đ a linked post to
youtu.be »
—
originally shared here on
Pretty sure Iâve shared my love for Tony Hawk on this blog before, but it doesnât hurt to remind myself every once in a while what a stand up human this guy is.
He surfaced today in the form of a YouTube video as part of Amoeba Recordâs âWhatâs In My Bag?â series, where famous people gather their favorite forms of media from around the store and then talk about why itâs meaningful to them.
From this video alone, I wrote down a bunch of albums that Iâm gonna try bumping while on vacation next week, including:
đ a linked post to
schneems.com »
—
originally shared here on
âThat cannot be done.â Is rarely true, but itâs a phrase Iâve heard more and more from technical people without offering any rationale or further explanation. This tendency to use absolute language when making blocking statements reminded me of a useful âMcDonaldâs ruleâ that I was introduced to many years ago when deciding where to eat with friends. It goes something like this:
If I say to a friend, âIâm hungry, letâs go to McDonaldâsâ (or wherever), theyâre not allowed to block me without making a counter-suggestion. They canât just say âNo,â they have to say something like âHow about Arbyâsâ instead. This simple rule changes the dynamic of the suggester/blocker to one of the proposer/counter-proposer. If someone is simply refusing to be involved, they McBlocked me.
In practice, though, itâs hard to always have a suggestion youâre willing to run with, so a relaxed version of the rule is that the other person has to AT LEAST specify why not. Instead of ânoâ it must be âno, becauseâ. For example, it could be âI had a burger for lunchâ or âIâm banned for life after jumping on a table and demanding Szechuan dipping sauce.â This helps show that youâre not just blocking things, you understand the goal and want to move the conversation forward. It gives the other person something to work with.
I was literally thinking about this âruleâ the other day and had no idea what to call it.
Ironically, Iâm not sure how much I like âMcBlockâ as the word, but I canât think of any alternatives. đ
đ a linked post to
aramzs.xyz »
—
originally shared here on
The thing is, each cycle, it happens again. New artists, new art, new weapons, new masters, new ways to crush joy into little boxes that can serve the status quo.
This time around, let us use the joy of creation to bury them. This time around, let's break the cycle the only possible way: by working for everyone, by bringing everyone along. By avoiding the fist, ignoring the invisible hand, and instead linking arms with each other to rise above.
đ a linked post to
staticmade.com »
—
originally shared here on
When someone asks if you âneedâ something, thereâs an implicit weight to that word. Need suggests dependency, maybe even weakness. Itâs the difference between someone offering you food and asking if youâre hungry. One feels generous; the other feels like you have to admit to a deficit.
So I changed the question: âWhatâs the most important thing I can help you with this week?â
Noting this for the future.
This doesnât just apply to the workplace, either. Iâm in an era where my friends are having their second (or third+) child, and adding more burden on them by making them decide how I can help them with their burdens feels counterproductive.
Another case: my wifeâs been busy with graduation at her school. Instead of asking her how I can help her deal with organizing the caps, gowns, diplomas, and tassels for 600+ students, I should have asked her whatâs the most important thing I can help with.1
Even if the answer is unrelated to that task, itâs nice to know I can help her overall burden by doing things like âhandle the kidsâ after school transportâ or âprovide a shoulder rubâ or âfinish the laundry.â ↩
Stuff that needs to be thrown out of my garage before the kids are done with school for the summer
originally shared here on
Bag of opened asphault patch
Homebrewing equipment
Gusâs mattress
Old busted wicker patio chairs
Old beat up patio table
Two boxes full of paint cans and other chemicals
Car battery for the Fusion
Tub of ⊠tar, I think it is?
Carolâs old Christmas tree
Gusâs old bike
My old bike (that could be a good idea for the first post for that series you wanna do where you throw away stuff that is super meaningful but you wanna properly honor each item with a eulogy)
Gusâs balance bike thing that heâs never used
Stuff I'm still not sure how I'm gonna get rid of it
Play-Doh ice cream truck
American Girl ice cream truck
Four growlers from Utepils (probably need to make a trip up there?)
