The Curmudgeon Speaks

When I was still working as a professor, I didn’t spend much time in the university library. I worked in my office or at what might seem strange to some in a campus coffee shop that was just across the street. I continue to do this even after I have retired.

My wife never complained about my coffee shop thing even though when we are staying in lake country I sometimes I now drive about 10 miles to my shop. “I have to go to work,” I say. It turns out that there is actually some benefit to this habit. I happened across this article describing what some call the coffee shop effect. It appears that the benefits of low-level noise and distraction seem a benefit to the creative process, but might not be the best environment for learning. Somehow, this makes sense to me.

Here are the abstracts from a couple of studies cited in the article. 

Mehta, R., Zhu, R., & Cheema, A. (2012). Is noise always bad? Exploring the effects of ambient noise on creative cognition. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 784-799.

This paper examines how ambient noise, an important environmental variable, can affect creativity. Results from five experiments demonstrate that a moderate (70 dB) versus low (50 dB) level of ambient noise enhances performance on creative tasks and increases the buying likelihood of innovative products. A high level of noise (85 dB), on the other hand, hurts creativity. Process measures reveal that a moderate (vs. low) level of noise increases processing difficulty, inducing a higher construal level and thus promoting abstract processing, which subsequently leads to higher creativity. A high level of noise, however, reduces the extent of information processing and thus impairs creativity.

Nielsen, E. G. (2015). The coffee shop effect: investigating the relationship between ambient noise and cognitive flexibility. (thesis)

This work suggests that noise may be beneficial for creativity but not for learning. Further research is needed to clarify the effect that ambient noise has on cognitive flexibility as it applies to other, non-learning-based tasks

Take the last trail to Markville and I will meet you at the station.

With my apologies to the Monkees who in 1966 had a hit with Last train to Clarksville.

Some are born to greatness, some achieve greatness, but some have greatness thrust upon them. 

I opened the Curmudgeon Hall of Fame nearly 10 years ago now. My goal was to recognize true greatness among my fellow curmudgeons.

My standards are extremely high and as the only member of the nomination and membership committee, I could come up with only one individual worthy of recognition as being at the pinnacle of our kind.

I spotted what until yesterday was the only member of the HOF while walking the streets of Kona, Hawaii. Yes, I have traveled extensively in pursuit of those deserving of membership. “Surf Shop Guy” as he will always be known to me exhibits the characteristics of the ideal curmudgeon. You can just tell at a glance.

Yesterday, I was watching the inauguration of President Biden. The camera panned the crowd and then I saw him. I knew in an instant I had found the second member of the Hall of Fame. Everything about this image shouted extraordinary curmudgeon.

Quickly I called the nomination and membership committee into session and I made a decision. I introduce the incomparable curmudgeon, Bernie Saunders, and I bestow on Bernie hallowed membership in the Hall of Curmudgeon Fame.

Writing blog posts can result in the strange paranoia experienced by every creative. Will there ever be another interesting idea to write about? Whether you consider what I write about interesting or not, I am describing the personal fear no ideas I find interesting will jump into my head.

I have learned that the world is interesting enough to fuel ideas forever so you just have to relax and sooner or later – whoomp, there it is.

Ham hocks

You may be aware of the concern many have that their social media is spying on them. That their devices – Echo or Siri or whatever – are watching and listening.

We had ham hocks and beans for dinner last night. We purchased a hog to help out a farmer in the early days of the pandemic and we are getting down to some of the components we don’t eat and never purchase. Cindy found these ham hocks buried in our freezer and found a recipe she prepared. The ham hocks and beans were great.

This morning I find this in my news feed. This simply seems too weird. I did not search to help Cindy find a recipe and we each have our own technology equipment. There must be some connection here I don’t understand.

Anyway, I have been shouting random things at the Echo when I get bored with what I am watching on television. Snickers! Mint and chocolate chip ice cream! Let’s see what will show up tomorrow.

Social media services have been blamed for many things. In my way of thinking, it is important to different the privacy/manipulation of what is viewed issue from the inappropriate content issue. Section 230 is most directly about the second issue.

