Paradigm Game Quotes

Trading doesn't just reveal your character, it also builds it if you stay in the game long enough.

Almost always the men who achieve these fundamental inventions of a new paradigm have been either very young or very new to the field whose paradigm they change.15 And perhaps that point need not have been made explicit, for obviously these are the men who, being little committed by prior practice to the traditional rules of normal science, are particularly likely to see that those rules no longer define a playable game and to conceive another set that can replace them.

Don't ever make the mistake of believing that market success has to come to you fast. Trade small, stay in the game, persist, and eventually, you'll reach a satisfying level of proficiency.

The tickling narrative, unlike the sexual narrative, has no climax. Is the tickling scene, at its most reassuring, not a unique representation of desire and, at its most unsettling, a paradigm of the perverse contract? Does it not highlight, this delightful game, the impossibility of satisfaction and of reunion, with its continual reenactment of the irresistible attraction and the inevitable repulsion of the object, in which the final satisfaction is frustration?

Humor. Two unconnected things are suddenly united by a paradigm shift. It is hard to describe, but we all know it when it happens. Weirdly, it causes us to make a barking noise.

Whether the person you are dealing with is playing a Monkey dominance game or is a pure predator, he wants to deal with a Monkey. When you are in your Monkey brain you are emotional and most of all predictable. Predators (rapists, robbers, murderers--but also the cold-blooded corporate ladder climber) thrive on this and count on you following your social scripts.

There are whole industries, such as venture capital, that are currently organized around the belief that innovation is essentially a game of playing the odds. But it’s time to topple that tired paradigm. I’ve spent twenty years gathering evidence so that you can put your time, energy, and resources into creating products and services that you can predict, in advance, customers will be eager to hire. Leave relying on luck to the other guys.

Middlemarch is a novel that is diminished by being put on the screen. It can't help but be, because so much of what we enjoy in Middlemarch is the interplay between what the characters do and what we know about them because of the telling voice. It's less of a problem for the cinema when it deals with novels that are purely concerned with action and what people do. I haven't thought this through, and I'm just trying it now to see what it sounds like. But maybe it would be less a problem with novels that are told in the first person. The interesting thing to me about Middlemarch, and Thackeray's Vanity Fair, and several other great novels, is precisely this omniscient, as we call it, third person, which naive readers mistake for the author. It isn't George Eliot who is saying this; it's a voice that George Eliot adopts to tell this story. There can be something very interesting in a novel like Bleak House, which was also done very well on the television by the same adapter, Andrew Davis. Now, Bleak House is told in two voices, as you remember. One is the somewhat trying Esther Summerson, who is a paradigm of every kind of virtue, and the other is a different sort of voice entirely, a voice that tells the story in the present tense, which was unusual for the time, a voice that doesn't seem to have a main character attached to it. But I think that Dickens is playing a very subtle game here. I've noticed a couple of things about that second narration that make me wonder whether it isn't Esther herself writing the other bits of it. For instance, at the very beginning, she says, "When I come to write my portion of these pages . . ." So she knows that there is another narrative going on, but nobody else does. Nobody else refers to it. The second thing is that she is the only character who never appears in those passages of present-tense narration. The other characters do. She doesn't. Why would that be? There's one point very near the end of the book where she almost does. Inspector Bucket is coming into the house to collect Esther to go and look for Lady Dedlock, who's run away, and we hear that Esther is just coming -- but no, she's turned back and brought her cloak, so we don't quite see her. It's as if she's teasing us and saying, "You're going to see me; no, you're not." Now, that's Dickens, at the height of his powers, playing around -- in ways that we would now call, I don't know, postmodern, ironic, self-referential, or something -- with the whole notion of narration, characterization, and so on. Yet, it doesn't matter. Those things are there for us to notice and to enjoy and to relish, if we have the taste for that sort of thing. But the events of Bleak House are so thrilling, so perplexing, so exciting that a mere recital of the events themselves is enough to carry a whole television adaptation, a whole play, a whole story. It's so much better with Dickens's narrative playfulness there, but it's pretty good without them.

The paradigm shift is coming. It’s written into the dialectic. We are the pathfinders of the dialectic. We are the vanguard of the enlightenment. Someone has to be way ahead of the game to lead everyone else forward. The pioneers, the scouts, the adventurers, the radicals, the explorers, those that first step into the unknown along paths never trod before, surrounded everywhere by darkness, must be of exceptional character, boldness, curiosity and courage.

