full time after majority came and with my diploma.

I think during this period I got more mature, but a lot of society's fears got into me, in particular about money. Also, COVID came which gave me a nice excuse for not doing what I wanted.

Now, COVID is far, but SO is there, and she is giving a lot of purpose in my life even if I'm not traveling—something really rare before. Therefore, now is a nice time to start finding a job and saving Swiss and American coins for spending in non-Swiss territory. I heard about FIRE from a French author/blogger whose book was at the library. Before that, I already had spreadsheets calculating how long I could travel based on how long I worked depending on travel type and field of work. I wasn't interested in making money out of money for ethical reasons and because I thought it was harder than it is. I had a lot of the ERE principles ingrained before I knew about it, but not so much of the FI principles.

I grew out of this thinking because of the freedom, meaningfulness and security that ERE and FI can bring compared to the bad aspects of investing in a society I don't like.

Why am I here:

I'm sorry for not introducing myself with more palatable elements of what I do and did. This is relevant to the kind of discussion I want to have on this blog. I believe more entertainment will make into my journal. I'm here because I want discussion, inspiration and to get more involved in journaling.

I'm happy to meet all of you, I can't wait to discuss and compare ways of life! Have a nice day! Thanks for reading me.

[mathiverse]

Welcome! I'm excited to follow along in your journal!

[Slevin]

1. develop my understanding of the world [I can improve that without a bachelor's degree in physics, although not quiet the same]
- explore my consciousness [lifelong, intermittent] → meditate, live slowly outside, have little possessions, music*, experiment nature in the great outdoors*

Welcome to the forum! Sounds like you’re gonna have a very interesting journey!

Tbh I was pretty disappointed by my physics degree. Not the process, which taught me how to think about things, but the general usefulness day to day and thinking that there is some useful cohesive answers to things other than physics. It turns out when you get down to problems of humans, psychology, climate change, programming, etc, most domains become complex or chaotic, and so the ideas of describing things in mathematical frameworks no longer apply very well. I think I just wanted a silver bullet approach to life and was disappointed to find out it didn’t exist. It sounds like you are taking a much more “kennen” approach, which I think is also a wise choice.

[jacob]

Tbh I was pretty disappointed by my physics degree. Not the process, which taught me how to think about things, but the general usefulness day to day and thinking that there is some useful cohesive answers to things other than physics. It turns out when you get down to problems of humans, psychology, climate change, programming, etc, most domains become complex or chaotic, and so the ideas of describing things in mathematical frameworks no longer apply very well. I think I just wanted a silver bullet approach to life and was disappointed to find out it didn’t exist. It sounds like you are taking a much more “kennen” approach, which I think is also a wise choice.

Counter-argument: If I had gone for electrical engineering (as was my previous plan) instead of physics, I would likely have focused on engineering the best solution possible system given the existing paradigm rather than being in the habit of first questioning the existing paradigm and proceeding to work out another solution from first principles. Physics develops a mindset of going from first principles to some system under some constraints. Using that foundation created the ERE-framework (WL7), cf. the MMM-framework (WL5) which I would likely have adopted if I had an engineering background.

Otherwise, I totally agree that physics per se is for the most part useless when it comes to day-to-day living. I even complained about that in high school. Indeed, the only thing I can recall [on top of my head] using from physics lessons is electric wiring, which I learned in 7th grade, and which on occasion has been helpful to avoid electrocuting myself.

The primary lessons of physics are really meta-lessons.

There were two additional things I credit where I am today (in so many ways) to my physics journey.

The first one was wandering into the library of the physics department during my freshman/sophomore years and pulling "interesting" monologues from the shelves and reading them. One was about the importance of looking at similarities rather than differences. (Like how water is similar to electricity, i.e. pressure = voltage, flow = current, ...) Unfortunately I forget the title, but that was a game-changer in terms of thinking. (It's the WL6 of physics.)---Perhaps this is also related to my structuralist approach to psychology, humans, ...

The second one was going to grad school and lucking into a supervisor who believed in throwing people into the deep end and otherwise just supporting their weak points. Enlightened Yellow leadership. The lesson there was that the buck stops with me rather than some eponymous "they". If I couldn't or wouldn't find the answer, it wasn't a given that someone else would.---My dissertation happened to focus on programming simulations of stellar atmospheres and that directly translates into understanding most of the physics base of climate change.

When studying physics, I do remember that very few [neither students nor professors] had any idea or plans about what to do with their degree upon graduation. The sentiment was that physicist can solve novel problems of pretty much any difficulty on their own. Just give them a bunch of manuals and a relatively short time. To wit, when Wall Street first discovered derivatives, they quickly figure it was easier to hire physicists (who would teach themselves finance over a few weeks) than it would be to teach business students how to program a computer to solve differential equations. As such physics is more education [like most liberal arts] than training [for a specific type of job].

