> I had tried blockers like Cold Turkey, Freedom and RescueTime

I was in the same boat, I even blocked websites in the hosts file, but I found that I'm really creative with finding alternative distractions.

I realized that this is not a software problem that needs to be solved, but rather something with the task. What works usually is to find at least a minuscule part of the task that looks remotely interesting and that hopefully snowballs into the task getting done.

Also, activate deadline mode.

> something with the task

I suffer greatly doing something which I have little interest in. This is a flaw of mine I would say; probably years of distraction have ruined my baseline attentiveness.

> at least a minuscule part of the task that looks remotely interesting and that hopefully snowballs

Well said, I noted this down! Need to implement it now

Thanks a lot for your inputs btw :)

SelfControl (for Mac) is the only hardcore no-compromise blocker that I know of and that works for me.

     They leave you dependent upon your will power, but Will Power is not just enough!

Honestly, instead of writing software, work on that. Improve your discipline and many areas of your life will improve.

I'm glad you wrote some software and it's in a state others can use it, really that's great. I'm just concerned that the motive behind this is a bandaid situation to a bigger problem.

It's like saying "don't be sad" to depressed people. Helping oneself with environment tweaks and tools like this can help make permanent improvements for neurodiverse folks.

It's not the same. Will power is a muscle that can be strengthened. Being able to overcome depression is not a great analogy. It's an entirely different category.

> Will power is a muscle that can be strengthened.

That’s at best debatable. We’ve gone back and forth on it.

https://hbr.org/2016/11/have-we-been-thinking-about-willpowe...

I don't think it's debatable in the least, with the caveat that maybe some people have a harder time of it than others, just like some have a harder time putting on physical muscle.

> I don't think it's debatable in the least

That’s not up to you to decide. It is demonstrably and unambiguously debatable because, well, psychologists are debating it and disagreeing on what is true.

It’s your prerogative to firmly believe one side of the debate. If you’re a psychologist it’s also your prerogative to research and actively contribute to that side. But there is no question that we don’t have proven consensus at the moment.

> That’s not up to you to decide.

It's not up to anyone to decide. Facts are facts and until anyone knows for sure. I'm simply stating I'm putting all my money behind one particular theory.

> It is demonstrably and unambiguously debatable because, well, psychologists are debating it and disagreeing on what is true.

Sure, but by that reasoning whether or not the earth is flat is debatable.

When I said, and generally when people say something isn't debatable, they are not saying that it isn't literally debatable, but rather there is sufficient evidence that counter-arguments can be dismissed.

> But there is no question that we don’t have proven consensus at the moment.

We do though. We know it's true for some people. There's no shortage of data corroborating that.

> Sure, but by that reasoning whether or not the earth is flat is debatable.

It is not, because in that instance we have incontrovertible evidence of the truth. It’s just that a minority claims that evidence to be faked.

In psychology we’re working on much shakier ground and it’s widely understood there’s little we know for sure. The field is rife with reproducibility issues.

> We do though. We know it's true for some people. There's no shortage of data corroborating that.

The link I initially shared touches on that point. The evidence we have was observed only on people who believed willpower works like that. Thus it’s not a universal truth.

> It is not

No, it is. I think you missed my point though.

> because in that instance we have incontrovertible evidence of the truth.

This is irrelevant to my point. You said that I was wrong to say the issue we were discussing is not debatable because it is still being debated. I pointed out that's a fallacious argument because you can claim anything is debatable then as long as at least two peoples are debating it. That's kind of self-evident and clearly I wasn't trying to claim as otherwise, as explained preciously. As such, intentional or not, I see that as a kind of strawman.

> In psychology we’re working on much shakier ground and it’s widely understood there’s little we know for sure. The field is rife with reproducibility issues.

Absolutely, it's why it's a soft science. But we're still able to overcome that difficult and come up with useful data and testable models, and we've done that with willpower. Of course we don't completely understand it, but it's beyond a doubt that at least some people can increase it.

Here's an excerpt from an interview with Kelly McGonigal[1]

The research also shows that willpower decreases over the course of the day, as your energy gets "spent" on stress and self-control. This has become known as "the muscle model" of willpower. Like your biceps or quadriceps the willpower "muscle" can get exhausted from effort.

But that doesn't mean we're all doomed to run out of willpower by noon. I prefer to talk about becoming a willpower athlete. Any muscle in your body can be made stronger through exercise. If willpower is a muscle, even a metaphorical muscle, it should be possible to train it. That's what the research shows.

