Writing – Life on the Wicked Stage: Act 3

Sunday Morning Reading

Revelate

Still on the road for summer travels, but this week offered a few moments to do some reading when not toodling along listening to the music of Glen Hansard. So time to share a few good pieces of writing and good reads in this week’s Sunday Morning Reading.

Kick things off with a piece by Robert P. George called The Two Great Threats To Truth. He questions whether there really is a difference between moral relativism and fantacism, if in the end they yield the same result. The piece will make you think. If thinking is your thing.

Claire Stapelton rose through the ranks at Google. From reading The Voice Of Google, it sounds like she saw it all, and she’s telling quite a bit of it.

“Government Efficiency and Death by Indifference” is the subhead to Anton Shekhovtsov’s The Techno-Oligarchy’s First “Holocaust.” It’s quite a dire piece, but certainly worth your time.

Speaking of oligarchs, a trio of NY Times writers take a look at Larry Ellison and his bet on AI. Check out Jonathan Mahler, Jim Rutenberg and Kirsten Grind’s story, Larry Ellision Bet It All on the A.I. Boom. Will He Be The Face of the A.I. Bubble? At some point this bubble has to pop, right?

David Todd McCarthy says There Is A Crack In Everything. Truth and beauty lie in the imperfections, not in the perfect.

The world is certainly an imperfect place. Rachel Yoder’s short story, The Promise perfectly reveals that.

Alex Skopic flushes out some thoughts on the failed state in Diarrhea In Every Pot and A Gun In Every Mailbox. When you break things down to “shooting and shitting” you might be on to something.

There’s nothing obligatory about Jeff Johnson’s piece The Obligatory AI Post. Make it obligatory reading.

To close out this week, a sad one when we lost one of the good ones in Glen Hansard, give a read to Sophia Stewart’s tribute, The People’s Troubador. If you don’t know the music, you should.

Revelate.

(Image from Samuel Couto on Unsplash)

Thanks for reading. Feel free to subscribe if you want. It’s free. If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here. If you’d like more click on the Sunday Morning Reading link in the category column to check out what’s been shared on Sunday’s past. You can also find more of my writings on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. This site does not use affilate links.

More Thoughts on Resilience as Our Strength and Our Weakness

The damnation of short and painful memories.

Warning. This is going to be a very long, very personal and very cynical take. A lot of this has been bubbling in my gut for far too long, and I’m tired of the taste in my mouth when it regurgitates. So I write.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a piece titled Resilience Is Our Strength But Also Our Weakness. The slug line for the piece was “Time to break a few things.” I stand by the title, the slug line, and the content.

That said, I’m going to write further based on a conversation generated from the piece on Mastodon with fellow Mastodonians David Todd McCarty and Denny Henke. Henke, while admiring the piece, took me to task for not offering specifics about what to tear down. He was correct. I didn’t. I’ll offer what few I think there are throughout and towards the end of this essay.

Nasty hint. I don’t think there are many. That’s one reason it’s taken me so long to think and write this essay. There are questions. Nothing I’m going to say here should come as a surprise. Anyone reading this has probably already had many of the same thoughts. If you haven’t I don’t know why you’re here.

Before I get into that, let me toss out a few links for context for anyone interested. First, take a look at McCarty’s piece linked to in my previous piece called A Quiet Truth, and also his attempt to answer Henke’s response in this piece Democratic Socialism: Keeping The Great American Experiment Alive.

I’ll also reprint Henke’s intial thoughts in his response to me below:

Great post Warner and I generally agree but you don’t offer much detail. You’re focused on the Reconstruction and the historical rooting of our current moment in the Confederacy, which I would interpret as the unresolved issues of 150ish years ago.

But shouldn’t we go back 250 years? That would seem to get us closer to the foundational problems.

Also, coming back to today and the notion of breaking things. What is it you want to break? What do you see as being the goal? And how do you see us getting there?

I’d ask the same of DTM. You both SEEM to be calling for a sort of soft revolution without really saying it. And though you both seem to be rejecting the previous normal, you’re seemingly okay with many aspects of what we had.

What level of inequality are you willing to accept or is it none? What level of general social-ecological-economic violence are you willing to accept or is it none?

History

Both McCarty and Henke mention my historical references to our country’s capacity for compassion and resilience in my earlier piece, specifically how we as a nation chose a path of reconciliation over one of punishment after the American Civil War. History can nag, and be both instructive and problematic. I’m not one who thinks looking past the past, or picking your past (as I did) helps tremendously, though it instructs if you pay attention. Otherwise why would the dark hearted forces that seize control keep trying to erase or change it every time the cycle swings them back into power? History doesn’t only contain a recounting of events, it contains what’s behind those events should you care to look.

We may not step foot in the same river twice, but we keep recycling the water in history’s reflecting pools.

In my view, as a species (expand for a moment those borders and blinders beyond the U.S.) we’ve more than proven that we’re incapable of the persuasion necessary to promote positive change in the grand scheme of things. We’re also incapable of enough horror to counter dark underlying forces eager to exploit., explode and yes, extinguish in their quest for power and dominion. We don’t want to be the monsters we need to counter.

It’s a doom loop humans have been caught in long before anyone reading this was born. And it’s a loop so overstuffed with doom that we want to physiologically and psychologically wipe it from our memories the moment we begin coming up for air after one catastrophe or the other. It’s amazing how we even find ways to ignore the scar tissue.

