The worst part of change is figuring out what you need to let go of in order to achieve it. Cate Hall (whose writing I admire) has a timely essay on the topic.
Modern life is mess of conflicting and changing realities to which we are more or less poorly adapting ourselves. Learning is hard.
As you might expect from hominids adapted to long extinct physical and chemical environments, the new parameters determining our current physical realities are a challenge for us to update on our own.
Backpropogating a human neural network does not yet have a set of best practices but when it does emerge I’m surely it will be a blogger tying together the layers of training, physical requirements and other weights and cultural measures that improve our learning environment.
Not with me? Google’s attempts to serve AI generated synopses is here to help and their updates might be working as this isn’t bad
Backpropagation is a training algorithm for neural networks, specifically designed to optimize the weights within the network by minimizing the difference between predicted and actual outputs. Backpropagation aims to reduce the error between the network’s output and the desired output
In plain English, you learn by making mistakes and correcting them. You do something again with an adjusted technique and when succeed you update your understanding. You reduce your errors by looking back at what you did and changing your future behavior hoping it will succeed. When it does you adjust. You have learned.
Success might change depending on what you are doing and how your environment changes. Some constants remain. How can we look back on the data in our own lives and in our species and use it to improve our lives going forward?
I don’t know exactly how to approach the current moment but I know I’m adjusting to millions of pieces of input daily and I am still frustrated that I don’t always get the outputs I want. The logical next move is to change.
But change what? And how? What will I be leaving behind in that process? How acceptable is it to let go of what we were so sure we knew? Can we convince others of it? Can we adjust the parameters globally so others adjust too? How do we turn the knobs and dials on the systems that we use to learn at network scale?
Being disagreeable has a lot going for it. It’s frowned on when women do it even though it is usually coded as a feminine trait. Traditionalists say they want agreeable wives and iconoclast lords.
Despite this call to the past, it’s not hard to argue that this amenable feminine and chaotic masculine is itself a bit subversive. Fractious independent goddesses and agreeable brotherhoods are archetypes too.
I am fearful in this moment that we have less patience for disagreements among humanity just as our capacity for loyalty and reciprocity dims with atomization.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease has a bit of a “both sides of the bus” meme quality to it. Attention can build you up and tear you apart.
The eye of American’s elite class has many competing stories about which ideas must be celebrated, which are taboo and which are too dangerous to be discussed. And that’s just the last couple of days of essays at the New Yorker.
I read some Charles Dickens today. No this isn’t a Great Expectations joke. Rather, I read the first seven paragraphs of his 900 page novel Bleak House.
[They were asked to] read the first seven paragraphs of Charles Dickens’ Bleak House out loud to a facilitator and then translate each sentence into plain English
If you are a knowledge professional you better hope you are a four but social media comments suggest most of us are not.
This methodology doesn’t even try articulate level 5. And as someone who occasionally sees what a real 1% outlier looks like I don’t disagree. Our best are in a league of their own.
So obviously as American funded “college for all” it was clear not all college attendees would on the right side of average. And as it turns out, the English majors at highly subsidized state universities (mostly white girls incidentally) had a lot of trouble understanding Dickens’s British family court tragedy.
I also don’t want to read that many pages of fog metaphors, and I have an entire tag dedicated to forced metaphors.
I took the test (speaking my answer into my phone) and it was harder than you think to simplify but I had the vocabulary.
Like those other white girls I am unlikely to be in the 1% of literacy when it comes 19th century British literature. Surely in my own skill stack (and it’s overlapping areas of expertise) I can approach 2SD on things. I suspect this blog and my general internet presence suggests I can do Level 4 reading. We think around what we can.
That seems adequate given I contribute what I like and communicate what is enjoyable on my own spaces. Here I am plodding along contributing sixteen hundred days of writing to the public discourse which is its own proof of literacy. It’s several novels worth of training data for our artificial intelligences.
I think about how much I do or don’t want to contribute to the maw of publicly indexed Internet because I believe we get better if we all contribute to this public good.
Our future is a shared coordination problem requiring we can comprehend and contribute to our commons. Maybe I understand enough Dickens to get by. He maybe has a dimmer view of legalistic thinking than I do. But I’m sure he’d see plenty of wretches in our times too.
I have been contemplating “an ideal routine” as soon as I felt the pressure of showing up for first grade. How to manage the energy the outside world requires from you while making sure you have done everything possible to manage your body to produce adequate energy.
Morning routines, what’s in her bag, every day carry, and optimal packing strategies all derive from a need to see how others are coping with the demands of life. You can aspire to various ideals of fitness, nutrition, style and parenting if you could just get the right routine with the right tools. Right?
I’m aspiring to restart learning new toolsets for building …everything. From design to marketing software to muscles to my hormonal profile. Building the life you want is deceptively close if you can manage yourself.