> The link I initially shared touches on that point. The evidence we have was observed only on people who believed willpower works like that. Thus it’s not a universal truth.

The article talks about ego depletion working like that, which is not the same thing as what I've been saying. It's an entirely separate issue.

I'm saying willpower functions as a muscle and can be increased. Like anyone can strengthen a bicep. I'm not saying we start with a limited pool of willpower that we use up, which is what ego depletion is. That's entirely unrelated to the claim I made.

However, as far as research on being able to increase willpower goes:

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855143/

> Participants who practiced self-control by cutting back on sweets or squeezing a handgrip exhibited significant improvement in stop signal performance relative to those who practiced tasks that did not require self-control. > ... > Supplemental analyses suggested that only practicing self-control built self-control capacity; the improved outcomes cannot be explained by self-fulfilling prophecies, increased self-efficacy or awareness of self-control.

[3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/174569161769707...

> A prominent idea suggests that training self-control by repeatedly overriding dominant responses should lead to broad improvements in self-control over time. Here, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis based on robust variance estimation of the published and unpublished literature on self-control training effects. Results based on 33 studies and 158 effect sizes revealed a small-to-medium effect of g = 0.30 > ... > The mechanisms underlying the effect are poorly understood.

[4] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26708331/

> this study aimed to explore whether a metacognitive therapy technique, Attention Training (ATT: Wells, 1990) can improve young children's ability to delay gratification. One hundred children participated. Classes of 5-6 year olds were randomly allocated to either the ATT or a no-intervention condition and were tested pre and post-intervention on ability to delay gratification, verbal inhibition (executive control), and measures of mood. The ATT intervention significantly increased (2.64 times) delay of gratification compared to the no-intervention condition. After controlling for age and months in school, the ATT intervention and verbal inhibition task performance were significant independent predictors of delay of gratification. These results provide evidence that ATT can improve children's self-regulatory abilities

That last link is a very famous study in the field and has yet to be invalidated multiple decades since it's publication. And there is no shortage of studies corroborating this same type of result. It's very much established.

And so, I'm going to reiterate and double down on my point here, that there is indeed a consensus view and ample evidence showing that a subset of people can increase their willpower via specialized exercises and use. That we know this isn't debatable in the sense we satisfied this to be true and should instead move past to discussing consequences, but it is debatable in the sense anyone can choose to debate it if they wish, as with the flat earth hypothesis.

[1] https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2011/12/29/a-conversation-abo...

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855143/

[3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/174569161769707...

[4] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26708331/

> Honestly, instead of writing software, work on that. Improve your discipline and many areas of your life will improve.

You're right! Though I recommend starting with something easier that still gives broad improvements across the board, like CRISPR-ing yourself a third arm, or solving world peace, or some other thing known to be at least possible to achieve.

EDIT:

> I'm just concerned that the motive behind this is a bandaid situation to a bigger problem.

Unfortunately, at the current state of understanding our minds and bodies (and ability to work with complex dynamic systems in general), all we can do is to stack band-aids on problems until they become manageable (and then treat them as stable foundation for the next layer of band-aid covered problems).

In mental health in particular, I find that addressing the "bigger problem" works, but usually by means of distracting you from the immediate problem. Often enough that is the actual solution itself - when you're stuck in some unusual feedback loop, the historical reason you ended up in it doesn't matter much; the only thing that matters is breaking out of it. In those cases, digging for the Ultimate Big Problem / Root Cause is just going to make the problem worse.

(As an analogy, imagine walking down the river bank, slipping, and falling into the current. It doesn't really matter why you fell in - the danger is in staying, and the solution is in getting to shore. Going back to investigate what happened in the first place only increases your risk of falling back in again.)

Fascinating explanation I getting to learnt a lot

Maybe, but changing your environment helps! If you want to quit smoking don’t have cigarettes in the house, etc.

I think leechblock for Firefox saved my career.

> work on that

I agree, I will start small from today onwards

I will start tomorrow.

The readme is confusing, the screenshot says a little bit, and the rest of the text kept me wondering "But what does it do?"

At least your text in here states the problem this app will supposedly solve, and how you're solving it:

> I tried to address the things which none other tool seems to eliminate. Key combinations, Mouse movements to switch tabs, leaving the full screen when temptation hits, etc.

But it still seems to be missing a bigger context. What "things"?