For the moment then , set aside history. Why continue to dissect it to death for no great real benefit? Set aside also discussions of racism, religious intolerance, class warfare, and all flavors of hatred of the other. More words have been written about those topics, some here, and in countless other places by countless other writers. None seeming to have any real lasting effect beyond blowing off steam on trains stalled on the tracks. Words do have meaning. Meaning meanders through the mediums and get muddled in the summaries.

Dig beneath to what in my opinion is the rotten root behind most of the ills humans continue to bring on one another. The thirst for dominion reveals dark hearts fueled with an appetite for self aggrandizement that makes the sin of gluttony feel like a mild teenage eating disorder. You can’t read a history of any civilization without finding that to be the case. Oh, shit. There’s history again.

What? Too big? Too broad a topic? Too much to tackle?

Spot on.

It is too big. Also too unsolvable. Too deep. You can erase moments of history. You can’t erase who we are. It is who we are. At least as demonstrated by a collective human history of repeating and revisiting the motivations behind the moments that stand out on the surface, that iceberg-like signal greater horrors underneath. Perhaps we’re waiting for some AI to solve it. That’s only partially a joke. Easier to laugh than accept responsibility.

Not recognizing the enormity of the larger root cause makes it far too easy to focus on what comparatively is the day-to-day (these days overwhelming) minutiae of corrupt and poisonous politics, legal morasses, greed in all forms, and debates over a constitution that has essentially been abused as much as the people it supposedly protects. Every day there’s a moment that feels crucial (it is always the most important election of our lifetime!), always feels pressing, and always ends up, in the grand scheme of things, rewarding a few while screwing over the rest. Always.

Admitting the larger problem is indeed too much, but also too much a condemnation of us all. And we generally shy away from that. Focusing on the immediate threat always and often more urgently satisfies the emotional need to rage against that which can’t be changed or controlled. And that brings me to violence.

Violence and Monsters

I’m not advocating violence. I’m not a violent person. I have resorted to it a couple of times to defend myself and loved ones. Beyond self defense, (too often a convenient excuse) I am acknowledging that violence is usually what most of what we’re experiencing evolves (devolves?) into. Not always. But usually. And usually when it counts.

Frankly, in my world view, if you’re not prepared for a violent outcome you’re being naive in the best case. In the worst, you’re just a willing victim and actually a part of the problem. Regardless, those willing to accept violence as a piece of the puzzle are at least the ones who have chance of winning each moment’s argument.

Yes, violence begats an endless cycle. One good deed may deserve another, but one bad one too often breeds many more. But without the threat of violence or punishment, power and the restriction of it is essentially meaningless.

Reiterating, I’m not advocating violence. I just think we need to be prepared for it. Frankly, I’m surprised we haven’t already seen it on a larger scale in this country in the reactions to the violence visited on us by our government. To say you’re incapable of it, means you’ve never been under serious threat, real or imagined. Reason is always preferred. Until you confront the unreasonable.

But what about the important non-violent movements throughout history? Gandhi? Martin Luther King and civil rights? Labor strikes? What about Victor Orban stepping down after being defeated in an election?

Don’t kid yourself. While non-violent organizers fighting for civil rights practiced and preached non-violence, realize in most situations they were prepared to have violence done on them. Those organizers were no fools. In too many cases throughout history (damn, there it is again) it wasn’t until things turned violent that things begin to change. The presence of cameras made a difference during the US civil rights struggles of the 1960’s. They don’t seem to do so with the same result in the 2020’s. It takes sociopaths to not blanche at the sight of bloodshed of others. It takes courage to bleed for them.

But what about Orban? Perhaps the most sensible tyrant in history. He read the writing on the wall, knew he’d already made his bundle, and had changed the structure of his country in ways that will take decades to fix and tie his opponents into knots. He got out while the getting was good. It’s a rare villain who knows to quit when he’s ahead. Or still has one. U.S. tyrant hopefuls who have been taking cues from Orban should heed his last one.

This country just quasi-celebrated its 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. If it wasn’t for a group of men willing to publicly sign their name to a document at the risk of being hung for treason, who knows what this continent would have become? Would you have signed it with your neck on the line?

Violence is being done on citizens of this country almost daily by its government, as well as on others around the world. Dark hearted monsters have more than proven their lust for it. As for the rest of us?

With the possible exception of some citizens in cities invaded by ICE, I’m not sure enough are willing to stand in the way when the guns come out. Certainly that would require sacrifice in such action. Would you be willing to make it?

The fact that ICE murders haven’t yet turned the tide is something I find hard to grasp in the same way a collective catastrophe like COVID did not. When it is easy to exploit death and destruction for selfish gain we’ve turned a corner into a very dark alley.

As twisted as all of this is, it’s also become some sort of an even more twisted spectator sport to watch the clock hopefully run out on Trump one way or the other. Allies and enemies abroad have joined in on the watching, waiting for a flashpoint or an act of God that may or may not come before too much more damage is done. Meanwhile the violence continues.

I’m not condemning anyone by saying that. I’m just acknowledging that we’re more willing spectators than we are victims watching a losing match, while somehow still trying to manage our lives, than we might believe. Much like the small folk in any Game of Thrones episode helplessly watching dragons fly overhead.

And therein lies one of my larger points.

It pisses me off when I hear criticisms about those who are too comfortable to do what it takes to change things. Certainly there are those who don’t want their comfort zones turned upside down. They deserve condemnation. But there are far too many just trying to provide for their families and get through the day-to-day. I know quite a few for whom that struggle is as all consuming as any political struggle.

It also pisses me off that those who do have enough capacity to work for change have chosen to do so so weakly. They piss me off more than those that willingly attach to the predators like remorseless remoras.

