Show Notes - Week of July 29, 2019

Happy long weekend from  53.5° north latitude. It is amazing how much work can fit into a five day work week. Looking back at the week, there were so many things going on, it is surprising that anything got done at all. Having the ability to focus on a single task at a time seems like such a luxury, such a foreign concept. I wonder if anybody really works like that anymore, or if they ever did. The hyper-specialization in the Industrial Revolution would be a clear example of focus, and similarly before that with a more agrarian society, but has a knowledge worker ever had the ability to focus? It is something work exploring. 

Podcasts:
I did have the ability to focus on one task most of Saturday this week, as I hauled five loads of sod and dirt to the Ecostation. Driving back and forth, burning probably close to half a tank of gas, I was able to plow through a bunch of podcasts, plus I took the train to work two days this week, so I had some time there as well. That is probably the most time I have ever devoted to podcasts in a single week, and there were lots of interesting tidbits as a result. 

First up was an episode of The Dave Chang Show on the Ethics of Meat Eating with professional hunter and author Steven Rinella. Chang seems like an easy guy to talk to, and the interview was able to broach the potentially touchy subject of hunting without getting preachy to any of the potential extremes - barbarism to gun rights. Rinella is an interesting person too, which helped. I will have to look into Rinella's books. The episode made me think again about joining a conservation society or two, maybe CPAWS and Ducks Unlimited.

Next was another great interview, this time Mark Maron on WTF interviewing David Letterman. The first maybe 10 minutes of every WTF episode is so unbearably hard to get through with Maron's stream-of-consciousness recap and annoying product placements. However, his actual interviews are really great stuff, and the Letterman interview was no different. Through the interview, Letterman discusses some of his personal challenges in his life, from alcoholism to infidelity, and Maron pokes and prods the discussion along without being intrusive. At one point, Letterman says:

You can't take everything with you as you move through life" --David Letterman

That referred to the bad stuff in life, like regret, shame, and pain. It was a good reminder that you have to move on if you want to make amends with the past and be a better person in the future. 
​
​I don't know Maron he has always been this good at interviewing people, but I suppose after 1000+ interviews, you hone your skills. 

After a few months of not having a link to the CKUA Hidden Track podcast, my app finally has the ability to download the episodes, and I listened to the first episode with Jeremy Dutcher and CKUA host Grant Stovel. They discuss Dutcher's debut album ​"Wolastoqiyik Lintuwakonawa". Bridging the gap between people is important in any situation, as is the case with the gap between Indigenous and white people in Canada. Music can provide that bridge. Hats off to Stovel for a great interview, and thanks to Dutcher for such a remarkable album. (Disclaimer: I sit on the Board of CKUA.)

The last of the great interviews was from Longform. The episode I listened to this week was an interview with David Epstein on the arguments for and against specialization at a young age and Epstein's book "Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World". I really like Longform as I find the hosts are fantastic interviewers. Casual and relaxed, yet deep enough to hit the important points. As a comparator, listen to the EconTalk interview with Epstein to really see the difference a good interviewer can make. 

---

Rounding out the podcasts was the History of Rome podcast, a monumental series that started way back in 2010, and another Freakonomics episode. I plowed through the first four episodes of History of Rome and I can totally see myself finishing all 179 episodes. Episode 2 had an interesting quote: "Might might not make right, but it will make a 1000 year civilization." The Freakonmics episode was "How to Change Your Mind" and the most interesting point was that people fail to differentiate between what they know and what others know. Following this through, there is a difference between the brain (trapped in your skull) and the mind (which is a collective and social construct of the people in your network).

Reading Pile:
Yes, even with all of those podcasts, I did get a bit of reading in this week.

First finished this week was "Sum: 40 Tales From The Afterlives" by David Eagleman. This book was an absolute mind-blower for me. I actually had to put the book down and cover my eyes after reading the first tale, as it was that impactful. I can't give any details without ruining the experience, so please do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of this book.