It prevents opening new tabs, blocks key combinations that would normally allow you to disable focus tools, and restricts mouse movements that could reveal browser tabs or elements. Browser extensions like Freedom do not prevent such.

Example situation: I started to solve physics questions but drifted away after sometime by opening VSCode or switch to reading something on Wikipedia which is unrelated to my primary objective.

I was looking for something like this the other day, and even started a repo for a project similar. This looks like exactly what I’ve been wanting, thank you for building it. I’ll be trying it out

I'm sure it was fun to build, and it's interesting to track inputs!

I fell in love with https://www.stayinsession.com ... Session can block tabs, windows, and apps while in Pomodoro focus mode with lots of granular settings. I think blocking loading of tabs should be sufficient, versus trying to block the input? (not affiliated, I just like this app)

I don't understand. If you want to switch tabs, press Ctrl-Shift-Q, then switch tab. What's the difference with simply going fullscreen with F11?

Sadly, i need to work on my willpower, 30 mins in, i drift away to some other task instead of what I was meant to do Hence I need repeated lashing by some software to keep me on check

my weaknesses sigh

> but Will Power is not just enough!

This should be something to work on, no? Strengthen your mind to the point your will is strong that it is sufficient.

Yes, this would be best; unfortunately, there exist no known training regimen for willpower that's known to be effective, and in particular to deliver results before it gets you fired.

Or, to paraphrase, your mind can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

(Wonder if that's the source of the belief that young people adapt and change, while older people get set in their ways. Perhaps it's less about neuroplasticity and accumulated beliefs, but more about accumulating commitments to the point of having zero slack left for changing things.)

> there exist no known training regimen for willpower that's known to be effective

I disagree with that. There has been much written since man could write.

> your mind can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

That too is just a question of focus and mental strength.

true indeed, i should probably work in myself than anything else now

Why did you assume that we would all work with just one tab?!

In my case, I am currently learning Go at the moment. So, a learning session will contain at least one browser tab for the website I'm using, a window for VS Code, and a third browser tab in case I need to look something up.

I want to disagree with many commenters here saying "Just work on your willpower".

I think that OP's correct. Yes, you can and you need to work on it. But why should you go the hard way only for the sake of hardship? If you need help, then rely on it in the meantime.

Willpower's limited resource.

Is there anything like this for Linux (i.e. user-friendly blockers for the entire OS, not just the browser)

I love the screen time feature on my iPhone to set nonnegotiable time limits for myself. However, I have not found any good solution for Linux I am happy with so far.

It's more that it goes out out of control if your workflow involves "open new tab on click". start with a google search, tab in a potential ressult, repeat 4 more times and then put it on the back burner and try a different result.

next thing you know you have 20 tabs scattered and maybe 5 are useful. But you don't want to just randomly close tabs in case you close the useful one. To use the book metaphor, its like you have 7 books scattered and in each book there's maybe 1-2 pages each you need. So it's not like you wanna just close the books and put them away without at least some bookmarks or note taking.

I don't really agree, at any one time I have hundreds of tabs across multiple windows and it's great. I have a window for investing. Every few days or so I unminimize it, read through the latest stats, news, information about companies I follow, etc. I have a window for a new hobby I'm picking up, I use that window every weekend, it has quite a few tabs for stuff I'm learning or want to come back to later. I have a window for work stuff. Etc, lots of windows for lots of topics, every time I want to change context I just switch to the relevant window, it's great.

> It's like having getting 100 books out of a bookshelf and reading them all at once.

No, it's like having a bookshelf, period. How many books on yours have you actually read? How many you put there with intent to read, which never materialized? People are reluctant to admit it, but at least for me and those I know personally, 90%+ books they own are either waiting to be read (or re-read), or should've been long ago disposed of, but it's kind of a shame to throw away/give away a good book - surely you'll get to it soon!

Literally the same thing with browser tabs, except it's digital (i.e. easier to acquire, easier to forget about).

That is what bookmarks are for.

That's what they would be if the web continued to consist of only static documents, as it used to in 1991. Unfortunately, people figured they can run a program on each request and feed its stdout to client browser, ruining bookmarks in the process. Later, they figured they could run code client-side, adding final nail to the coffin of browser bookmarks.

Bookmarks suck at being bookmarks because they're only an URL in a database. However the site looked like when you saved the bookmark, it's unlikely it'll look the same when you visit (you lose scroll position for starters) - hell, it may not exist at all anymore.