Folks may be willing to boycott a retailer, or a streaming service, or attend a weekend march for a few hours. But I don’t see any concerted actions or desire to do what the Albanians are currently doing to protest their government’s collusion with the Kushner/Trump family attempts to steal and develop a piece of that country’s shoreline. I think the Albanians have now been in the streets for longer than 40 days. That’s a long weekend that’s not short on courage.

So, as to one specific. Until a large enough portion of the population of this country is willing to stand in the streets for periods longer than a few hours on a weekend afternoon, I don’t think on the whole we’re ready for the moment, or the struggle. Those afraid of losing their comfort and those willing to enable by sitting on the sidelines don’t deserve a voice in fixing what has been broken, if or when the time comes.

The citizens of Minnesota and other cities invaded by ICE showed great resilience in the face of government violence. Tragically, it wasn’t enough. That winter furor cooled off as warmer spring temperatures crept in, though it seems to be sparking anew in the heat of the summer after similar recent government sponsored murders in Texas and Maine. I have my doubts.

It’s monstrous what’s happening. And we need to meet the monsters where they are. There’s a great theme in Emily St. John Mandel’s novel, Station Eleven, later made into a streaming series. “To the monsters, we’re the monsters” is perhaps more proverb than theme. There’s always fear on either side of a conflict. Do we need to be more monstrous?

For those who think this sounds like anarchy, you’re probably correct in the strict sense of the term. Here’s the thing. I happen to believe that active tyranny is worse than anarchy. I’m not alone in that. Anarchy is chaos without control. Active tyranny is chaos under the guise of control. That’s where we are. Both bring chaos. Both bring horror.

We’re living under active tyranny masquerading as a constitutional republic that controls too many of the world’s purse strings, constantly tilting every axis it can find, led by a decadent decaying thug, held up and held together by sniveling supplicants, none of whom know when or how to quit, or desire to. Trading one flavor of chaos for another often sounds appealing. It usually never is. Until there is no alternative.

Damnatio Memoriae

The condemnation of memory is an ancient practice of wiping the memory banks clean. The Romans get first credit for attempting to remove all instances of those no longer in favor. Rather than be faced with reminders of those unwanted, remove all instances of their likeness and wipe them from the history books. Don’t mention their names. Damnatio Memoriae resurfaces throughout history like a bad memory popping up out of nowhere, as those controlling the roads patch over the potholes created by the destruction of those who stood in their path. Sorry. History rearing its ugly head again.

I was in Russia directing an American musical when the statue of the founder of the KGB, Felix Dzerzhinksy, was removed from the square in Moscow bearing his name. Joshua Yaffa has an interesting take on the moment, the history, and its aftermath. Here’s a quote:

…in a civic culture that placed more emphasis on forgetting than remembering its more painful moments, Memorial never became part of the mainstream. In 1992, an investigation into the legality of the Communist Party’s actions ended with a whimper. There was never any formal reckoning or judgment on seventy years of Communist rule and those who carried it out.

I grew up in the South in the era when those with long memories and lingering hatreds began turning their dream of rising again into the ugly reality that has led us to where we are now. It was subtle, insidious, and largely ignored outside of the region.

The same media institutions we rightfully condemn for their capitulation today essentially did the same thing during and after the civil rights struggles in the 1960’s. Sainted as they may be for turning their cameras on the Bull Conners and the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they largely ignored the raising of statues and Civil War memorials celebrating traitors, hiding as easily as behind a hood, a politician’s platform, or the masks today’s ICE goons wear in cowardice. The media treats losing soccer coaches with more disdain than it has the legacy of losers who ripped a country apart once and are doing so again.

Politics

In Conor McPherson’s underrated musical Girl From The North Country, featuring the music of Bob Dylan, one of the characters speaking to another, his face pummeled from a boxing match, says:

Marianne: Boxing is so foolish. They say that in the bible, you know?

Scott: Yeah?

Marianne: Leviticus. Chapter 3 verse 4.

Scott: What?

Marianne: I’m making it up. You can say anything is in Leviticus.

The same is true about politics. You can say anything in politics. It’s in the bible. I’m making that up. The opposite is true and you can find it hanging on the walls of schoolhouses in some states. Irony isn’t dead, it just can’t outrun political comedy.

Built into the Constitution since its ratification, the speech and debate clause allowed members of Congress to lie through their teeth while working during attendance at sessions. It’s expanded well beyond the wells of congressional chambers, but then the constitution itself, much like the bible, expands and contracts depending on the moment, the speaker, and the number of social media followers.

One of the cardinal rule of politics is to make your opponent spend time and resources defending themselves. As to one of those specifics I left out, we don’t practice that skill enough. The monsters do. We do not. We need to.

Call me crazy, but as the Democratic Party searches in vain to try and grab a coherent message, their consultant driven attempts keep missing the mark against opponents tossing slop at them from the gutter. If you didn’t want to wrestle the pig on his home turf, you should have never gotten into politics.

The consultants want to call the intersection where the right and left meet a horseshoe. It’s actually a circle. But closing that gap rhetorically might just mean making those who hate each other for different reasons find too many similarities to make the comfortable classes uncomfortable, and put the consultant class out of work.

To me, there is only one message that should be leveled in any and all attacks. “You want the shootings in our streets to stop? You want health care? You want to afford a living for you and your family? You want an expanded Supreme Court? You want..(fill in the blank with any other issue currently sizzling on the hot plate)? Then first you have to vote these criminals and cowards out of office.”

