The Curmudgeon Speaks

I admit I don’t wear a mask at all times when I am outdoors so this is a new expectation. I wonder if the “just do it” approach is intended to keep things simple. There is a new expectation that masks be worn outside.

I try to walk outside for exercise and I don’t wear a mask. We live a few blocks from a park and walking through the park offers an alternative to walking the streets (no sidewalks). City or not, I probably average crossing paths with less than a hand full of people on most outings and most would be on the other side of the street. The park actually generates the closest proximity as the paths are maybe 6 feet wide and I stay on the paths to avoid ice and snow.

I have very limited needs for socialization so I prefer to say hi as I pass rather than pause to complain about the Vikings or the cold. Walking is a great opportunity to listen to podcasts so I don’t like to walk with Cindy because she would probably want to talk and ruin my concentration. She also walks too fast. Again, speed is not conducive to concentration. Talking and fast walking – not good.

So, is my situation cause for concern or is the “all masked, all the time” suggestion just a way to communicate without complexity

This just out. Trump used Twitter to claim he will veto military funding unless Congress revokes Section 230. You don’t have to be a techie to appreciate the irony. Section 230 allows social media hosts cover from responsibility for the content users create. In other words, such providers are not considered publishers. Such providers are also allowed some freedom to act in good faith to control content the company feels is inappropriate for users. This is a tricky issue. For example, small and free, open source efforts would have to shut down rather than risk law suits larger and older companies might be willing to take on. For example, I would probably disable comments on my blogs rather than accept liability for moderation. Section 230 has been responsible for in large measure for the economic engine the Internet has become. My solution would be to require authenticated accounts so that an individual posting anything can be identified. This would be a challenge (think the process and cost of acquiring a passport) and ignores issues of retribution that anonymity limits. Maybe this is just another poorly thought through Trump threat. Twitter obviously did not prevent the threat from being circulated which does indicate that personal responsibility is not sufficient to assure productive use of the Internet.

I very seldom buy books sold as paper. These three are the exception and two were given to me as presents. The third was coauthored by a friend who writes crime fiction set in South Africa. I wanted a signed copy. This is it for the past year or so. I like reading the type of book that requires you to turn paper pages every now and then. The one thing I notice is that the type seems small. I am spoiled from being able to enlarge the type on an e-reader.

I divide the books I consume into two categories and this division only tangentially relates to whether the books are read from paper or a device. There are the books I read for enjoyment and the books I read for learning. Pleasure reading can either involve listening or seeing. Books I read for learning must involve seeing and using a device. A visual and digital approach is important for a couple of reasons. First, reading allows greater control than listening. Sometimes it is important to go slow or to repeat and this just doesn’t work well with an audio input. The digital approach allows me to highlight, annotate, and save this layered material independently of the original material. In retirement, I spend a lot of time reading and then writing. I think of the process as a matter of personal interpretation and condensation.

I understand that this is a different way to look at reading, but it is relevant to certain positions I take. An important issue for some might be that I think it appropriate for students to read from a device. I understand that some are critical and claim that comprehension is lower with this type of input. There are several reasons for this (lack of experience, easy distractibility) that I recognize, but here is my perspective. There is a difference between reading and studying. All text involves reading, but much of what we read we do not study. Reading to learn works best when the reader has the greatest control and can act on ideas for better understanding and to make use of information. The opportunity to highlight and take notes and then to use this material in the future either as ideas layered on the original content or as material stored separately involves a better approach to using information encountered through reading. Depending on your goals for reading you might want to consider some of these ideas.

I first posted these thoughts in 2017. Facebook reminds you of old posts from the past and I thought it worthwhile to remind myself and others of this topic. After the past four years, I think we are all now more aware and I hope more appreciative. Empathy is such a valuable characteristic and being honest with yourself about the uneven nature of life should be the initial step in shaping the attitudes that guide our behavior.

I did not grow into adulthood wealthy, but I was privileged.

– I was born white and male

– My parents were not wealthy when I was young, but they were committed to each other.  They were college educated and encouraged their children in whatever personal interests we had. I followed a career path they did not understand. Rather than object, they found money to expand my undergrad training so they were comfortable that I had a backup plan. My own goals worked out and the breadth of my preparation ended up being a benefit throughout my career.

– I found a lifelong partner who supported me and who shared professional interests that magnified whatever personal talents I had.

So many struggle because they do not benefit from such privileges. They deal with discrimination because of irrelevant personal characteristics that are of no consequence. They mature in an environment of turmoil or hardship that was not of their making. They miss out on a break here or there that may have eventually resulted in great opportunities. They are unable to connect with someone who allows them to achieve far more than they would have on their own.

I take some credit for the successes of my life. I also realize that pretty much every possible break went my way.

This time of Thanksgiving should be a time of reflection. We seem to be in a time of great turmoil and a willingness by many to ignore life’s privileges. I hope the inequities generated by privileges are not magnified through the decisions politicians make.

I have been toying with spending more time on social media alternatives to Facebook. I spent a great deal of time writing on Facebook during the Trump administration explaining my opposition to his behavior and Republican policies. I posted close to daily and as the election of 2020 approached several times a day. I wrote elsewhere as well, but all of my political activities were focused on Facebook and its larger user base.