[Jean]

Welcome.

[AxelHeyst]

mush, sounds like you and @RoamingFrancis should hang out.

Welcome!

[RoamingFrancis]

Indeed, many similarities. Comment ca va?

[mush]

Thanks for welcoming me. Reading all your in depth answers and constructing an answer that is just as good is taking time. And I should be writing a newsletter and be making phone calls at the moment, but whatever, I only have been pushing it back for five days, it can wait a bit more.

I think I just wanted a silver bullet approach to life and was disappointed to find out it didn’t exist. It sounds like you are taking a much more “kennen” approach, which I think is also a wise choice.

I believe I have ingrained a big part of the philosophy from this Kurtzgesagt video on what they call "Optimistic Nihilism". What constitutes the basis of my thinking towards knowledge and acquiring it is that we live in a complex system that is so chaotic there isn't a chance we can understand it. Or, put simpler, that Truth is unattainable and will forever be, but also that we can spend our lives trying to build a system on how to move towards this Truth. To me, that is one very respectable goal in life. One cannot reach it, but one can always be closer. From it comes a lot of modesty, knowing one is always wrong, but can always be more right.

Physics develops a mindset of going from first principles to some system under some constraints. Using that foundation created the ERE-framework (WL7), cf. the MMM-framework (WL5) which I would likely have adopted if I had an engineering background.

[…]

When studying physics, I do remember that very few [neither students nor professors] had any idea or plans about what to do with their degree upon graduation. The sentiment was that physicist can solve novel problems of pretty much any difficulty on their own. Just give them a bunch of manuals and a relatively short time. To wit, when Wall Street first discovered derivatives, they quickly figure it was easier to hire physicists (who would teach themselves finance over a few weeks) than it would be to teach business students how to program a computer to solve differential equations. As such physics is more education [like most liberal arts] than training [for a specific type of job].

My answer needed a lot of forum searching to get the concepts you mentioned.

Makes me wonder why most of them end up physics teachers at schools. I can only agree with all you're saying though, that there is a very peculiar mindset and approach to things that seems visible only on people that studied in fields such as physics for so long. I wonder what your path and ERE would have looked like had you studied philosophy instead of physics—it's quite likely it would have been more complicated to understand.

On my side, every time I understand something better, I get a glimpse of how everything is deeper and more sophisticated than it seemed first. Therefore, ending the argument that I must accept it, and that it makes more sense to acquire pragmatic knowledge when necessary, and theoretical knowledge when approached through pragmatic and "down-to-earth" experiences. This seems to be the best way one can build a better understanding of the systems we live in, how to interact with them, how to make them work for you, while also knowing how to describe them and better them.

It also makes sure that I'm rarely (not never) disappointed by myself when learning*, as I only do so when I want to and feel the need to.

*Learning more theoretically. Indeed, learning guitar, languages, drawing or woodworking can be insanely frustrating sometimes. It also needs discipline.

I'm not sure it's very clear! In any case, I have to go work.

@RoamingFrancis Ça va. I'll be reading your journal, haven't got the time yet.

Have a nice day!

[avalok]

Welcome mush, look forward to hearing more from you here.

Counter-argument: If I had gone for electrical engineering (as was my previous plan) instead of physics, I would likely have focused on engineering the best solution possible system given the existing paradigm rather than being in the habit of first questioning the existing paradigm and proceeding to work out another solution from first principles.

Is this optimization bias more the case for "physical" (material) engineering? I'm not sure why (perhaps because the field is so new and we're still figuring out good patterns), but I find myself and other software engineers are more interested in questioning and redesigning, than optimizing in our work. No doubt I have the optimizer in me, it is strong, but professionally I feel as though I have been taught to approach a system by first questioning if it even needs to be written the way it is. Of course, the plastic nature of software makes this possible; a civil engineer working on maintaining a bridge, questioning if they should overhaul the design is not what you want.

[jacob]

Is this optimization bias more the case for "physical" (material) engineering? I'm not sure why (perhaps because the field is so new and we're still figuring out good patterns), but I find myself and other software engineers are more interested in questioning and redesigning, than optimizing in our work. No doubt I have the optimizer in me, it is strong, but professionally I feel as though I have been taught to approach a system by first questioning if it even needs to be written the way it is. Of course, the plastic nature of software makes this possible; a civil engineer working on maintaining a bridge, questioning if they should overhaul the design is not what you want.

Heh! Probably. Lets just say that a certain subset of software/computer people get their understanding of physical reality from wikipedia and google. And that this works about as well as one's ability to frame of one's respective search inquiries. Seek and you shall find exactly what you're seeking; so down the rabbit hole it goes. I don't think this should be totally surprising. There's been no practice/theory, that is, grounding in what actually holds up a bridge beyond HS or freshman physics. This can make for some very frustrating debates.

