Categories
Human Behavior

Let’s Have More 3 Day Weekends!

Isn’t it great to have a three-day weekend? We have a little extra time to breathe, sleep in, maybe go somewhere. We should have more of them.

But there’s nothing we can do about that… right?

Well—maybe. Unless we were more like China. In China, they noticed the same problem: people want longer holidays. More specifically, the tourism industry wanted longer holidays, but businesses don’t want to give up too many workdays. So instead of fighting about it, they rearranged the calendar.

In 1999 , they invented something called 调休 (tiáoxiū)—”adjusted rest.” It’s a system of make-up working days, where weekends are sometimes converted into regular workdays called “special working days” to create longer blocks of time off around major holidays.

And you know what? It’s absolutely brilliant. And also completely insane. Let me explain.

What China Actually Did (Calendar Tetris, Government Edition)

Picture this: Next Tuesday is Dragon Boat Festival—a nice little one-day holiday. The government is so nice that they even give you Monday off to connect it to the weekend. Then your Chinese colleague casually mentions, “Oh, by the way, we’re working this Saturday to make up for it.”

Wait… what?

This is adjusted rest in action. China takes their holidays and engineers them into blocks by borrowing weekend days. That three-day weekend you’re enjoying? You may have worked a Saturday or Sunday to “earn” it.

It happens all the time throughout the Chinese calendar. Here’s the 2025 Chinese calendar. Note the special working days.

From teamedUP China, a Chinese recruiting firm

Why It Worked in China

This system works in China because of something you see everywhere there: an almost supernatural ability for society-wide coordination around shared priorities.

Take gaokao (高考), China’s college entrance exam. The entire country comes to a standstill for three days in June—construction sites go silent, airlines reroute flights, and businesses turn down music. It’s not just government policy; it’s collective buy-in because everyone understands this matters.

The same cultural DNA makes adjusted rest work. When the government says, “We’re all working Saturday so everyone can have meaningful family time,” there’s immediate social consensus. Chinese workers embraced this system because it delivers what they genuinely value: real time for family visits across this massive country. When your parents live 1,000 miles away, a single day off is useless. But a week-long Chinese New Year break? That’s life-changing.

When Beijing publishes the holiday calendar each October, 1.4 billion people simply adjust accordingly. No endless debates, no union disputes—an entire civilization synchronizes like a coordinated dance.

Why It Would Never Work in America

Now imagine trying to implement a make-up day policy in the United States. It would be chaos.

It doesn’t work for us because we’re too beautifully, chaotically diverse. Just think about all the observant Jews who can’t work on Saturday for religious reasons. Or the millions of retail and service workers whose schedules are already scattered across seven days a week. Or the parents juggling childcare around school schedules that don’t align with federal holidays. Or the freelancers and gig workers who don’t even have traditional weekends to begin with.

We’re just not the type of society that’s good at making collective decisions, even when they’d benefit everyone. Try to get Americans to agree on synchronized vacation schedules and you’ll trigger the same cultural immune response that makes us argue about daylight saving time for decades without ever actually changing anything.

What We Do Instead

So what do we do in the US instead? We move the holidays. That’s why most federal holidays that fall on weekends get shifted to the nearest Monday, creating automatic three-day weekends without anyone having to work extra days. It’s a far simpler and more elegant solution for our individualistic culture. No make-up days, no synchronized scheduling, no arguments about who has to work when. When Washington’s birthday falls on a Wednesday, we just shift it to the nearest Monday.

The trade-off? We don’t get those spectacular week-long vacation blocks that China engineers. Our longest federal holiday weekend tops out at three days. But for a country that can’t even agree on what to call carbonated beverages, maybe that’s about all the coordination we can realistically handle.

Categories
Life Lessons Meditation

What I Wish I Learned in College

Colleges teach you how to think. What they should teach is how to live a life that matters.

On the train up to Yale for an event, I told my friend Cherie, “Whenever I go back, I get this feeling of anxiety. It’s not about other people judging me—it’s about me judging myself. Am I doing enough? Am I worthy of having gone here?”

She didn’t hesitate. “Oh yeah. I have that too. It’s called Yale-ing.”

That was it exactly—the quiet, constant self-surveillance that comes from trying to measure up to an imaginary, idealized version of yourself. Yale searches for the most driven, unconventional, obsessive people it can find and gives them space to run. What looks like drive from the outside is often anxiety on the inside—a constant need to prove themselves again and again. They’re insecure overachievers.

Categories
Life Lessons Meditation

In Praise of Idleness

For most of history, people worked so they could have leisure. We’ve somehow flipped it: now we have leisure so we can work better.