Life feels malleable at the moment. And who is going to stop me? Maybe I accidentally fix a problem for myself and find I’ve got a tool or insight that might benefit you. The chaos of old ways fall apart means new routines and folkways must be built.
I don’t want to betray myself by overreaching and pushing as I am so often finding hard limits the hard way. I like to go hard and rest. But reality has become so much less reliable that I wonder if I must compensate even more for the chaos with steadying flows of my own.
I am a pretty informal person. I don’t hold any institutional authority. The interests I represent are my own. I speak for myself.
Obviously I care a great deal about my family and my friends and want to reflect well on them but I can only speak for myself. This is a given in an age where big institutions often find themselves frustrating the interests of normal people. And people take a stand.
So when I find myself haggling with medical insurance or trying to wrap my head around a set of requests from someone claiming to be a representative of a large power, I think back to a viral tweet by Patrick McKenzie (@patio11), about the efficacy of the dangerous professional voice.
The “Dangerous Professional Voice” is less about aggression and more about clarity, formality, and signaling that you understand the system and expect to be taken serious.
What are my options?’”
McKenzie suggests this phrase, calmly and professionally delivered, often prompts the other party to reveal escalation paths or alternatives that might not otherwise be offered.
The voice suggests it solving it is a given. Getting down to business and showing you mean business. Even if you are an informal person sometimes you may want to use this dangerous professional voice as you go about your day. Share if it works. Patrick says he enjoys hearing about use in the wild.
I’m not sure exactly how to characterize Doomer Optimism other than a kind of social club for Internet denizens that wish to retain their optimism in the face of chaos and change. It’s a very human group and I’ve enjoyed their company for years.
I’m one of the odder congregants in this group which includes a diverse array of characters from all classes and walks of life. I say I’m the odd man out only because I’ve seen them as a generally regenerative self sufficient localist group that in another era would have been back to the land hippies, unionists, environmentalists and anarchists. Generally left wing coded but skeptical of state and corporate power.
That I’m one of a handful of practicing technologists that participates, and a libertarian, means I argue for the liberatory power of open source software and its range of applications for individuals to enable a life that can provide means and meaning without being in the jaws of the Machine.
Decentralizing technologies lets us all participate. More individuals are interested in thinking how they engage with industrial processes. 3D printing enables many types of freedom and is crucial to the right to repair movement. Which gives power back to the owner of property and not the corporation from which it was purchased. I unabashedly support the freedom to compute as a human who wishes to find a harmony with the machine in all its forms. Be not controlled by your tools or their makers. Make your own future.
If none of this strikes you as particularly right wing, reactionary or otherwise populist, or even statist; I’d agree with you. I am a libertarian.
And yet there are those who are still enthralled by old narratives of political poles that this individual, and choice centered, politics is one grounded in real people with real problems not financial or social abstractions.
Paul is a neighbor, a friend, and a gentleman in the most noble possible sense. He does not traffic in status or social cachet. He is a free thinking and curious American man who is dedicated to hearing a large swathe of perspectives. He wrote a response and included the email screenshot below. I am certain Paul really does mean his hospitality genuinely.
Dear @awinston
Thank you for your email (below). Of course its intent was not in good faith nor was it evidence of genuine curiosity, but it did cause me to reflect on the scope of @thewagonbox project and the growing constellation of characters around it. And I had to think about you, and Mr. Wilson, and how one should respond to the sort of witch hunts for political wrong-think that have become your cottage industry (one that I’m afraid is dying.)
To your first point: an interesting aspect of the Wagon Box, and particularly our Doomer Optimism events, is the breadth of the politics represented. Seneca Scott is a ‘90s democrat who wants a safe community for his family and goats. James Pogue, like me (and Jesus), has anarchist sensibilities, cares about the habitat for the trout he fishes and is leery of the global hegemonic machine. Ashley Fitzgerald is a suburban mom who likes regenerative agriculture and healthy neighborhoods. The event has largely focused on a suspicion of “The Machine” and ways to live humanely and harmoniously with the natural world. The idea that it is some hotbed of “hard/far right” ideology, or that we are promoting “corporate governance” is laughable.
To the question of the “ties” I have to Ryan Payne, or Jonathan Keeperman, or D. C. Miller, or any other person you may see as a “smoking gun” evidence of nefarious ideology, I have a few comments. First of all, you have left out other characters who have graced the Wagon Box, some of whom you might even consider even worse! And of course there are others hard to place politically, like Walter Kirn, Patrick Deneen, Paul Kingsnorth, or Max Foley. All these characters differ quite widely, have deep disagreements, but all have something in common: I find them interesting and care about what they have to say, and they see enough in me to take me up on my invitation.