By engaging in cognitive reappraisal, and telling ourselves a different story about what is happening, we can subvert the entire willpower paradigm. Some research has shown that willpower is like a muscle, and it gets tired with overuse. But it only gets depleted if there’s a struggle. Games change the struggle to something else. They make the process fun, and as Mischel showed in his research, we are able to persist far longer and without the same level of teeth-gritting willpower depletion.

I think one of the changes of our consciousness of how things come into being, of how things are made and how they work . . . is the change from an engineering paradigm, which is to say a design paradigm, to a biological paradigm, which is a cultural and evolutionary one. In lots and lots of areas now, people say, How do you create the conditions at the bottom to allow the growth of the things you want to happen?—Brian Eno

The modern patient safety movement replaces “the blame and shame game” with an approach known as systems thinking. This paradigm acknowledges the human condition—namely, that humans err—and concludes that safety depends on creating systems that anticipate errors and either prevent or catch them before they cause harm. Such an approach has been the cornerstone of safety improvements in other high-risk industries but has been ignored in medicine until the past decade.

The Law of Accelerating Returns,” Ray Kurzweil did the math and found that we’re going to experience twenty thousand years of technological change over the next one hundred years. Essentially, we’re going from the birth of agriculture to the birth of the internet twice in the next century. This means paradigm-shifting, game-changing, nothing-is-ever-the-same-again breakthroughs—such as affordable aerial ridesharing—will not be an occasional affair. They’ll be happening all the time. It

We follow what is happening with influenza virus strains in the Southern Hemisphere when it is their fall (our spring) to predict which influenza viruses will likely be with us the next winter. Some years that educated guess is more accurate than others. So is it worth getting the vaccination each year? I give that a qualified yes. It might or might not prevent you from getting flu. But even if it is only 30 to 60 percent effective, it sure beats zero protection. What we really need is a game-changing influenza vaccine that will target the conserved—or unchanging—features of the influenza viruses that are more likely to cause human influenza pandemics and subsequently seasonal influenza in the following years. How difficult would such a game-changing influenza vaccine be to achieve? The simple truth is that we don’t know, because we’ve never gotten a prototype into, let alone through, the valley of death. We need a new paradigm—a new business model that pairs public money with private pharmaceutical company partnerships and foundation support and guidance.

Any player playing World of Warcraft can reach the highest level if he or she puts enough hours into the game. This game paradigm creates a powerful incentive to bypass the time sink. Instead of castigating the Chinese, we have to ask whether gold farming is simply a symptom of bad game design.

While it is true that false prophets can sometimes make accurate predictions (e.g., Balaam [Num. 23:6–12]; Caiaphas [John 11:49–51]), that anecdote illustrates the confusion inherent in the continuationist position. Why would anyone not label the immoral Paul Cain a false prophet when he gives false prophecies? Crediting the Holy Spirit for words that could be from demons through the mouth of a false prophet is a serious misjudgment that highlights the dangerous game continuationists are forced to play. The continuationist position invites any Christian to interpret any personal impression or subjective feeling as a potential revelation from God. Moreover, it removes any authoritative, objective standard for questioning the legitimacy of someone’s supposed revelation from God. Within the continuationist paradigm, it’s normal for a person not to know for sure if an impression came from God or from some other source. But that is a direct by-product of corrupt charismatic theology that degrades and discounts discernment and diverts people from the truth. That point was vividly illustrated in the experience of a well-known continuationist pastor whose life was rocked by a woman in his congregation who approached him with a supposed word from God. He tells the story this way:

Another game-changing project is the BRCK, pronounced “brick,” created by the same team behind Ushahidi and iHub. On a flight back to Africa from the United States some years ago, Hersman looked down on our vast, rugged continent and wondered why it was that most routers and modems were built for the first-world comfort zones of, say, New York or London, whereas most Internet users actually live in the harsh, far less comfortable environments of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The team sketched out a design for a rugged portable connectivity device that could work in remote conditions where electrical power and Internet connections were a problem. The result is the BRCK, a sturdy, brick-shaped, cloud-enabled Wi-Fi hotspot router from which you can access the Internet from anywhere on the continent that is close to a signal. It has an antenna, charger, USB ports, 4 GB of storage, a built-in global SIM card and enough backup power to survive a blackout. The device sells for $199 online and is already being used in 45 countries around the world. Consider the provenance: designed in Nairobi, Kenya; manufactured in Austin, Texas. This is a complete reversal of the standard manufacturing paradigm. Again, an example of African technology going global.