Somewhere along the way, we decided that being busy was the same thing as being valuable. If your calendar is full, you must be important. If your inbox is overflowing, you must be needed. If you never stop moving, you must be living a good life.

It’s a strange inversion of history. The ancient Greeks even had a word for this: scholē. It meant “leisure,” and it’s the root of our word school. Leisure wasn’t a reward for hard work; it was the highest state of being. Work was a means to secure leisure, and leisure was where life actually happened — in thinking, creating, learning, conversing.

The early idea of the “liberal arts” came from the same place. They weren’t job training. They were the “arts befitting a free person” — skills in language, reasoning, mathematics, and music. They were for people who had the time and freedom to explore ideas without having to justify every minute in terms of productivity.

Nearly a century ago, philosopher Bertrand Russell made a sharp case for idleness in his essay In Praise of Idleness. He argued that civilization would gain far more from shorter work hours and longer stretches of leisure than from endless production. For Russell, leisure wasn’t a pause from life — it was where life happened. It was the true incubator of culture, thought, and creativity.

Categories
Ideas Science and Math

Who Really Said That?

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
– Albert Einstein

We’ve all heard that quote. At meetings. In self-help books. On motivational posters in office break rooms. It exemplifies Einstein’s legendary cut-to-the-chase brilliance.

The only problem is, Einstein didn’t say it.

As far as I can tell, the quote first appeared in a Narcotics Anonymous pamphlet in the early 1980s. Einstein died in 1955 without mentioning anything remotely close to it in anything he’d ever written or said.

And yet, the misattribution stuck. Why? Because it feels like something Einstein would have said. Like Churchill, Lincoln, or Mark Twain, Einstein has become a kind of general-purpose intellectual that we can attribute our cleverest, pithiest thoughts to, whether he said them or not.

This misattribution happens all the time. So often, in fact, that there’s a name for it.

Actually, there are several.

Stigler’s Law of Eponymy

In 1980, University of Chicago statistics professor Stephen Stigler gave this phenomenon a name: Stigler’s Law of Eponymy. It states that “No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer.”1

The best part? Stigler didn’t even claim to have discovered it. He credited the idea to someone else—sociologist Robert K. Merton. In other words, the law named after Stigler was… not discovered by Stigler. The law proves itself. Here’s what he wrote in the paper:

If there is an idea in this paper that is not at least implicit in Merton’s The Sociology of Science, it is either a happy accident or a likely error. Rather I have, in the Mertonian tradition of the self-confirming hypothesis, attempted to frame the self-proving theorem.

Stigler’s Law of Eponomy

But it’s not just a clever academic joke. Stigler’s Law points to something more systemic: we don’t just forget who discovered what—we misremember it. Over time, we start attaching credit to the loudest name, not the first one.

In the original paper, Stigler and others have documented example after example:

  • Halley’s Comet? Observed by ancient Chinese and Babylonian astronomers. Halley just did the math.
  • Newton’s First Law of Motion – Better known as inertia, it was described by Galileo decades before Newton refined and popularized it.
  • Fibonacci sequence – Long before Leonardo of Pisa wrote about it, Indian mathematicians like Pingala and Virahanka had described it in the context of Sanskrit poetry and combinatorics.

Fame creates its own kind of gravity and inertia. Once someone becomes famous enough, many other discoveries are attached to them.

The Matthew Effect

Now let’s look at Robert Merton—the person Stigler credited. Back in 1968, Merton gave this bias its own name: the Matthew Effect, based on a verse in the Gospel of Matthew, “For to everyone who has, more will be given…”

In the world of science, that means prominent researchers get more recognition, more funding, more citations—even when the original insight came from someone else. It’s not always malicious. Sometimes, people just assume the famous name must be behind the breakthrough. Other times, the lesser-known researcher gets buried in the footnotes.

The Matthew Effect isn’t limited to academia. It shows up in:

  • Publishing, where established authors get bigger advances regardless of quality.
  • Tech, where investors back founders who’ve “done it before.”
  • Education, where early reading success snowballs into long-term achievement.

It’s a feedback loop. Once you’re seen as successful, you’re more likely to be treated as successful. And then the cycle repeats.

Churchillian Drift

If Stigler’s Law and the Matthew Effect explain why discoveries get mislabeled, Churchillian Drift explains why quotes get misattributed—especially to famous people like Winston Churchill.

Coined by British broadcaster and quote sleuth Nigel Rees, Churchillian Drift describes how pithy or profound lines migrate toward famous names over time. If a quote sounds wise and ancient, we give it to Confucius. If it’s cynical and funny, it goes to Mark Twain. If it’s about strategy or war, it’s Sun Tzu. And if it’s about perseverance, logic, or nobility? Einstein gets the nod.

