The difference between your medical prediction and your computing prediction really struck me. I don’t mean the difference between the fields, but the difference in how you proposed to measure them. Your computing prediction was about your own reaction and thus fairly easy to score. But your medical predictions were about absolute progress, hyper, and research, and thus difficult to score.
My pet peeve on these threads are predictions like yours that I cannot identify as predicting stasis or change! If you predicted amazement in 2012, just like in 2011, at least I’d know that and I could make a parallel prediction about my own amazement. If you had chosen a specific instance of amazement in 2011, it would have made it clear to me what you meant and it might have helped you judge whether your 2012 experiences lived up to it.
The difference between your medical prediction and your computing prediction really struck me. I don’t mean the difference between the fields, but the difference in how you proposed to measure them. Your computing prediction was about your own reaction and thus fairly easy to score. But your medical predictions were about absolute progress, hyper, and research, and thus difficult to score.
My pet peeve on these threads are predictions like yours that I cannot identify as predicting stasis or change! If you predicted amazement in 2012, just like in 2011, at least I’d know that and I could make a parallel prediction about my own amazement. If you had chosen a specific instance of amazement in 2011, it would have made it clear to me what you meant and it might have helped you judge whether your 2012 experiences lived up to it.