Awesome suggestion from Firefox, but leaves me wondering about my relevance as an authentic thinker.

An unexpected source of my profound source Mozilla Firefox suggested article and link to Quarts

A story about Claude Shannon

https://qz.com/1365059/a-universal-way-to-solve-problems-from-a-mathematical-genius/

Shannon’s reasoning, however, was that it isn’t until you eliminate the inessential from the problem you are working on that you can see the core that will guide you to an answer.

In fact, often, when you get to such a core, you may not even recognize the problem anymore, which illustrates how important it is to get the bigger picture right before you go chasing after the details. Otherwise, you start by pointing yourself in the wrong direction.

Details are important and useful. Many details are actually disproportionately important and useful relative to their representation. But there are equally as many details that are useless.

If you don’t find the core of a problem, you start off with all of the wrong details, which is then going to encourage you to add many more of the wrong kinds of details until you’re stuck.

Starting by pruning away at what is unimportant is how you discipline yourself to see behind the fog created by the inessential. That’s when you’ll find the foundation you are looking for.

Finding the true form of the problem is almost as important as the answer that comes after.”

What is interesting, is that Mozilla Firefox’s algorithm suggested this article based on my clicking in the past week (I typically do not do this due to lack of time and resist the urge to click Firefoxes suggestions because they are distractions. Yet, yesterday, I ended up reading an article about slow walkers and turned into a simulation for Dr. Richards. Today, I found this and several others. Should I be concerned that my journey as a researcher is not being overseen by a string of code (a very sophisticated, research-based code, but code nevertheless?). Should I perceive my thought development is unauthentic? Or is it merely technology-aided?

This ability of code to predict my interests to such a degree that I canNOT resist the urge to click the link contrary to my conscious decision, makes me think of how easily I can be connected to other readers and seekers of truth, and ultimately, it makes me feel unspecial, unoriginal, blah. Here I am contemplating the importance of thinking environments, creativity, human experience; I am reveling in own humanity, and boom! Here is the reality of human (my own) predictability fed to a machine as a formula and processed as suggestions that (most upsetting part) WORK!