If you’re not calling them a criminal and a coward every time you speak, in exactly those terms, you’re missing the moment. And if your candidate refuses to do so, find another one who will.

I hate to say it about myself, but I look several family members in their face on Zoom calls and bluntly say, “when you stop supporting pedophiles, rapists, and criminals, then we’ll talk.” I hate being brought to that place. It’s damn painful. But here we are.

The dark hearted monsters have made sure there is no longer a middle road. We need to quit looking for one. Stop also looking for the high road. Everyone is in the same ditch. Don’t debate nonsense. Don’t try to reason with the unreasonable. If your compassionate muscle begins to twitch, exercise it in support of those who literally find it hard to manage through a day or a week, and can’t find the time or energy for anything else.

Henke asked me “What level of inequality am I willing to accept, or is it none?” I’d love to say it was none, but that would be naive. Like Thomas More I don’t think there could ever be a Utopia. There is always going to be inequality. Thinking equality for everyone is a fiction that can really only be achieved from a perch above those you want to help. There’s irony in there somewhere.

The question isn’t what level of inequality would you accept, the question is what levels of support for those on the lower rungs of the ladder are you willing to pay for.

For some, politics may be about creating equality, opportunity, or possibility. We like to hear that. Some desperately want to believe that. And yes, laws do matter. But laws can be undone. More swiftly than they can be created. Laws can be evil. Slavery was legal. Laws can be ignored. But at its root, politics is, and always was, about dividing up what resources are available or finding new ones when those run out. If you think it’s about anything else, you’re wrong.

More Specifics and Breaking Things

I promised to list some specifics beyond the few sprinkled above. And here you go.

As to the upcoming elections.

Pay Attention: There are no secrets. We’re told and we see daily what the plans are. If you dismiss them as the ravings of a lunatic, you’re wrong. Pay attention.

Vote. The only way to defend the right to vote is to vote. That sounds easy and trite. I don’t think it will be for some this year. Whatever obstacles (and there are quite a few) that the president has declared he wants to throw in your path need to be overcome. Voting is going to be more of an act of defiance than it has ever been.

Organize. Yes, it helps. But it only helps if you do so strategically with the simple goal of tossing the bums out. Everything else is secondary. Certainly if we lose.

Be ready to protest after the election and whatever bullshit the coward and criminal-in-chief tries to pull to keep himself in power and out of jail. The largest mistake we made after the 2024 election was staying in shock and not causing trouble in the immediate aftermath. We allowed the criminals the time to carry out the plans they had made very public for all to see. None of what we are seeing should be a surprise. If it is or was, you weren’t paying attention.

Sharpen your steel. The steel in your spine. Know you’re already under attack and know what you stand for or don’t. Know what you’re willing to compromise on and what you’re willing to sacrifice and what you’re not. That won’t be easy. It never is.

Call and write your representatives. Or visit their local offices. Certainly call and write them on an issue and how you feel about it. But let whomever answers the phone or greets you at reception that your support stops depending on how they fight. More importantly tell them straight up that if they want a donation they have to ask in person and be prepared to stand accountable. Remind them that the country you want them to fight for was birthed by a minority who pledged it all and that you expect them to do the same.

Write. Not just on social media. Not just your representatives. Not just on the Internet. Write your friends. Write your family. Write the CEOs of companies you do business with. Turn your mind into one that isn’t afraid to make waves. Let whomever you write know that you hold them responsible as the ones that broke the dam and caused the damage. Put them on the defensive. If they are going to tell you to get lost, they are already lost to you. Don’t try to reason with the unreasonable. Write them off and let them know you’ve done so.

As to breaking things.

The only reason the president hasn’t declared some sort of state of emergency and taken complete control is it would bring political fundraising to a halt. Not just for him. He doesn’t need it while he sits in office and collects the bribes that spill over his desk like golden showers. But it would end most political fundraising for the rest of the hangers on and lickspittles. That of course would be a blow to the media as well, because that’s where the dollars raised mostly go after the consultants take their cut.

I have no doubt in my mind that Trump will do some such action either before or after the election. At that point the money will have already been raised and spent and it’s one of the few gambits he has left.

“Things” are already broken. Congress. The Courts. The Justice Department. The Constitution. The economy. Global alliances. The list is too long before you even get to the defacing destruction of Washington DC and the White House.

I’m reminded of when now senator Mark Warner was elected governor of Virginia in 2002. (Sorry, not sorry, but it’s another history moment.) He came to power to discover that the Republican Party had been essentially cooking the books. Warner had to scale back some of his plans to put the state’s finances back together. It wasn’t easy. But he largely succeeded by setting aside some of his promised priorities.

That pales in comparison to what whomever is elected in 2028 will face, or assuming the democrats come back into the majority in Congress after the midterms.

Like Orban’s Hungary, so much is broken it is going to take years if not generations to restore. I’d suggest restoration shouldn’t be the goal. Neither should reconciliation.

Sure, we’d all like to see some of the physical manifestations of Trump’s classless remodeling of the capital city and other places torn down and ripped asunder. That would probably feel good, and provide a cathartic cleansing. A symbolic, yet perhaps necessary one. But we should never attempt to erase the memory of what we’re living through. Don’t damn the memory, damn those who created them and forever remember their evil. At least for seventy or 80 years or so. That seems to be our capacity.

Certainly we’d like to see many of these barbarians sent to jail for their crimes. If we don’t, forget about the current system of laws that they’ve already spit on and torn asunder. The criminals have. We should too.