I wasn’t into blame. Maybe because I had so much of it directed at me, you know? I guess you can go one of two ways with that. You can reflect it right back out at everybody else, or you can drop out of the whole blame paradigm. I guess I chose not to play the game anymore.

Almost always the men who achieve these fundamental inventions of a new paradigm have been either very young or very new to the field whose paradigm they change. And perhaps that point need not have been made explicit, for obviously these are the men who, being little committed by prior practice to the traditional rules of normal science, are particularly likely to see that those rules no longer define a playable game and to conceive another set that can replace them.

Women derived significant benefits from the lessons in Betty Lehan Harragan’s Games Mother Never Taught You and Margaret Hennig and Anne Jardim’s The Managerial Woman. These books, published in 1977 and 1976, respectively, launched a paradigm shift in female thinking. They and other such writings encouraged women to acquire political savvy, learn the ropes, and beat men at their own games. There is much to be said for political savvy and learning the ropes, but it gets you only so far -- approximately as far as women have gotten.

IF THIS CONCLUSION had signaled the end of Arendt’s thinking on the subject, American readers of On Revolution could close the book basking in a feeling of self-satisfaction, offering a hymn of praise to their country’s exceptionalism, singing a chorus of “God Bless America” and retiring to their beds secure in the conviction that theirs was a nation unlike all others. But this was not the German-Jewish immigrant’s complex understanding of the United States, where gratitude was inevitably tempered by ambivalence and pessimism. Arendt was not one to close on so optimistic a note. The book’s last chapter, bringing the narrative up to the present, takes a sharp turn toward the ominous. It exhibits what one commentator calls a “particularly bleak and embattled tone.” It is a bucket of cold water thrown on the warm glow of the earlier exuberance. Political freedom, Arendt insisted in the book’s final pages, “means the right ‘to be a participator in government,’ or it means nothing.” The colonial townships and assemblies, building pyramidally to the constitutional conventions, were paradigms of citizen participation, but the popular elections that Americans today consider the hallmark of their democratic republic are hardly the same thing. Voting is not what Arendt meant by participation. The individual in the privacy of the voting booth is not engaged with others in the public arena, putting one’s opinions to the test against differing views and life experiences, but instead is choosing among professional politicians offering to promote and protect his or her personal interests through ready-made formulas, mindless banalities, blatant pandering, and outlandish promises cobbled together as party programs. (And heaven help the elected official who, in the manner of Edmund Burke, tries to argue against the personal interest of his or her constituents or to communicate bad news.) Leaders are selected on the basis of private, parochial concerns, not the public welfare, producing a mishmash of self-interested demands, or what Arendt called “the invasion of the public realm by society.” This was almost the opposite of genuine participation. Instead of the kind of intimate interchange of views and the deliberation that might be expected to resolve conflict, which was the practice of the townships and assemblies, isolated voters left to their own devices and with no appreciation of any larger good or of people different from themselves demand an affirmation of their particular prejudices and preconceptions. They have no opportunity, or desire, to come together with the aim of reaching mutual understanding and agreement on shared problems. Centrifugality prevails. American democracy, Arendt writes, had become a zero-sum game of “pressure groups, lobbies and other devices.” It is a system in which only power can prevail, or at best the blight of mutual backscratching to no greater end than mere political survival, lending itself to lies and demagoguery, quarrels and stalemates, cynical deal-making, not public exchange and calm deliberation.