It’s branding by attribution. The quote becomes “better” if we imagine a titan of history saying it.

So What Do We Do With This?

At the surface, it’s just cultural laziness—there are only so many “famous” people in the public’s mental Rolodex, so we assign them everything. But it’s also more subtle and damaging: it reinforces the idea that only a handful of people in history are worth listening to.

This doesn’t just happen with quotes. It happens with scientific discoveries, artistic breakthroughs, and even entire branches of mathematics. As I wrote in The Fibonacci Sequence, Brought to You by Fibonacci (and Absolutely No One Else), history often remembers the person who popularized an idea, not the person who actually created it. The result? We get a distorted picture of how progress really happens.

The next time you hear a clever quote—or a “fact” about who discovered what—you don’t have to just nod along. You can check. Quote Investigator, run by Garson O’Toole, traces famous lines back to their earliest appearances. That’s where I found the true story of the Einstein quote.

You might find that the quote in your PowerPoint isn’t from Churchill, but from an obscure 19th-century pamphlet. Or that the mathematical sequence you love owes more to India than to Fibonacci.

Finding the truth behind these attributions means going beyond the headline version of history—the one where “Einstein was smart” and “Newton discovered everything.” What you get instead is the messy, collaborative, and far more human version of how ideas actually spread.

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy ↩︎
Categories
Books / Audiobooks Writing

A Short History of Thinking on Paper

I love notebooks.

I love the ritual of pulling out my Leuchtturm Bullet Journal and pretending—for a few minutes each day—that I’m a nineteenth-century poet in a French cage, writing up my deep and progound thoughts. Most of the time, it’s my work list and reminders for my kids’ homework. But still.

I like that I can carry a physical artifact of my thoughts. That I can plan my day in a truly analog fashion. That I can step away from screens and write things down, slowly, by hand.

In a world where it’s normal to carry around a supercomputer in your pocket, a notebook starts to feel like an extravagance. A tiny luxury. Which is strange when you think about it. The iPhone is a thousand dollars. But it’s the twelve-dollar notebook that feels indulgent.

That’s why I was so excited to stumble across The Notebook: A History of Thinking on Paper by Roland Allen.

Categories
Human Behavior Science and Math

The Cafeteria Conspiricy

Voronoi diagram of people enjoying a park from Kottke.org

The strangest thing happens to me when I visit the cafeteria at work. People will come in from out of town and we’ll go to lunch with about 10 people. But there’s nowhere that we can find for 10 people to sit together. There will be a number of seats in a row and then one or two people there to break it up.

It’s like everyone is intentionally spreading out across the room as far as they can. It feels like there’s a conspiracy to keep us from finding a table.

Categories
Judaism Life Lessons

What $1 Can Buy

This is a story about an experiment in giving.

I’m used to walking down the street and seeing someone sitting on the sidewalk with a sign:

“Homeless. Please Help.”

And I feel it—that tension. That deep, emotional tug to help.

But then the mental calculus starts. There are so many great causes I could be supporting with that dollar. I could give to a food pantry. Or support addiction recovery. Or donate to a shelter with wraparound services. Or contribute to an organization that tackles root causes like housing policy or mental health care.

Categories
Life Lessons

Ivy League Trading Cards: The Heroes of Early Women’s Education

When I wrote the blog post last year, Yale Needs Women, I found myself cringing at how President Kingman Brewster handled coeducation. He didn’t so much throw open the gates as grudgingly unhook the latch—mostly because Princeton had just started to admit women, and Yale’s admit rates were taking a hit. Brewster famously insisted on still admitting 1,000 men each year to ensure Yale’s mission of “producing male leaders” wasn’t disrupted. The women? They could come—so long as they didn’t get in the way.

Yale, in short, was pretty awful. But many Ivies were pretty bad. Dartmouth women arrived in 1972 to frat chants, hate mail, and banners reading “Better Dead Than Coed.”

But there were some heroes in the fight for coeducation. I thought I’d use ChatGPT to create some trading cards of the Heroes of Ivy League Coeducation. Here’s my first attempt. At the bottom, I’ll show you how you can help me out!

Categories
Books / Audiobooks

Joe Biden’s Original Sin

I just finished Original Sin, the book by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson that traces how President Biden’s decision to run for a second term—despite mounting evidence to the contrary—slowly unraveled into a crisis. It’s not a thriller, exactly. More of a slow-motion reckoning.

Categories
Judaism

The Entebe Rescue and My Cousin Patricia (July 4, 1976)

On July 4th, we usually remember the events of 1776, when America cast off the yoke of British rule. But something else happened on that date—exactly 200 years later. On July 4th, 1976, Israel carried out one of the most daring military operations in its history.