The next day NBCās president decided to make an exception to the networkās ban on recorded sound in order to interview Morrison and play a portion of the recordings. (Yes, both NBC and CBS banned recorded sound over their air, and would continue to do so for another decade. [ā¦] ).
Itās telling that the lesson Americaās big radio networks took from this incredible eye-witness recording was simply, āNope, no more of that!ā As sound scholar Michael Biel pointed out, āThis isā¦the first time that a recording was allowed to be broadcast on NBC, and I can count on my fingers the other times that NBC broadcast recordings ā knowingly and unknowingly ā until the middle of WWII.ā
As we gathered data, surveyed people and set up experiments, it became clear that those tiny shortcuts ā sometimes hailed as a hallmark of efficient communication ā undermine relationships instead of simplifying them.
After I thought about this a bit, this seems to be a clear benefit: We’re really good at trying to imagine (and predict) what other people are really thinking. We pick up subtle clues from body language and more, and we do it subconsciously. So why wouldn’t we also pick up subtle clues in a medium like text?
Only with Substack does anyone perceive creator branding as being subservient to the platform ā something that ought to be seen merely as an interchangeable CMS ā like that.
I’ve tried a few different things on Substack. (None of them ever took off, and each of them I subsequently moved to web sites I directly control.) I’ve always felt something was off, and lately I’ve been souring more on the whole platform. This piece by Gruber puts a clear, fine point on what I dislike about Substack.
This is what makes the LLMs feel different. So far, computers have always been perfectāexcept when they’re wrong/broken. That’s fundamentally not how people are. LLMs came along and they’re imperfect. Always. Just like people.
First ā You can’t simply reply. I get it. It’s hard to have a mailbox on the Internet these days. So many bounces, to deal with (I’m serious.)
Second ā So when you go to drag-select, copy and paste that “s.sampath@verizon.com” email address, you discover it’s not what it seems.
Pasting into your email client’s “To” field, you actually create a list of multiple recipients: The first recipient is “s”, then the second is “sampath”, etcānone of which are the email address you meant to copy and paste. So you have to type it into your email client. Not a big deal, but probably enough to stop most people. If they really cared, they’d just give us an
Okay, but why can’t we copy and paste? Because in the HTML source in their email, it’s actually:
If you can read HTML, you see there are HTML entities jammed in various places in that email address. I had to lookup the entity ‌ ā that’s a Zero Width Non-Joining space. Meaning it’s not visible (“zero-width”) and it’s job is to keep whatever is left and right from “joining”ā¦ in the sense that complex characters can join to make a glyphā For example: An ‘a’ and ‘e’ can join to make the single character ‘Ʀ’ if your language supports that. (But, of course, English does not have any joining characters at all.) I’m confident this is just an artifact of their bulk-email-sending composer software; it’s common for such things to “defend” an email address in the middle of text from harvesting looking for emails. So this wasn’t maliciousness on Verizon’s part.
Third ā ā¦but it’s ironic that, in a message that contains, “Itās not just better service ā we are setting a new standard, beginning today,” I have to flip between windows as I retype that email address.
Fourth ā Because I’m a level-39 nerd wizard, I do reply to these things. (I mean, I start a new email message addressed to that email address.) And because we (said wizards) are quick to anger and regular Internet users (ie, Sampath) are tasty with ketchup, I send things like thisā¦
A friend and I recently did a 48-hour fast. (One of the low-lights was going to dinner with people on our way to a concert… everyone’s having burgers and salmon, and I’m drinking black coffee. Anyway.) Our design was to finish the fast by doing one of my usual quadrupedal movement (QM) workouts at my favorite tennis courts, and then a run (as best as possible) around 1.75 mile trail loop. Then break our fasts by eating.
By the end of the QM, I was utterly exhausted. For a cool down I worked on a sweat-angel for about 5 minutes. Left a legit puddle where my head was. And then we did the trail run. Several people joined us for the QM and run, and much fun was had by all.
There’s no real takeaway here. Just a photo and a note to myself: Sometimes I push things. Sometimes I push things too far. Where’s the edge?
What nature requires is close by and easy to obtain. All that sweat is for superfluities. We wear out our fine clothes, grow old in army tents, hurl ourselves against foreign shores, and for what? Everything we need is already at hand. Anyone who is on good terms with poverty is rich.