THE FOSBURY FLOP At the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City, a twenty-one-year-old American named Richard Douglas (“Dick”) Fosbury shocked the judges and eighty thousand spectators at a session of track and field by winning a gold medal and setting a new Olympic record

Every stage of an experience demands a sacrifice: The obtaining of external forms of respect demands the sacrifice of self-respect; the gaining of validation and social acceptance demands the sacrifice of personal values; and the obtaining of wealth beyond common standards demands the sacrifice of aesthetics. Along the way, you are battling between the aspirations of your soul, common sense and paradigms you reject. The decisions are made at every second, at every provocation, at every betrayal and disappointment, denial, offer or alluring proposition. What you take and what you do with it is equally important. But the idea that you are in control of your life is truly an illusion. You can only control how you respond to life and within the framework presented by life itself. If you want to either change the rules of the game or the nature of the challenges, you must change the framework, which in this case means sacrificing the previous framework in which you operated and the identity built within such structure. You can’t change reality without changing yourself, or you will replicate the same reality wherever you go. And so, to a great extent, it is as relevant to be aware of what you can or can’t tolerate, who you are and are not, as it is to have the capacity to change the program behind the projections you observe and observe the meaning of such projections. No change is ever allowed to the one who cannot see what is being projected. Such an individual is a victim of his own ignorance. And that is why so many religious scriptures warn against the dangers of arrogance. For it is when you consider yourself above the projections of your environment that you are crushed by them. Such a secret will always be hidden from the masses for as long as it remains profitable to the ones benefiting from the projections such masses experience.

You get to dominate or avoid being dominated. This kind of domination is rarely spoken of directly, but it’s the payoff for some of the biggest rackets humans have perpetuated. For centuries it has been the source of war-making. To many people, domination is almost a greater thrill than life itself. The victim who always gets his or her feelings hurt is running a classic racket. Victims dominate everyone around them, because no one wants to hurt their feelings. Without having to be loud, forceful, or in charge, the victim can manipulate things to revolve around him or her. Similarly, when a teenager is nervous and cranky, everyone around him says, “Leave him alone. Let him do what he wants, or we’ll have to hear about it all afternoon.” No one wants to be bothered by his crankiness, and he knows that. I know a writer and political consultant I’ll call Gordon, someone with a national reputation, whose unwanted condition was to be constantly pulled into projects he didn’t want to take on. When he looked at this from the point of view of it being a tantrum he was throwing, or a con game he was playing, he saw the payoff: that he could dominate the situation by insisting that he could leave any political campaign at any time, because he was not totally committed. “Then I could set the terms,” he later said, “and others went along with those terms because they didn’t want to lose me.” It looked to him as if he would lose his power if he didn’t dominate. From inside the Universal Human Paradigm, not dominating looks threatening.

meaning to life and what we and others do in it. Else, in a godless paradigm, it is just a game of survival of the fittest. Animals play it as well as humans with no difference between the two in the godless view of life.

The Left has made the young gullible and materialist, while the Right has turned them into nihilistic cynics. This paradigm of power and struggle, expressed through endless ego-driven duality games will eventually lose steam. The new methodology must reconcile these two extremes by formulating a way of living that embodies the virtues of a natural, universal being - simplicity, patience, and compassion.

Mass culture or the New culture is Fake culture. It is devoid of meaning. It provides one with an illusory sense of liberty, making us believe that one is throwing off old shackles but it is in no way liberation. Mass culture tells people to just give up, go along, smile and 'be happy'. Perhaps on some level for some, this can be happiness, for those who do not have an inclination to strive for something more. But there are many people whose hearts cannot be bought by cheap thrills, or religion, or New Age, the crypto-media, mass education, the Left-Right paradigm, or limited hangout conspiracy theories. This is a corrupt system of lies which is oiled by the blood, sweat, and tears of their deceived and their deceased. The system is a web, and as time moves on, it becomes perfected, until it eventually becomes a net that catches us within its grasp so that we won't get out. One must have a strong inner fire, a strong inner space, not a weak inner space, to save yourself. Play the long game. Do the right thing. True success is survival. Culture is steel. It explores the greater depths of the Mystery, in the Universe, and in the Soul – Matter and Spirit. It is a shared inner space of a Folk creating the outer world through its radiance. A strong inner space that brings value and perspective. It is opposed to the weak inner space of today which is of trivia and degeneracy. We must be in a state of resurgence to find our real culture. We must find it in the universe and in ourselves.