The problem with inappropriate content is that the government and individuals want to have someone to blame when inappropriate content appears. It is easy to blame the social media companies as they are there and associated with what folks see. However, the source of the inappropriate content is not the social media company, but the individuals who have posted the content. Presently, these individuals are difficult to identify and this anonymity allowing freedom from legal responsibility is the core problem. It seems there are two possible remedies; a) a system that only allows content posts from authenticated users or b) some system of moderation.

I assume both systems are necessary. Anonymous posts allow individuals who believe they must remain anonymous to post without identification. A spouse hiding from someone intended them harm is a common example. Individuals persecuted by a government is another. Potentially, systems could be created such that the social host service could still require authentication, but not reveal this information to the public or to governments. There are reasons not to trust this option as perfect, but many cases could be covered in this manner.

Moderation implies that a representative of the social service reviews content before it is posted to the public. The size of this task in some companies and the willingness of companies to take on this responsibility are legitimate barriers. This would seem a task with a predictable failure rate that means it would require funding beyond the labor involved to cover legal fees and payments in the cases a judgement goes against the company. I see two options – perhaps the cost of moderation could be paid by users. This would require prepayment that would be drawn to compensate reviewers. The second alternative would be for the companies to make a reasonable financial allotment for moderation and the content requiring moderation would be addressed at the pace these individuals could get to the material.

Are these perfect solutions and would the solutions allow equitable access? No and not completely. Speed of presentation would be an issue. Addressing the funding issue would be a great job and service creator. Companies wanting to offer authentication services could be created. Moderators could be hired.

Authentication as a service exists. For example, any of us wanting to fly must take the responsibility for authentication. Participation in social media may appear trivial in comparison, but it seems likely some action will be mandated. To repeat something I keep saying – don’t expect free.

Anyone how feeds birds during the winter is probably aware of the squirrel problem. Squirrels find your feeder and seem to have unlimited appetites They monopolize access and the poor birds don’t get much of a chance. In my situation, the feeders are quickly emptied and I am often not available to refill.

There are various countermeasures you can deploy, but you quickly find that squirrels are pretty smart and very persistent. They can climb around barriers, jump much further than one would think, and they chew through plastic or wood to get at food. Inexpensive feeders simply do not stand up to the abuse.

I have found something that works, but it needs to be located in just the right location. The feeder below is what I use. There is an inner plastic container with openings for the birds and an outer cage made of wire. The wire cage moves so that too much weight on the cage causes it to slide down and if you examine the following picture closely you will see solid metal squares that then cover the openings to the food.

I found that this feeder works, but it must be located in a way that a squirrel cannot reach it while still able to have some of its weight supported by another object. In the picture that follows you can see a pole we originally intended to hold our feeders. However, a squirrel could partially support its weight using its back feet on the pole to keep the wire cage from sliding down. The present location does not allow any access to the feeder without hanging on the feeder and engaging the wire cage.

Following moving the feeder from the pole to the new location, one of the squirrels stood on the ledge of the window and stared at us for a long period of time. The evil eye. Guilt does not work with me. There is plenty of food on the ground for you.

This winter I face a challenge I have not experienced since retirement. No, it is not avoiding the pandemic, but it is related. I must stay in the great white north and cannot escape south or to Hawaii. We are now entering the part of the year that gets long and dreary. No holiday or festival on the horizon. Yes, we do get to inaugurate a new President and I might get my COVID shots and both will be positive events, but I am talking about the daily grind of cold and darkness, ice and snow as winter gets long.

We have been making investments in anticipation of the great weary. I have an Aerogarden to grow lettuce and tomatoes in my living room as a way to watch stuff that is green and growing. My other major purchase arrived today – size 13 IceBugs. We learned about IceBugs last year about this time and try as I might there were only size 12s available. I wear a size 14 shoe so a size 13 is a bit of a stretch (actually the opposite of a stretch). I could get them on fine and Cindy wanted to know how my toes felt. I could feel them so I am going to put the purchase on the line and walk in them.

IceBugs are something like gold shoes with very short cleats. Whatever I do, I must remember not to walk on our wooden floors.