What does that mean? It means you can write a post that is directed within the network. If you want to get on the radar of a blogger – write about their ideas and reference them. The lowly hyperlink is a connective tissue that creates a network graph between the nodes.
Critchlow wrote that in 2018. 7 years down the road, all the technology (for the web and blogs) works great, it’s easier than ever to blog, and in 14 years / 5,000 posts I’ve never had anyone (an author of something I’ve linked to) reach out to me. I’m not complainingāI don’t blog as a way to fish for connections like that. (I blog as a way of working with the garage door up.)
slip:4utone1.
Also, how is this the first time I’ve used the tag “Blogging”?
What matters is whether a certain approach gets you to where you want to go. And let’s be clear, using obstacles against themselves is very different from doing nothing. Passive resistance is, in fact, incredibly active. But those actions come in the form of discipline, self-control, fearlessness, determination, and grand strategy.
How did these trillions of potent proteins, originating in thousands of human bodies, find their way to my sonās blood circulation? What historical, social, and economic conditions enabled this extraordinary exchange of substances?
With the passing years, Iāve come to recognize that this was Ballardās true callingānot as a writer of imaginative works, but as a genuine futurist. This is even evident in his novels.
You could see artiĀfiĀcial intelĀliĀgence as a kind of fronĀtier, then, which moves forĀward as comĀputĀerĀized machines take over the tasks humans preĀviĀousĀly had to do themĀselves.
I am rowing toward the past. I am trying to squeeze out of each stroke a better image of myself, and I am trying to enlist the ghosts of history to help power the oars. I want them as friends, as comrades, as partners, as ancestors.
Those last few reps are the money makers ā the best return for your effort youāre going to get, but many people donāt even know theyāre possible. My usual stopping point felt like just about the end of the road, but it was actually the beginning of a hidden, hyper-rewarding territory where exceptional results happen.
No one has ever reached a point where the power fortune granted was greater than the risk. The sea is calm now, but do not trust it: The storm comes in an instant. Pleasure boats that were out all morning are sunk before the day is over.
It turned out in retrospect that the messy diversity of the forest had been the source of its resilience. When stresses such as storms, disease, drought, fragile soil, or severe cold struck, a diverse forest with its full array of different species of trees, birds, insects, and animals was far better able to survive and recover. A windstorm that toppled large, old trees would typically spare smaller ones. An insect attack that threatened oaks might leave lindens and hornbeams unaffected. The rigidity and uniformity of the system meant that failures were not small and contained but systemic.
I’m simply stuck, staring at: “The rigidity [ā¦] of the system meant that failures were [ā¦] systemic.” I’m filing this under Stuff I Wished I’d Learned 30 Years Ago. I often say that I use systems and structure as a way to multiply my efforts. And that’s true. But I’ve learned that the real reason is that I’m afraid. The big why behind my hyper-organization, maximally-complex systems, and endless aligning of figurative ducks is my desperately trying to control the world around me. With realization comesā¦ the recognition that I have a lot more work to learn to not do.
Pragmatism is not so much realism as flexibility. There are a lot of ways to get from point A to point B. It doesn’t have to be a straight line. It’s just got to get you where you need to go. But so many of us spend so much time looking for the perfect solution that we pass up what’s right in front of us.
I recently returned from a whole bunch of movement. I was at the annual American RendezvousĀ event in Somerville MA, followed by taking theĀ Level 2 ADAPT Coach CertificationĀ course. Immediately followed by some just-for-fun hard work atĀ Vandrar Hem.
This morning I sat down on the concrete for meditation and it was sublime. 10, 15, or maybe even 20 minutes of simply sitting and breathing. Weeks of continuously have a “next thing” on the schedule every minute of every day is its own type of exhausting. This morning I was recharging via stillness. But completely still (like being totally active) is not the correct state.
What I had failed to cultivate in my recent travels was equanimity.
Too often, equanimity is described as a practice or technique that aims at the production of something ā usually a state of stillness. Other proposed aims include a ācounterculturalā refashioning of the self: eg, āto disarm the way we define ourselves in terms of achievements, fame, praise, and what weāre told should make us happyā, as the meditation teacher Christina Feldman and the psychologist Willem Kuyken put it in Mindfulness (2019); or being compassionate and caring instead of discriminatory and judgmental.