​My advice to you is to read it in forty different sessions. I read it all in the space of 90 minutes, and I think I would have got more from it if I would have paused and reflected after each tale. 

The other book finished this week was "Zeroes" by Chuck Wendig. This was my first reading from Wendig after following him on Twitter for the last couple years. I enjoyed this book. It reminded me of "Daemon" by Daniel Suarez, but maybe not quite as good. Or maybe it wasn't as good since it really reminded me of a book I had read previously. Anyway, it was a good book, worth the read, and certainly good enough to continue to search out more from Wendig. 

---

The Long and Slow Death of Google+:
I came across this article from January about how Google shuttered Google+ earlier this year. There is a good summary of the issue in the API and the decision to accelerate the shutdown as a result of that issue. However, the really interesting part of the article was the summary of why Google+ was created and a question as to whether or not Google even cares that Google+ was ultimately a failure. 

Here's the thing...Google still got what they came for.  More of your data.

Back in January of 2011, when Google+ launched, the one thing Google did NOT have was any detailed personal information about you. They didn't understand things like your preferences, demographic information, how you describe yourself, where you worked, your social connections, where you went to school, and many, many other valuable data points

​All Google had was search terms and click data, and perhaps the secret rumblings of collecting early voice data through Google Voice, a Gmail VOIP calling app they made available to Gmail users for free, in trade for recording millions of hours of how we humans pronounce things.

With Google+, Google was able to understand more about you as a Google user. Your profile, address, likes, dislikes, friends, foes, etc. In 2011 maybe we thought that information about us was a fair trade for the ability to communicate with our friends. Maybe we didn't care, or maybe we didn't even think about it. But now in 2019, more of us do think about those tradeoffs, even if that number is still the vast minority of people. I wonder if I will sign up for the next big platform after Twitter. I doubt it.

This blog, even if no one reads it, is my response to microblogging like Twitter or Instagram, and is based on the need to say what I want to say in a way I want to say it. If I want to write 1,000 words about the podcasts I listened to, then that's what I'll do, but not with ads inserted by some algorithm. If there is content I want others to know about, then I'll post it here. Do I need to collect entire profile data sets of everyone that reads what I write? What would I do with that? I'm not an advertising platform like Google or Facebook, so I have no need for that. I suppose at some point the need to pay for the infrastructure becomes enough of an impetus to start to look for ways to "monetize". However, maybe the old tip jar model from years gone by or the patron model that is popular these days will be enough. Even if that ever becomes the case, I still can't see what benefit either I or my readers would get from them sharing a full profile of their personal information with me. 

New Words:

trenchant
[ˈtren(t)SHənt]
ADJECTIVE

1. vigorous or incisive in expression or style.

​subjunctive
[səbˈjəNG(k)tiv]
ADJECTIVE

1. relating to or denoting a mood of verbs expressing what is imagined or wished or possible.Compare with indicative.

NOUN

1. a verb in the subjunctive mood.

apostasy
[əˈpästəsē]
NOUN

1. the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief.

reify
[ˈrēəˌfī]
VERB
formal

1. make (something abstract) more concrete or real.

fecund
[ˈfekənd, ˈfēkənd]
ADJECTIVE

1. producing or capable of producing an abundance of offspring or new growth; fertile.

rococo
[rəˈkōkō, ˌrōkəˈkō]
ADJECTIVE

1. (of furniture or architecture) of or characterized by an elaborately ornamental late baroque style of decoration prevalent in 18th-century Continental Europe, with asymmetrical patterns involving motifs and scrollwork.

panoply
[ˈpanəplē]
NOUN

1. a complete or impressive collection of things.

alacrity
[əˈlakrədē]
NOUN

1. brisk and cheerful readiness.

zir
[ziər]
PRONOUN

1. used instead of “him” or “her” to refer to a person of unspecified or nonbinary gender previously mentioned or easily identified.
   

DETERMINER

1. belonging to or associated with a person of unspecified or nonbinary gender previously mentioned or easily identified.