You ever get to talking to someone and you see their eyes glaze over? They do not care what you have to say, they are not listening. It’s no fun. It is death. What’s the point? Good faith curiosity is the lifeblood of any relationship, of any conversation, of journalism, and of self governance. There are swaths of folks who have had good faith curiosity driven from them, and it has been done largely by people like you, who paint in caricatures and come to stories with an agenda, who live on fear and suspicion. You send a guy like me some sort of hostage note instead of an invitation to a real conversation. It’s sad.
At the root of the Wagon Box project is my personal curiosity in people, and at the root of that is a conviction that we will all be together eventually at a large table in a conversation that will never end. Our enemy is no person, but the stale impulse of death that preys on love, on connection, on community. It thrives in the Machine of mass delusion of which, regrettably, The Guardian is a mouthpiece. It has forced you to have a narrower view of people, a static view, and one that lacks curiosity. But I really do care about you, as you too are on a journey and I’d love to hear about it. Let’s grab coffee and talk sometime. No deadline.
I brought up the context of there being technologists as part of this conversation as another reporter who shares a similarly slanted lens who seems to have quite a problem with Silicon Valley while not really understanding the core values that technologists share that are not compatible with a controlled statist or even corporatist view of power.
We are going through a huge cultural change that will sweep many of us up its cascading consequences. We will have materially different conditions as artificial intelligence changes day to day life.
Do you want to trust those who insist on control to prevent horrors? Or do you want to trust yourself and your fellow man to engage with one another as human? I’ve chosen optimism. I believe we can build freely.
We don’t live as rural as some people might think. While we very much live out in the county and not the town, we do have a small land grant university town within a reasonable distance.
When you are more rural you come to appreciate how that kind of town provides many types of amenities that a comparatively larger but less diversified city might not.
Academics, outdoorsman, small farmers, military veterans and engineering firms draw from the town’s signature appeal of new young people. That we have incredible natural beauty is hard to beat.
I believe in the comparative advantage of a diverse community with diverse offerings and different types of employment and housing are the bedrock of that. I am very publicly for building denser housing but also more choices for housing, as I saw what zoning regulations did to push my generation out of Boulder and out of Colorado.
If we can’t manage to provide housing for newcomers we can’t keep those who find themselves offering services. Until recently we’d been hiring a young woman to handle our house keeping every few weeks but as she is quite capable her business has grown and she’s hired more people.
Thriving places require all kinds of people to provide an economic base. As Montana prepares for a quickly arriving digital future, our innovation depends on the hard work and just rewards of all us.
And I certainly hope I can do my part to contribute to that. Because I am a terrible housekeeper but I have other useful skills to exchange. Comparative advantage is a beautiful thing.
My husband’s most Boomer coded preference is how much he likes phone calls. I think it’s crazy but he will just pick up the phone and call people. Someone will text, email or message him and if he has the time & expertise he will write back “just call me now” as if it were nothing.
Now I grant that being available to get on the phone has plenty of social dynamics at play. If you have power and the luxury of time, availability, and energy “just call me” is quite a flex. I almost never have the energy though I can make time when it’s critical.
I had a funny moment today where the delivery driver for the flowers I sent to my mother for Mother’s Day just could not figure out that I was not the recipient. He declined a voice call with me though seemed to struggle with texting.
I’d laid out what I thought were clear instructions. I was sending flowers to a location that was not my location (I have an account with this very popular delivery service) as this was a gift intended for someone.
I left instructions to ring the doorbell and if no one answers leave the flowers on the porch. If they must call I left my phone number and her phone number saying to call her as she was the receipt.
Now the delivery service had a pin with GPS for the location. I figured literally millions of people order flowers for their mother today so I didn’t think it would be complicated or even unexpected that flowers were meant for someone’s mother.
Now for a quick aside. I did not tell my mother I was doing this. Our family has a fairly strict “don’t gift unless you feel moved” preference so it’s not implied we gift on every holiday. I was raised with the ideal that gifts are most meaningful when someone finds an item we think the other will like and is moved in the moment to get it. Rather than wait for a holiday, we send it then.
I felt moved by some seeing flowers yesterday in my grocery shopping. Spring is coming in and I wanted to send some to her. Now I didn’t want to ruin the surprise for my mother by saying wait at this hour for a delivery. Delight is important.
So back to “getting on the phone” as a forced metaphor. It’s Mother’s Day and I’m literally sending roses so I figured again it was obvious the items were going to my mother. That the flowers were not for me was implied but who knows. I wrote it out in the delivery instructions anyway.
This poor delivery man kept texting me asking where I was and where he should go. I text back the address and note that he should knock on the door to deliver it there.