The harder work will be in closing the holes that our constitutional republic has left open that let this madman run through and over. Those holes exist because the founding fathers believed in honor, checks and balances, and to some extent the will of the people. This decade has more than proven that we don’t care so much about honor, much less checks and balances or the will of the people.

Break what’s left, and I’d suggest taking advantage of the opportunity to make something new. If it requires a constitutional convention, do it. If it requires being more monstrous to meet the monsters where they are, do so. It can’t be any messier or more dangerous than things stand now.

I’ll close with something I post on social media twice a week.

Act like it.

(Image from Halinskyi Max on Shutterstock)

Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.

More Thoughts On The Segmentation In Computing

Seniors turning their nose up at tech

A reader asked me a very legitimate question about the coming segmentation of the computing marketplace I’ve been writing about.

Sweet life axYZum3rdMY unsplash.

Essentially the question was why I thought it was a bad trend.

Here’s one reason why. While it is somewhat about increasing costs, it’s about more than that.

I do technical support with a number of senior citizens, among others. To be frank, the majority of the seniors are terribly frustrated with computers, smartphones, the Internet, and basically any technology. The conversation typically begins about healthcare as they have to use apps like MyChart or the Internet to communicate with their doctors. It moves down the line from banks to government agencies to grocery stores who require apps to access what were once coupon savings.

If they buy or are gifted something that requires an app or an account to use they typically just don’t want to set it up. The thought of updating any operating system fills them with dread. Setting up a new phone or computer has kept some from even considering upgrading to newer devices. The fact that I will typically find too many apps that need updating on their devices speaks to their reluctance to even pay attention to that chore.

Most are turned off by the mere thought of AI, but a few hope it makes things easier. None want to pay for it. They universally despise Google’s AI summaries in Search. Real life experiences with doctors and support services that are switching to AI Chatbot customer service is spoken of as it were a demon spawn from hell. Not being able to talk to a person drives them over the edge.

All are frustrated with the increasing costs from hardware to services. I can’t begin to tell you the number of subscriptions I’ve had to help them cancel as they choose to do without. For most it isn’t a question of affordability. After all they have the resources to hire me. Although for some it is. It’s more a feeling of getting ripped off, paying for features and services that they don’t want, and that the prices always increase. They also display an astonishing and increasing lack of trust in anything tech related.

If I had to summarize the prevailing mood of this admittedly limited sample it’s one of not worth the costs or the headaches so they wish they could simply do without. The sad reality is that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to do so. Especially for a generation that relies on health care professionals more than the younger set.

They are far from the bleeding edge. They mostly want to do video calls and see photos and videos of family. A few want to play games. Some want to read and watch streaming video. They all use email and messaging and no one understands why spam still exists. To quote one, “if they can’t fix that, they should get out of the damn business of selling phones.”

It is this segment of the market that I worry most about.

As an example I recently supported a family going through the far too onerous process of applying for Medicaid. The amount of scanning and digital paperwork they had to submit was horrendous. The act of filing out online forms was just as taxing. Of course part of that problem lies with the ridiculous Medicaid system. There was no way around what they had to go through but to do the drudge work and get it done. With all the talk of AI potentially removing drudge work from our lives, when I see someone deliver software that can tackle that system from both a users’s perspective and also from a bureaucratic one, I’ll believe the folks pushing that dream are out to do something other than make money. Believe me, they could make a lot of money if they cared to do so.

In my opinion tech companies, largely run by folks not in the senior set or too wealthy to have to worry about these things, would do well to put focus groups of seniors together to try out new technology and products. I don’t believe that will happen. Perhaps the prevailing wisdom is that by the time the youngsters pushing the tech envelopes reach the age when these frustration points of today’s seniors might matter to them, the tech they are working on today might take those frustrations away.

I’m not holding my breath.

(Image from Sweet Life on Unsplash)

Sunday Morning Reading

Still milling milestones

It’s a Sunday. It’s a Sunday when I can say I’ve hung around for seven decades as the clock ticked past 70 yesterday. Spending the weekend celebrating with the grandkids, dodging in an out of pockets of time when the air is breathable, so there’s only a few links to share in this week’s Sunday Morning Reading. Hope you enjoy them as much as I have spending it with two innocents watching them approach the world from that perspective. When they look to you for answers, it’s awesomely terrifying.

David Todd McCarty thinks We’re Teaching Our Kinds The Wrong Lessons. As someone who wonders why we spend so much time teaching them not to lie in a world that rewards liars, I often think the same.

NatashaMH writes about An Artist’s Search For Meaning. The quote below she included from Viktor E. Frankel, hit in a different way on this birthday weekend.

“It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life — daily and hourly.”

It wouldn’t be a Sunday Morning Reading column without at least one nod to politics, Her’s the nod from Carlyn Beccia, wondering Has America Crossed The Asshole Threshold? I would argue yes, but wouldn’t limit it to just America.

Claire Stapleton worked at Google. She saw most of it. She tells what she saw in The Voice Of Google in a piece that is so much more than just about Google and the tech culture.

Sunday Morning Reading

Reading is a gateway drug. Get your buzz on.

Sunday Morning Reading is about…well, it’s about reading. In my personal opinion some don’t read nearly enough. Read. Read those you agree with. Just as important, read those you disagree with. Stretch those reading muscles and stretch your mind.

I linked to a Rose Horowitch piece earlier in the week entitled The End of Reading Is Here. It’s controversial. I don’t agree completely. But that’s the point of reading. If that’s still a thing.