The New Year brings many folks sharing their resolutions. Typical resolutions involve commitments to changes to eating, drinking, exercising, or the appreciation of life’s opportunities. These are all great areas of personal endeavor and I suppose I should attempt improvements in these areas as well. I notice a few folks have identified their social media habits and have made public commitments to change how or how much they use social media. Getting off Facebook or at least reducing engagement seems to be particularly common. Oddly, the folks seeing this as an area of life they should modify make the effort to announce their intentions on the platforms they intend to abandon.

I have thought about my own social media behavior and even before the end of the year I have begun to make some changes. I have used Facebook primarily for commenting on political issues and intend to add limited content after Biden is in office.

First, I remain an advocate for social media. When online technology began to emerge I saw it as a participatory opportunity for all less controlled by privilege and standing. Everyone could become part of the conversation. An interesting by-product of more open discussion is that we have learned some things about each other we probably did not want to know. We have learned that conversations before must have been tempered by  circumstance and shaped by present company and now we have witnessed attitudes that were previously hidden. What is that expression – when someone tells you who they really are, believe them the first time (Angelou). Let’s just assume that social media is experiencing some growing pains. Part of the negative reaction is due to limitations of the services – short comments are difficult to generate in a way that leaves open the possibility of misinterpretation (Twitter) and algorithms prioritize content more likely to push people’s buttons and encourage emotional reaction (Facebook). We also contribute in ways that could be improved. We are lazy and too often share with little investment explaining our reasoning (e.g., memes) or take positions of certaining without evidence beyond our own convictions. We want shares and likes, but are offended when someone comments to challenge a statement made. We act as if we did not really want to engage in a conversation. 

Resolutions? Here are some actions I will try to emphasize.

When reacting to Facebook posts (or posts on other social media sites), I will do more than like or share. It is important to say something and when appropriate offer evidence (link to reputable source).

I will generate more content for sources other than Facebook. I write blogs now, but I mean social sites other than Facebook. It would be best if this content was unique, but posting the same content in more places would be helpful. Options – Liker, MeWe, Wt:Social, Diaspora. Folks must make this commitment to overcome the network effect (the value of a site increases exponentially as a function of the number of contributors). 

I will challenge the ad model. I see two ways to do this. Spend some money to support other sites and content sources. For example, don’t rely on Facebook for news – pay for Apple+ to access newspapers and quality magazines, pay for New York Times online. Use an alternative ad revenue service that is not based so heavily on personal information. For example, Brave, will replace existing ads with ads it sells and this revenue can be used to support content creators visited. 

I will distribute my online activity to distribute the information collected about me. For example, assign different search engines to different browsers I use (Google, DuckDuckGo, Bing). Most searches don’t require the best search engine and one can also use Google if a search conducted with some other search engine doesn’t produce satisfactory results. I don’t use an ad blocker because this assumes I have a right to use services and consume content others work to generate without compensation to others. This is selfish and not a long-term way to encourage quality services and content.

I will comment on the posts of others. If social is to be participatory, this will not happen based only on posts and likes. Say something. Argue responsibly with logic and evidence. Explain your support when this seems useful. 

Since 2006, I have made use of a service that keeps track of all of the songs I listen to on my devices (computers, tablets, phone). I am guessing this captures 95% or so of everything I hear. The year by year summary chart offers an interesting way of understanding my life. You see a fairly large decrease in songs heard in 2014 and then a reversal this year.

When I was working, I would start my computer in the office in the morning and turn on the music. I would turn off the computer when I went home and then turn it back on when I read or wrote in the evening. I retired in 2014. I have continued to spend time reading on a device and writing, but not at the same level. I traveled more and I spent time doing other things. You can see that 2020 was a year not like the others. We did go to Hawaii, but then came home two weeks early and were far less mobile from that time until now.

What will this chart look like next year at this time. A couple more month of the same and then hopefully life will change.

For anyone who is interested in the data generated by your musical tastes, check out last.fm. It is interesting to track changing trends in your musical tastes, your all-time favorites, and comparisons to the others who use the service.