I had no background, or I had a very exiguous background in finance. The guy who hired me always talked about hiring good intellectual athletes, people who were sort of mentally agile in an all-around way, and that the specifics of finance you could learn, which I think is true. But at the time, I mean, no hedge fund was really flooded with applicants, and that allowed him to let his mind range a little bit and consider different kinds of candidates. Today we have a recruiting group, and what do they do? They throw résumés at you, and it’s, like, one business school guy, one finance major after another, kids who, from the time they were twelve years old, were watching Jim Cramer and dreaming of working in a hedge fund. And I think in reality that probably they’re less likely to make good investors than people with sort of more interesting backgrounds. n+1: Why? HFM: Because I think that in the end the way that you make a ton of money is calling paradigm shifts, and people who are real finance types, maybe they can work really well within the paradigm of a particular kind of market or a particular set of rules of the game—and you can make money doing that—but the people who make huge money, the George Soroses and Julian Robertsons of the world, they’re the people who can step back and see when the paradigm is going to shift, and I think that comes from having a broader experience, a little bit of a different approach to how you think about things.

The CrossFit community celebrates strong women and powerful performances, helping to reinforce a new paradigm in which being a strong woman is inspiring and impressive. It’s become popular to be capable in your own body.

A lot of the value attracted comes in the form of people, ideas, and opportunities. We live on a very limiting planet, a prison planet, that also chains us to our genes and thoughts. It requires effort to go beyond all that. And also here people fail when choosing to compete against others rather than their old self - the outdated paradigms. As you grow older, this process gets harder, unless you have accumulated wisdom. A lot of the paradigms we are brainwashed with start at birth, which is why so many people today feel like they are at war with each other. What they see is real, and so they play this game called life, not according to their rules but the rules of others.

Humor. Two unconnected things are suddenly united by a paradigm shift. It is hard to describe, but we all know it when it happens. Weirdly, it causes us to make a barking noise.

Revolutionizing Healthcare: The Role of CGM Devices in Diabetes Management In recent years, Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) devices have emerged as a game-changer in diabetes management, offering patients a real-time view of their glucose levels and revolutionizing the way they monitor their condition. Among the pioneers in providing these life-changing devices, Med Supply US stands out as a reliable source, offering CGMs from various renowned brands like Abbott, Dexcom, and more. This article explores the significance of CGM devices and highlights the contribution of Med Supply US in making them accessible to those in need. Understanding CGM Devices: For individuals living with diabetes, maintaining optimal blood glucose levels is crucial to prevent serious health complications. Traditionally, this involved frequent finger-prick tests, which could be inconvenient and sometimes inaccurate. CGM devices, however, have transformed this process by providing continuous and real-time glucose level readings. These devices consist of a small sensor inserted under the skin that measures glucose levels in the interstitial fluid. The data collected is then transmitted to a receiver or a smartphone app, allowing users to track their glucose levels throughout the day and night. Benefits of CGM Devices: The introduction of CGM devices has brought about a paradigm shift in diabetes management due to their numerous benefits: Real-time Monitoring: CGM devices offer a real-time insight into glucose trends, enabling users to make informed decisions about their diet, exercise, and insulin dosages. This real-time feedback empowers individuals to take timely action to maintain their glucose levels within a healthy range.

In recent years, Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) devices have emerged as a game-changer in diabetes management, offering patients a real-time view of their glucose levels and revolutionizing the way they monitor their condition. Among the pioneers in providing these life-changing devices, Med Supply US stands out as a reliable source, offering CGMs from various renowned brands like Abbott, Dexcom, and more. This article explores the significance of CGM devices and highlights the contribution of Med Supply US in making them accessible to those in need. Understanding CGM Devices: For individuals living with diabetes, maintaining optimal blood glucose levels is crucial to prevent serious health complications. Traditionally, this involved frequent finger-prick tests, which could be inconvenient and sometimes inaccurate. CGM devices, however, have transformed this process by providing continuous and real-time glucose level readings. These devices consist of a small sensor inserted under the skin that measures glucose levels in the interstitial fluid. The data collected is then transmitted to a receiver or a smartphone app, allowing users to track their glucose levels throughout the day and night. Benefits of CGM Devices: The introduction of CGM devices has brought about a paradigm shift in diabetes management due to their numerous benefits: Real-time Monitoring: CGM devices offer a real-time insight into glucose trends, enabling users to make informed decisions about their diet, exercise, and insulin dosages. This real-time feedback empowers individuals to take timely action to maintain their glucose levels within a healthy range. Reduced Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia: By providing alerts for both low and high glucose levels, CGMs help users avoid dangerous hypoglycemic episodes and hyperglycemic spikes. This is particularly beneficial during sleep when such episodes might otherwise go unnoticed. Data-Driven Insights: CGM devices generate a wealth of data, including glucose trends, patterns, and even predictive alerts for potential issues. This information can be shared with healthcare providers to tailor treatment plans for optimal diabetes management. Enhanced Quality of Life: The convenience of CGM devices reduces the need for frequent finger pricks, leading to an improved quality of life for individuals managing diabetes. The constant insights also alleviate anxiety related to unpredictable glucose fluctuations. Med Supply US: Bringing Hope to Diabetes Management: Med Supply US has emerged as a prominent supplier of CGM devices, offering a range of options from reputable brands such as Abbott and Dexcom. The availability of CGMs through Med Supply US has made these cutting-edge devices accessible to a wider demographic, bridging the gap between technology and healthcare. Med Supply US not only provides access to CGM devices but also plays a crucial role in educating individuals about their benefits. Through informative resources, they empower users to make informed choices based on their specific needs and preferences. Furthermore, their commitment to customer support ensures that users can seamlessly integrate CGM devices into their daily routines.