Follow that piece up with Sonny Bunch’s R.I.P. Attention Span. Closing his essay he says “The end of reading may be here. But so too might be the end of watching anything that lasts longer than the time it took you to read this sentence.”

In an age where some are eager to ban books (surprised we haven’t seen any book burnings yet) Mendel Uminer chose to move rather than reduce his collection of books after his landlord complained. Check out Alex Vadukul’s story Too Many Books.

You know that reading can satisfy curiosity. It can also raise it to new levels. Neil Steinberg’s Etymological Field Notes tells such a tale. Do you flânuer?

And for those who tell you not to believe everything you read, here’s John Semley on The Fanfare Around The Band Geese Actually Was a Psyop.

In the wake of all of the seemingly unending horrible daily doping of bad political news, (some about wakes to be, some about wakes possibly delayed), James L. Bruno writes The “Last Best Hope On Earth” Crashes & Burns.

With the act and art of reading being in question, especially when it comes to the news, the click matters more than the content now that most of what we’re presented isn’t worth being displayed in a supermarket checkout line tabloid rack. Or does it? According to Pete Pachal when it comes to the news Speed Still Matters In News, But The Prize Is No Longer The Click. Maybe there never was a prize.

Speaking of prizes. Winning isn’t everything. Unless it is. JA Westenberg reminds us that A Battle Won Is A Terrible Thing.

Rob Urie tells us Why AI Doesn’t Think, Cannot Reason, Isn’t Intelligent and Will Never Achieve Consciousness. It’s not magic.

(image from the author)

The Myth of Character

There’s nothing new under the sun

I’m a pretty good judge of character. My profession as a theatre director trained me to understand a character in a play’s dramatis personae from reading a script. I hear you. That’s life on the stage. That’s make believe.

Shutterstock 1782039683.

Here’s the secret. No character on a stage ever appeared for the first time in a play. They debuted in life and someone described them in words and brought them to theatrical life. Playwrights don’t create characters out of whole cloth. They, like poets and writers before them, write characters as they have experienced them in the real world, or borrow them from those that have written them before. We are a decidedly unoriginal species.

If you live long enough and pay attention to the world, you develop the same skills as writers and theatre directors. You quickly come to realize that there are indeed a limited number of character types around us and they are easily identifiable. There are apparently a finite number of molds we’re baked in.

Hell, dogs recognize good and bad characters much like humans. Often faster. So do children, but something happens as we mature that dulls that instinct.

Writers for the page, stage and cinema people their stories with recognizable types, not for lack of trying, but as recognition that we don’t really change that much through the ages. In the theatre trade we call these easily identifiable types “stock characters.” Stock, as in picking them down off of a shelf.

Aristophanes and Theophrastus for the Greeks, and Plautus for the Romans get most of the credit for this. Although most consider Plautus to have simply borrowed the concept. Later, Commedia dell’Arte became famous for its stock characters, and also the masks created for them. The humans behind the masks became less important to the story than the costume. That should tell you something.

Supposedly the first time the term “stock character” appeared in the English language was in the 1860’s. Other cultures had and have their own versions of stock characters. Asian and African forms of storytelling also developed their own easily recognizable familiar characters.

When it comes to literature and entertainment there haven’t been that many new characters recreated from life’s observances since antiquity. “Good” characters have a flaw or two or three. So do the “bad.” That’s what makes them human. Even the dramas written in the days of multiple gods featured those beings as flawed. Without flaws there is no conflict, no drama, no comedy.

In today’s highly charged political atmosphere, with villains currently holding winning hands here and abroad, looking for perfect characters to defeat them is a fool’s errand. And yes, there are more than plenty who fit the character mold of fool.

When a person creates a role behind a mask representing good character or one on a path of redemption, that’s an age old character trait also. Those characters always get their comeuppance in the end when the flaws are exposed. It’s only recently in the history of literature that we’ve forced happy endings that include the irredemable into the mix. It’s a sad and unfunny joke that people keep trying the trick. Audiences, like dogs, sniff it out.

When someone says a man or woman is of good character it doesn’t mean they’re perfect, pristine, or pure. We might like it to, but that’s wish casting. Flaws will always emerge. Otherwise the story generally sucks.

I wish we’d stop looking for those mythical creatures and recognize that the good and bad ones that populate our real life off the stage are just copying what came before and mirroring the life most of us lead.

(Image from mariesacha on Shutterstock)

The End of Reading?

Let’s not make it so. At least until you read this piece.

File this one in the “Depressing If True” category. Rose Horowitch has written an excellent piece for The Atlantic entitled The End Of Reading Is Here. Yes, you read the title correctly. Unless you’ve already given up on reading you should give the piece more than just a look. If you have given up, try to remember how.

I’m not sure I’d agree completely that we’ve reached or are nearing the end point of reading, but I have to admit that we sure seem to be rushing headlong to cliff noting, bullet pointing, and summarizing everything to a point that it’s far too easy for some to break the habit and shy away from reading as a way to discover knowledge, new ideas, and well…advance ourselves and civilization while understanding from whence we came.

An excerpt:

Reading has never been natural. Humans have no innate cognitive machinery designed to string letters into words and connect them to their real-world analogues. To read, people had to repurpose regions of their brain used for speech and object recognition. The practice first emerged 6,000 years ago in Mesopotamia.

Horowitch traipses through the history of the written word hitting the high and low water marks, many easily recognizable, some not nearly as discernible, pointing to an age when Marshall McLuhan predicted we would become “post-literate.” He predicted that in 1962. She marches on from there.