Hmm.. actually, that didn't quite answer your question. There are two things required in order to construct a functional system that works in physical reality as opposed to a made-up reality like in a computer game. A Venn diagram if you will. One is the ability to question existing systems or build new systems that are self-consistent (physics, software). The other is the ability to ensure that a given system is consistent with reality (physics, physical engineering).

I think I'm beginning to hijack mush's brand new journal, so I'll stop here.

[Sclass]

Most of this comes from the fact that I have serious trouble finding sense in studying a very precise subject that will not really benefit anyone, including myself, for a very long time.

Welcome mush. You’re way ahead of the game for a 20 yo. At your age I just turned off my brain and started studying. Lost ten good years that way.

Counter-argument: If I had gone for electrical engineering (as was my previous plan) instead of physics, I would likely have focused on engineering the best solution possible system given the existing paradigm rather than being in the habit of first questioning the existing paradigm and proceeding to work out another solution from first principles.

@jacob I don’t think this is taught in engineering schools anymore. At least in the US. Foreign schools seem to do a better job of producing engineers. And sorry to hijack.

[mathiverse]

@jacob I don’t think this is taught in engineering schools anymore. At least in the US. Foreign schools seem to do a better job of producing engineers. And sorry to hijack.

What do they teach instead these days?

[Sclass]

Science. Our joke at Stanford School of Engineering is that is the School of Science.

Very few graduates come out of there with the ability to engineer something. I mean in the traditional sense like building a bridge of X lanes, Y materials, in Z days at Q cost. Just saying engineering grads look more like scientists these days than actual engineers. This is mostly overcome after a few years in the real world through mentoring.

The more elite the institution the more the engineering grads look like this.

I spent a lot of time on recruiting committees. Our new grads knew a lot of things from their books and lectures. But they were pretty useless unless we tightly micromanaged their daily tasks. Oddly, the lesser universities in the rust belt and grads from highly industrial nations (Asia) were better at making real stuff for us using bare bones specs.

My friend (a kid I hired under a brutal interview process) who went on to recruit for Uber says he simply gives the kid a problem they’re working on and says “can you make this happen for me and how?” 95% of new grads fail. He likes to rub me that a lot went to Stanford. I’ve found it takes a couple of years in the industry to get your legs.

Basically to put it bluntly the science classes and process doesn’t move the needle much for me. Can you do build or not? I don’t want a lecture some theory from the age of reason. I need shippable product. It’s actually kind of frustrating when our esteemed institutions are bragging that they are creating our newest generation of engineers. They’re basically filtering what we build up later in the trenches in battle. Credit is given to the uni because it’s easy to explain. Code boot camps are kind of the striking example invalidating the traditional process.

Just saying there is kind of a myth about what engineering school actually teaches. I think it was different 50 to 100 years ago when you actually had to leave school knowing how to build a steel mill from nothing.

There’s nothing wrong with being a scientist. I got my undergrad in physics. Just commenting that the difference in philosophy one gets majoring in physics and EE isn’t that big given the kind of thing being taught in engineering school. Probably the more elite engineering schools with big research programs have professors who behave more like scientists.

[ertyu]

The more elite the institution the more the engineering grads look like this.

I spent a lot of time on recruiting committees. Our new grads knew a lot of things from their books and lectures. But they were pretty useless unless we tightly micromanaged their daily tasks. Oddly, the lesser universities in the rust belt and grads from highly industrial nations (Asia) were better at making real stuff for us using bare bones specs.

This is a bit off-topic but I'm finding the same as I research MA degrees. It's the same discipline, but the degrees from the pedigreed schools (e.g. St Andrews) are very much academic degrees: it is assumed that you will sit around pontificating and scratching your balls in genteel luxury, and write papers about things -- or that you're a rich fuck who studies for the purpose of being not just a leisured gentlemen but an educated leisured gentleman. Multiple academic references are required, and the degree essentially seems to measure your ability "to have a conversation about the conversation" in your field.

Whereas a "working class" school like Dundee, when designing the same MA, went, "alright, let's see how many job-relevant certifications we'll be able to get our students to earn in the process of completing this." The program specifically advertises itself on the basis of how it will be useful to you professionally. No academic references required, though I assume they might want to have my boss click some radio buttons on my behalf at some point. It is very much assumed that if I'm choosing to apply and pay for this degree, I'm adult enough to complete it -- and if not, that's on me.

I am not surprised to discover that the same holds in the hard sciences.

[Sclass]

Yeah when I think about it 99% of my engineering professors weren’t really engineers. They were grant monkeys playing the research scientist game in the university. Bleeding edge electrical engineering is to a large extent science. Teaching “school of engineering” coursework was an necessary evil in their role. And they taught what the believed was important - namely their research.