From my personal experience and from my observations of others, the limiting factor to learning is the availability of mental energy to persevere/endure in the learning process.
You have a problem. Either an academic homework problem or a real-world problem of some sort (think error message in the console). You try one thing but it doesn't work... then another, and still you're not making progress. You're starting to realize solving this problem is not obvious and will require some "brain sweat" and you have to make a choice whether to invest the hour (or day!) of your time to learn enough to solve your problem.
Learners willingness to persevere in their efforts to solve the problem depends on lots of factors, but most importantly they are conditional on the level of learners' interest/motivation (intrinsic or extrinsic). Ideally, learners will be motivated purely by the "knowledge buzz" of learning new concepts and seeing the connections between them, but any source of motivation is OK: as long as it pushes/pulls you enough to go through the necessary learning and solve the problem.
I recognize that learning to learn is a useful multiplier, but learners need to have base rate of (1) intellectual stamina (brain muscles?) and (2) interest/motivation to push through. Otherwise learning is not going to be happening.
https://www.justinmath.com/books/ (scroll for the second one)
He is a math guy, who worked in Wall Street and then left and now works on math academy buidling models to improve learning.
It's great, well researched and practical book. However, it's not easy at all. Go check it out. It's free and he has published google docs version.
-- from "The Humanity of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
My computer engineering professors also emphasized user centered design. For one of Google's top scientists to bring this up is an admission that they won't, or can't, design a good user experience for their tools.
While we understand the importance of warming up for physical activity and recognize the need for a certain aptitude for running, weightlifting, or boxing, when it comes to more intellectual activities, we often leave things to chance: sometimes we are more alert and receptive, while at other times we are less so.
Over the years, I have found enormous benefit in practicing autogenic training, a more Western and scientific version of meditative practices that today seem to arouse the interest of those who deal with these things. I am mentally more alert, more receptive, and learning, which is always challenging, is faster.
Jokes aside I'm really into learning science and make youtube videos covering learning and learning papers + an ipad app. I keep a running list of my favorite learn-to-learn resources here:
https://www.ahmni.app/blog/learn-to-learn-resource-list
If I had to recommend only one resource it would be: The ABCs of How We Learn: 26 Scientifically Proven Approaches, How They Work, and When to Use Them by Schwartz
You don't go to college to get a job
You don't go to college to get a degree
You don't go to college to learn things
You go to college to LEARN HOW TO LEARN
If you do that, all the other things will come to you.
If you get out of college and have not learned how to learn, your "degree" is toilet paper.
Best bit of career advice I ever got, back in the 90s: "Get really good at the help system".
(At the time, it was MSDN DVDs).
** "in my opinion" is always implied, unless a source is given **
Reading about airline crashes has radically changed how I view blame.
The way I was raised and the choices I made as an adult have given me a relatively rare point of view: people are made of humans, and humans are made of animals, and animals have limited capabilities.
I can explain someone's actions, or I can excuse someone's actions, and the difference is largely in the mind of the beholder.
Social punishment is micro and macro. On the macro it looks like shared morality and it feels like safety. On the micro it looks like emotional invalidation and it feels like danger and isolation.
If we're lucky, LLMs force people to put more effort into assignments and grading and then that would help kids learn to learn as well.
Trust me if google can do something anyone can. They are trying to "define" what "they" "want" from a "compliant workforce"
Simply showing a learner a few slides on spaced retrieval will not cut it.
https://techxplore.com/news/2025-09-google-ai-scientist-gene...
People who do stuff will make money
”Learning how to learn” sounds vaguely insightful just because of the repetition, but if you think for a bit about what it actually means it falls apart.
In other words, until one learns how to hammer a nail, it's unreasonable to assume knowledge of how to tell another to do so. AI is no exception. It's speed-running US society's final threads being severed, and okay, sigh, here we go. No, I'm not interested in fixing the problems he's identifying.
My ex had a saying from bench science..."if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitant." That part. Off to go live in a van down by the river...
But it'll be totally different in the next generation. Trust me, bro, I'm rich - so I must know what I'm talking about.
Future internet road maps be like:
Join the Generalist bootcamp, it includes big picture of the world and everything, anything you ever need. Full access subscriptions at $1000.
You will Learn the following things:
Analytic philosophy, Mathematical logic, Pure and applied math, Physics, CS, Systems thinking, Engineering(Mech + electronics), creative problem solving And finally one art subject
Beginer Projects: Wafer stage design. Model nano tech projects. Small nuclear fusion reactors. Portable TEM machine.
Pre-req: Just enough maturity. You should be curious, persistence & hardworking. We assume you will practise problem solving till you die.
Outcomes of the bootcamp: Job guaranteed at fortune 500.
Testimonials: We have so many happy customers working for companies having trillion dollar values.