The human brain evolved in an environment that was local and linear. Local, meaning most everything that we interacted with was less than a day’s walk away. Linear, meaning the rate of change was exceptionally slow. Your great-great-great-grandfather’s life was roughly the same as his great-great-grandson’s life. But now we live in a world that is global and exponential. Global, meaning if it happens on the other side of the planet, we hear about it seconds later (and our computers hear about it only milliseconds later). Exponential, meanwhile, refers to today’s blitzkrieg speed of development. Forget about the difference between generations, currently mere months can bring a revolution. Yet our brain—which hasn’t really had a hardware update in two hundred thousand years—wasn’t designed for this scale or speed. And if we struggle to track the growth of singular innovations, we’re downright helpless in the face of converging ones. Put it this way, in “The Law of Accelerating Returns,” Ray Kurzweil did the math and found that we’re going to experience twenty thousand years of technological change over the next one hundred years. Essentially, we’re going from the birth of agriculture to the birth of the internet twice in the next century. This means paradigm-shifting, game-changing, nothing-is-ever-the-same-again breakthroughs—such as affordable aerial ridesharing—will not be an occasional affair. They’ll be happening all the time. It means, of course, that flying cars are just the beginning.

Ban privileges. The rules of the game should be the same to all players, regardless of their size, location, or any other criteria

Foremost, we need a paradigm shift in cultural attitudes towards gender stereotypes. Everyone—both men and women —needs to step outside of their comfort zone and analyze how these misconceptions are clouding our judgment on a subconscious level. Our strategic mindset should not be thwarted by having these misconceptions seep into our every-day interactions, create artificial divisions between the genders, or prescribe a path rooted in tradition over reason.

Hot Sauce54: Demonstrating that psychologists have a wonderful sense of humor, this paradigm consists in measuring how much hot chili sauce the participant pours into the confederate's drink. In the original study, the point of the experiment is that the victim of the hot sauce poisoning had somehow provoked or mocked the participant, and the latter is then informed that the annoying man doesn't like spicy food. I guess you could create all sort of variations from this basic template, like making your participant play an offensive and gory video game for twenty minutes, and then see if he tries to kill the other guy with a chilly overdose.

Get to the other side” is still the basic paradigm. “Visit all the map” is handled by a “secrets”* system. Time limits add another dimension of challenge.

Behavior, in this view, “is solely the consequence of the past history of the system, that has brought it to a state where various neuronal populations form an excitatory consortium that organizes and ineluctably triggers the correlated synaptic volleys needed for a particular movement,” as the neuroscientist Robert Doty described it. The sense that one is exercising free will when one orders the cheesecake or moves the cursor on the computer screen to another game of hearts rather than to the spreadsheet program with your overdue taxes—is an illusion, an artifact of a prescientific era, says the prevailing paradigm. The idea that we might choose cantaloupe over cheesecake is as illusory as the apparent underwater “bending” of an oar dipped into a river.

By engaging in cognitive reappraisal, and telling ourselves a different story about what is happening, we can subvert the entire willpower paradigm. Some research has shown that willpower is like a muscle, and it gets tired with overuse. But it only gets depleted if there’s a struggle. Games change the struggle to something else.