The usual, and occasionally unusual, list of the enemies of writing and reading make their appearance on her march through the ages, but Horowitch lays them out, dare I say, in only the way a writer could. And yes, AI makes its appearance on that list. For it is not just reading, it’s also the writing of the words we read that is under threat.

Another excerpt:

The written word is fundamentally different from oral language. Writing detaches the message from the messenger, allowing for a more dispassionate spread of information than was possible in oral societies. Because writing a phrase takes longer than speaking it, writing forces the author to slow down and reflect. Written language tends to employ more complex sentence structures and vocabulary than spoken language. And unlike speech, it doesn’t disappear into the ether.

In her conclusion Horowitch reminds us that in our digital age we have the capability to read much more than at any point in human history.

When the Library of Alexandria disappeared, the knowledge inscribed on its scrolls was lost forever. We can only guess what else Eratosthenes and Euclid might have written. The text turned to dust. That won’t happen today; all of the words in the great library could be stored on a single computer chip. Nowadays, even the most obscure academic monographs are scanned and digitized. Google Books and the Internet Archive represent libraries of unfathomable proportions. We can navigate to them with a few keystrokes, not a perilous journey across the Mediterranean. There’s little risk of their texts succumbing to humidity or mice.

But the threat of apathy remains. What we’re losing is the ability and inclination to read those texts. An astonishing wealth of information and wisdom has been bequeathed to us. What we’ll do with this inheritance is up to us.

That makes it all a choice, does it not?

I won’t question the assumptions, nor the excellent way she has written them. I will add that if we are indeed reaching the end of reading, the logical next step is the end of thinking.

The piece is more than worth your time, should you have in the inclination to read it. I hope you do. It might actually make you think.

This Is A Bummer. Open Source Dropbox Client Maestral Will Shut Down

Ch…ch…changes

I would say Monday always seems to bring bad news, but bad news seems to show up on any day that ends in “y” lately. But this is a Monday and this is bad news.

Maestral, an open source client for Dropbox has ceased to be maintained as of the end of June 2026 according to the develper on the app’s website. Hat tip to John Gruber who posted the news this morning, and for posting this quote from the developer.

As of 2026-07-28, this project is archived. It’s been a fun challenge to develop a syncing client, but unfortunately, I find too little time to invest in Maestral these days. I’ve also moved away from using Dropbox myself.

Maestral will still remain usable in the medium term, but will no longer be actively maintained or receive updates.

I’ve been using Maestral for quite some time to manage file syncing on Dropbox, primarily because I despise Dropbox’s own apps. Maestral is a far cleaner and less resource intensive experience, and has more than served my needs syncing files back and forth. So, I’ll either have to bite the bullet and swallow some pretty foul tasting software again, or find a different solution.

The different solution will be a difficult one as I work with a variety of theaters and clients, all of which using different file syncing and sharing solutions, (Google’s solution being the runner up to Dropbox) so I have to keep up with most of the file syncing services out there.

All shows must close at some point, but it’s a shame to see this one posted it’s closing notice. I wouldn’t count on any new ones appearing on the horizon.

Sunday Morning Reading

Words, words, words…

Meaning. It means so much. So do the words that deliver it to us. But remember, there was meaning before we constructed words into language. This week’s Sunday Morning Reading comes on the final day of a weird and wacky 4th of July weekend in the U.S when an often mean Mother Nature reminded us who is really in control no matter which words we choose or manipulate to pretend we are. It was kinda fun to watch. There’s also a few interesting pieces about America’s founding, and the myths and the meaning behind it all.

Kicking it off is a short piece from JA Westenberg asking Remember When Words Had Meaning? What comes first the distortion of language or the devaluing of the culture that employs them?

Speaking of meaning, Jack Loftus gives us The U.S. Constitution Is For Simple Folk Still Burdened By The Belief That Words Have Meaning. You can argue it was always thus, but we sure do spend an awful amount of time, energy and money arguing the opposite.

In this age of WTF, it has become an accelerating trend to see pieces disemboweling many of the myths we assign to the founding of America around the 4th of July. We used to share common myths more than we did a common history, but now even the myths get mangled. So it’s no surprise when the powers that currently be toil to rewrite both. Noah Berlatsky‘s The Constitution Sucks is a good example of how we can forever flip the coin looking for the right result, ignoring the edge.

T.H. Breen takes a look at some of the too often un-heralded folks and local movements during America’s revolutionary war period in It Wasn’t Just The Founders.

John Warner offers up For The Fourth, 9 Books For Your Sense Of Patriotism, saying “I’ve come to (personally) understand patriotism as a not a fan-like allegiance to a team, but a responsibility to understand the country’s history, warts and all as we pursue the illusive promise of life, liberty and happiness for all from the Declaration.” The key is knowing we all “come” to understanding.

Will Frivolous Charges Be Brought Against Future Ex-POTUSes? That’s Okay Too by Josh Marshall offers up an excellent piece on how we can twist and morph words in a legal context that shift the ground under most mythical mountains like “no man is above the law. “

Speaking of words and meaning, the bad guys seeking to survive a legal onslaught ahead of what they fear is a political tsunami coming for them are trying to rekindle old fears about communism and socialism as their latest talking points. Not sure those old saws will cut the same way they used to, but it demonstrates just how limited the dictionary is. David Todd McCarty takes a look behind the hooting and hollering in Democratic Socialism: Keeping The Great American Experiment Alive.

And in a quasi-hysterical look at shifting meanings and changing words, Rogé Karma is wondering Why Everyone Is Suddenly Talking About ‘Universal Basic Capital’. The quasi-hysterical part is that it’s coming from the AI market masters and a few politicians substituting the word “capital” for “income” following the words “universal basic.” Language is hard. When you can say anything to get what you want.