Snowblower (currently listed on Craigslist)
Sharing & Caring Hands
The foldable strollers, carrying backpack, and car seats that no longer fit your kids
đ a linked post to
dansinker.com »
—
originally shared here on
In the Who Cares Era, the most radical thing you can do is care.
In a moment where machines churn out mediocrity, make something yourself. Make it imperfect. Make it rough. Just make it.
As the culture of the Who Cares Era grinds towards the lowest common denominator, support those that are making real things. Listen to something with your full attention. Watch something with your phone in the other room. Read an actual paper magazine or a book.
The real threat to creativity isnât a language model. Itâs a workplace that rewards speed over depth, scale over care, automation over meaning. If weâre going to talk about what robs people of agency, letâs start there. Letâs talk about the economic structures that pressure people into using tools badly, or in ways that betray their values. Letâs talk about the lack of time, support, mentorship, and trust. Not the fact that someone ran a prompt through a chatbot to get unstuck. Where is the empathy? Where is your support for people who are being tossed into the pit of AI and instructed to find a way to make it work?
So sure, critique the tools. Call out the harm. But donât confuse rejection with virtue. And donât assume that the rest of us are blind just because weâre using the tools youâve decided are beneath you.
Today, quite suddenly, billions of people have access to AI systems that provide augmentations, and inflict amputations, far more substantial than anything McLuhan could have imagined. This is the main thing I worry about currently as far as AI is concerned. I follow conversations among professional educators who all report the same phenomenon, which is that their students use ChatGPT for everything, and in consequence learn nothing. We may end up with at least one generation of people who are like the Eloi in H.G. Wellsâs The Time Machine, in that they are mental weaklings utterly dependent on technologies that they donât understand and that they could never rebuild from scratch were they to break down.
Before I give a counterpoint, I do want to note the irony that even now people do not understand how this stuff works. Itâs math, all the way down. It shouldnât work, frankly⊠but it does!
I think that is so beautiful. We donât really understand much about our universe, like dark matter, gravity, all number of naturally-occurring phenomena.
But just because we donât understand it doesnât mean we canât harness it to do amazing things.
As far as the students using ChatGPT⊠I mean, yeah, itâs painfully obvious to most teachers I chat with when their kids use the tech to get by.
I would posit, though, that this is the history of education in general. We teach students truths about the world, and they go out and show us how those truths are not entirely accurate anymore.
Sure, some kids will certainly use ChatGPT to compose an entire essay, which circumvents the entire point of writing an essay in the first place: practicing critical thinking skills. Thatâs bad, and an obvious poor use of the tool.
But think of the kids who are using AI to punch up their thoughts, challenge their assumptions with unconsidered angles, and communicate their ideas with improved clarity. Theyâre using the tool as intended.
That makes me so excited about the future. Thatâs what I hope teachers lean into with artificial intelligence.
đ a linked post to
winnielim.org »
—
originally shared here on
Because this is how we are conditioned to see value: we are only valuable if we do x,y and z â this is also how we value other people and our selves. It perpetuates an insidious suffering because very few people are truly loved or seen. We are not loved for who we are but the roles we play and the actions we make. Obedience is seen as a great virtue. Wanting to live in a way that we want is seen as selfish. When other people get to live in an unconventional way they want we ostracise them for it. If I didnât get to do this, you canât do it too. If I suffered, you should suffer too. Sometimes weird shit happens even if we do societally-valued things. For example, if we start caring about our health by eating better or exercising more, suddenly we start getting comments about how we are too health-conscious and should loosen up more.
If we spend a few moments thinking about this, it is shocking how little space we have to be our selves. Who exactly are our selves anyway? We may not know because we did not have the time, space or permission to unfold. We spend so much time and energy chasing the goals we think we want, without contemplating why we wanted them in the first place.
Another one I got a sore neck from reading because I found myself nodding vehemently the entire time.