He keeps asking me to come out. I get an automated call from the service threatening to cancel the order if I don’t respond to the driver who is trying to contact me. Sure. I’m trying to contact him but go off big corporation.
I call my mother. She is in the middle of cooking lunch. I happened to also be eating my own lunch when this kicked off but whatever. I cut her off feeling rude with “pleasantries in a moment, go outside right now there is a delivery man for you.”
She rushed out and successfully retrieves the roses! I hear some background talk as I’m still on the line but I can’t quite make it out. I hear a male voice. My mom gets back on the line. She says I’ve got stuff boiling over on the stove but I am so sorry I didn’t hear a knock.
I try to explain I I know the delivery man was confused so I just decided to pick up the phone. This isn’t your fault.. I didn’t mean to interrupt as it was meant to be a surprise. No need to chat please get back to stove. Admittedly a funny thing to say to one’s mother on Mother’s Day. And that was that. A quick phone call fixed the problem.
So maybe my husband has a point about just getting on the phone. I don’t know if I would have been able to help the flower delivery guy with a call but I could get to my mother even if it was disruptive. So if the spirit moves you maybe call someone. And yes she liked the roses.
When I list it out I almost forget how much during this time I was battling side effects from a mold infestation and working through changing my medication for my autoimmune condition. I got my right eyelid slit open twice!
When Alex made it home to Montana after midnight I felt like I could finally sleep. I never sleep well alone and much as I tried to sleep as he was flying back I could not. I’m exhausted today and needed a nap to stave off a migraine.
As we get older I am sure we will continue to be called upon to show up. So much of my energy is drawn into improving my health so I can participate in civic and economic life.
I want to improve my health so I can continue to discuss, learn, advocate and invest for this very confusing transition to our future.
I can scoff at catchy neologisms like “wellderly” as marketing campaigns for famous doctors in an especially challenging era for medical trust. But I am also concerned about sleeping better, gaining muscle mass, and improving my meager health. A man has many concerns but a sick man has only one remains true.
I wasn’t allowed to watch much media as a kid but some exceptions were made. Frank Capra’s oeuvre was one of those exceptions. Mr Smith Goes to Washington was a classic of civic duty. And now as a Montana citizen it has special meaning to me.
Screen grabs from the C-Span livestream on YouTube
When he was first invited to testify we weren’t quite sure if it would happen. Behind the scenes there is a lot of wrangling, preparation and negotiations from congressional staffers on both sides of the aisle.
Even then you can still be surprised at the last minute! What was meant to be a bipartisan subcommittee discussing digital assets became most Republicans and maybe officially a roundtable I think? Robert’s Rules nerds will know.
The minority chairwoman walked out with no warning though the rumors circulated late last night that she would protest President Trump’s crypto businesses by walking out. Which is a dick move when many regular developers and businesses are looking for clear regulatory guidance from our legislative bodies.
The poor decorum on the part of Congressional representative Maxine Waters (D-CA) sent the session for a loop as she left at the outset. It would have been more dramatic had it not also come across as a confused elderly woman being pushed around her staffers.
Nice suit though on Ms Waters
The session quickly moved on to its actual business at hand because as mentioned the future of digital financial innovation is bigger than any one man’s business dealings even if he’s the President.
The future is made by those who show up and departure of some of the Democrats from the hearing did not stop the future from arriving nor the expert panel from testifying. Including the witnesses the minority party called. Yeahhhhh they didn’t get to walk out like Ms Waters.
It’s easy to make fun of our representatives for grandstanding, politicking, and general chicanery but it’s a serious deliberative body that makes the rules of the road for all Americans.
I got the sense that in this unprecedented moment for the American economy that everyone who stayed took that role very seriously. To which I say thank goodness!
We have no clear rules of the road in digital assets and cryptocurrency and the Securities and Exchange Commission has not helped.
With no regulations passed and the constant threat of investigations and court cases from the Securities and Exchange commission it’s been nigh impossible for American companies to plan and many digital asset firms have moved abroad.
It’s hurting American businesses as new digital companies move overseas. The Chairman asked “does the lack of clarity hurt consumers, builders and companies?” Every single witness said absolutely.
We need clear rules of the road and regulatory clarity. And we need to be sure as citizens we don’t let our rights be trampled upon in the process. Americans deserve the future of digital innovation being built here and built with our freedom in mind.
There’s a reason that the amendments that protect our core rights use words like “shall not abridge”, “infringe”, or “be violated” in their language as there’s a whole lot that government can do to restrict or functionally take away our rights without “prohibiting” them.
As I myself have worked to successfully passed right to compute work here in Montana I was beaming with pride as Alex fought for that future in Washington today Mr Miller is our gentleman from Montanan. He’s got a little less hair than Jimmy Stewart but he’s fighting for us all.