Tabs keep state. That's what makes them good at being bookmarks. You switch to the tab, you see the site as it was when you left it before; you don't lose any state (at least within hours to days of a single session; tab unloading and session save/restore complicates this, but they still restore more state than normal bookmarks do).

There is no legitimate use for more than 100 files on a computer.

You forgot the "simultaneously opened" part.

Opened in the sense of "user working on/with them" corresponds to stuff displayed on your desktop. The mapping is then:

Open tabs :: books on a bookshelf

Tabs on screen :: books open on your desk

Most people tend to have 0 or 1 books laying open on their desk at once. Similarly, most people tend to have 0 or 1 tabs visible on their screen at any given time. In special cases, people tend to have multiple books open on their desk, or tabs visible on screen, but that number is unlikely to be larger than 10. Having 100 books on a bookshelf or 100 tabs in a browser is not a problem.

I guess the way I'm using my computer is also wrong now...

  $ lsof / | wc -l
  8533

I was wondering who's gonna drag lsof into this conversation. ;) Surely you are aware of the fact that it shows a number completely irrelevant to this discussion.

No, you won't be reading 100 at the same time, but you'll be reading a few of them and switching between, keeping related tabs in the same window. I currently have about 40-50 tabs open, as I usually do. Works great!

I have about 40 as well. Not really by intention, more due to the fact that tabs are so transient now with synced devices and windows and my own ADHD. I could tell you why every tab was opened but half the tabs would be at least 2 days stale.

browser windows also further islate things. I'm one virtual desktop and I forgot for a week another desktop had 20 tabs open from a completely different task that is long finished.

I use them as a kind of informal "to look at later" list. Not quite important enough to bookmark immediately, but things I'll peruse later when I'm not busy - either reading, bookmarking, or closing.

Even better: I only read one at a time.

But that doesn't mean my bookshelf shouldn't contain 100 books.

Just because you don’t didn’t mean it’s not possible.

One example - one window per client with all their tabs open.

Tab search tool (press T for search) means instant switch and load.

There’s other tools and approaches that can help too, but this is one.

I agree totally. Just because you need a couple of spatulas, a set of knives, some cutting boards, etcetera etcetera to have a functioning kitchen, doesn't mean you have to leave every tool lying around on the dinner table 24/7.

The moment you go on HN, skim the front page and open a queue of HN submissions to read, you already exceed your half a dozen tab rule.

When I look at how many pinned tabs at work I have, all of which are mandatory, there isn't even a single tab left for actual browsing.

I'm sure you're proud of completely impractical ideas such as opening a tab, bookmarking it, closing the tab, then five minutes later trying to find the bookmark to reopen the tab and then delete the bookmark, just to stay within a silly six tabs rule.

Have you considered that maybe you're the one doing something wrong? Some humility and empathy could help you out.

> The moment you go on HN, skim the front page and open a queue of HN submissions to read

I don't do that. Open one, article, read, close and than open another. And there is no right or wrong way to web browsing.

There are two types of people, those who use a bookmark bar and those who use tabs.

Myself, I don't get mass tab usage. Use tab, close tab. Reopen if I really need that page again.

I ensure that all usage for that tab is exhausted before. On very rare occasions have I needed to reopen that tab. If really need it, I'll bookmark it in the bookmark bar.

Password managers, PAM, IMC and all other miscellaneous utilities are all things in my realm yet looking at my work screen now I only a total of three tabs open. Anything that would be useful to have open normally times out anyway.

And my actual inbox is organised to where no email sits in the inbox. A new email gets copied to a folder via filter, marked as read. I then delete the email from the inbox once read knowing it exists elsewhere.

Makes Mondays very easy to get in to work.

Here's the thing, champ: you downvoted my comment because you didn't read beyond the first line, which is evident from the fact that you completely ignored the approach that I was advocating.

1. Install OneTab

2. Open all of the links on HN you want in separate tabs

3. Hit the OneTab extension icon

You now have all of those tabs waiting for you, across all devices, sorted not just by date but by session. You can move tabs between those sessions if you have a way you like to organize things.

If you go back and read your reply, it quickly becomes clear that you didn't even try to understand what I was showing you.

Also: pinned tabs != ephemeral tabs. This is very much a false equivalency. If you have mandatory tabs, that's very different from pinning a tab to come back to it later.

Seriously, just install OneTab and enjoy your life a bit more.

I think it partially indicates how neglected bookmarks are as a feature