And in another word substitution, Doc Searls suggests we shift from an “attention economy” to an “intention economy.” Check out The First Source Of Personal Intent. I’m not sure the meaning changes with the substitution.

(Image from Alexandra on Unsplash)

The Not Always Serendipitous Bug When Text Messaging With Spouses

But honey, I didn’t get the text!

I enjoy driving long distances alone. One of the benefits is that it gives me time to catch up on podcasts and audio books, so there’s the bonus. Even though that doesn’t come close to making up for the current high prices of gas or driving through summer road construction.

My wife is in the final weekend of a production of Always Patsy Cline at Hope Summer Repertory about three hours away. This morning I left Chicago before the crack of dawn to avoid the current heat wave baking our glass bubble of a car and pass through the construction zones a little easier. The trip is to catch her last two performances, then pack her up and bring us back home after what will be two months of her being away and me traveling back and forth. We’re theatre folk so we’re used to that home again, away again lifestyle.

Here’s where the serendipity begins. While listening to the post-show portion of The Accidental Tech Podcast episode #698 (I subscribe to the podcast) host Casey Liss brought up an iPhone messaging bug that I’ve encountered for quite some time. One that would pop up again on this trip.

In essence the bug is this.

When his wife texts him on a solitary thread between the two of them, he will not receive a haptic tap on his Apple Watch. He does however receive the “tap-tap” as he calls it, if she is a part of a group thread. Liss’s thinking is that this has something to do with Focus modes. In those of which he runs, he has configured his wife to be able to break through with a haptic notification on his Apple Watch when she texts.

One of his other co-hosts Marco Arment also has the same issue. The third co-host John Siracusa has the problem but in reverse. He doesn’t wear an Apple Watch, but his wife does, and she claims she never gets an Apple Watch notification when he texts either.

I have the exact same problem. Like Liss I also have a specific self-designed haptic touch configured for my wife. I have seen this bug for so long that I’ve just relegated it to another that Apple will never fix. But there is a slight difference, which I’ll get to in a moment.

This morning’s serendipity wasn’t just hearing this issue discussed and getting the satisfying momentary knowledge that if these much more sophisticated tech guys than I can’t figure it out, I’m not crazy and I’m not alone. We’ve all been there in those moments of relief with our own tech frustrations. But the story continues with a bit of zemblanity. (Today’s word search was looking up the opposite of serendipity. Everyday is a good day when you learn something new, and also discover you’re not alone in your tech woes.)

While on this early morning drive, listening to this very section of the podcast, my wife texted me, asking me to stop off at the store when I hit town before heading to her company housing to pick up a few things. I never got the notification of her text on my Apple Watch, and didn’t see the one on my iPhone until after I had reached her residence, stopped the car, and began to unload.

Yup. I had to turn around and go back to the store.

During the ATP discussion of all of this much good natured back and forth was had about one spouse or the other not receiving these text message notifications and the “fun” it can cause in spousal relations when your only and honest answer is “Honey, I didn’t get your text!” Of course the logical next response that never works is “Blame Apple.”

As I mentioned earlier, Liss seems to think this has something to do with Focus modes. He may indeed be correct, but this happens to me whether I am running a Focus mode or not.

I long ago gave up on using Focus modes to any great degree. I just found them too complex to set up, and often not working as I expected. As an example, I no longer allow even the two I do use to flow through my chain of Apple Devices and none are turned on for my Macs. And yet, a Do Not Disturb mode will still launch on my iMac at odd hours on random days. Focus modes in my experience are just too fiddly and in my experience too buggy to be reliable.

The only Focus modes I currently use are the default Do Not Disturb and Sleep modes on the iPhone. I do have my wife, and several family members, set to break through those. Whether I’m running those modes or not, I do not get a “tap-tap” notification on my Apple Watch when my wife texts, unless, like Liss, my wife is part of a family group message thread, and then those come through as designed.

During her two month gig, my wife and I have resorted to “don’t text, call” as our way of reaching each other when some level of urgency or import arises. We’ve been through a few dicey family situations during her gig where I have resorted to turning off the Sleep focus at night. Breaking my wife’s habit of always texting first is a challenge in and of itself. But that’s another story.

Note that I always receive “tap-tap” notifications from all others I’ve set to break through Do Not Disturb or Sleep, or when I’m not running either Focus mode, which the majority of the time. This only happens with my wife.

I don’t know if this is the locus of the problem or not, but I would bet it floats somewhere in Apple’s iCloud. Focus modes, like Messages, flow through iCloud (assuming you have Messaging in iCloud turned on). Liss is convinced he’s configured something wrong. How notifications flow from one device or the other for those, like I, using multiple Apple devices, is also an inconsistent issue in my experience.

My guess, is anyone experiencing this at some point may have flipped a switch in an earlier generation of the software that has since changed, but there’s a flag set somewhere in that user’s iCloud account that’s hanging around causing the problem.

I’ve experienced several issues with my specific iCloud account that required things to be reset on Apple’s end in the past to suspect this is the case. As a little birdie told me during all my iCloud adventures, keep in mind every time Apple updates the operating system for your device, updates are happening on the backend as well.

Perhaps this is one of the many bugs Apple may be cleaning up on the backend preparing for the release of iOS 27. If not, it should be. It certainly would make for happier households that use Apple’s products.

(Image from Andrej Lišakoy on Unsplash)