I have explored alternatives to Facebook before, but my reasons had nothing to do with politics. My reasons include a) a concern that Facebook has grown far too large limiting the development of competitors because of the network effect and b) because I object to Facebook’s confirmation bias and emotion encouraging biases that it uses to increase attention to the platform.

I have explored several alternatives and I have been disappointed to discover that these platforms have decided to encourage a pro-Trump bias (MeWe and Parler) in what appears to be a desperate attempt to attract users who believe Facebook is anti-free speech and anti-conspiracy. I am interested in encouraging educational topics and the last thing I want is to spend time on platforms that have become a refuge for extremists with anarchist views of the world. I don’t see educators being attracted to MeWe if it gains this attention.

I will have to wait a few weeks until the aftermath of the election dies down and see what happens.

I would find it interesting to know how many hours I have spent on Facebook in the past 4.5 years. I do not regret this effort and did it out of a personal sense of duty whether justified or not. I felt a need to argue the values I hold in what I hope was a rational and factually based approach. I know my civility slipped from time to time, but I do have limits. My approach was to present my views linked to credible sources and to take the time to write rather than simply forward what others have generated or said. Others may have represented what I feel, but forwarding without personal effort does not signal commitment. 

Anyway, I intend to post far less content on Facebook. When I do, I would guess my posts will focus on issues and policies rather than what I consider the flawed values and selfishness of leadership. I miss discussing policy matters – equity, health care, education, climate decline, global awareness, and even net neutrality.

I have issues with Facebook, but I have spent so much time on this platform because of the presence of so many other people. If you have a message you want heard, you must go where the people are. The lack of participation in other social media outlets is a problem simply because monopolies limit innovation and offer the opportunity for manipulation. A competitive environment fights these limitations. Beyond these general objections, I see Facebook flawed by a double whammy. Individuals select those they follow AND Facebook applies the algorithmic selection of content to feed existing biases. Of the most common social media services, Twitter does not shape the sharing of the content shared by those selected. 

My preference would be for those wanting to share online to operate a personal blog and follow the blogs of others using RSS. This takes a little more work and I happen to think the commitment required is a good thing – it is a test of commitment. However, I have also been exploring alternate social media platforms as what I see as a professional responsibility. I have been cross-posting some blog content to learn about these alternatives and to offer content to build up the material these platforms can offer. My initial reaction has been that these platforms struggle to create the network necessary to reach the level necessary to motivate investment – meaning you have to see yourself contributing in the hope the future may bring benefits. 

Anyway, here are some options I urge others to try for at least six months or so. Take the same attitude I have described – work to build up the population and the body of content necessary to reach critical mass.

The following order is kind of ranked, but you should explore enough to make your own decisions.

WT:Social

MeWe

Liker – more liberal, but may level out after election

Parler – conservative, but may level out after election

Diaspora – this is a federated group that consists of multiple points of contact that share content as a public feed

In the last few days of October, the Senate Commerce Committee requested that the CEOs of major technology companies appear to defend their practices. Those on this committee representing the Democrats and Republicans had very different grievances they wanted to address. The Democrats were mainly focused on predatory practices taking advantage of the near monopolistic status of these companies. The Republicans focused on the concern that conservative voices were being silenced and were particularly irked by the lack of attention given to a recent story in the New York Post promoting a conspiracy theory involving the son of Presidential candidate Biden. In the time since, this story has pretty much disappeared. Twitter was singled out for the most intense attacks because they were ignoring the posts of the President and others attempting to share this story. Twitter CEO Dorsey claimed the post was being blocked because the content relied on hacked content violating its policies. Several days after this meeting Twitter did allow the sharing of this content.

Fast forward to election eve through today.

President Trump in response to disappointing vote counts has been tweeting accusations of improper voting procedures and vote counts. Twitter has again warned again against these tweets. The claims are not actually blocked as a viewer can click through the warning and view the claims made by the President. Twitter is also offering related information explaining the rules by which the election was held and the procedures by which votes are being counted.

Again, I am guessing some will be critical of Twitter’s behavior using some kind of free speech defense. I am guessing I could get away with making whatever claim I wanted in regard to the election. I have not tried submitting something I know to be factually inaccurate so I am just guessing, but I judge this to be the case from comments I observe when scrolling Twitter. Here is why I think the President should be treated differently. Protestors are converging on some of the locations where votes are being counted demanding that the counting of ballots be stopped. Counter-protesting demanding that all votes legally cast be counted are showing up. This situation is dangerous. My claims on this matter would generate very little attention and I would not have the standing resulting in people taking to the streets. The President is different and hence I agree with Twitter in blocking these yet to be validated claims.

At this point, any possible justification for blocking the counting of votes submitting under the rules established by the states with close elections has failed to be established. Counting any votes that might eventually be deemed to be in violation of state rules could later be deemed invalid. To stir up anger and division in this manner is dangerous and irresponsible.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act establishes two principles – social media sites are not responsible for the content posted by those outside the company and these companies can act in good faith to protect those who use the sites. Promoting potentially violent and illegal acts by the leader of a country would seem to qualify.

Section 230(c)(2) provides immunity from civil liabilities for information service providers that remove or restrict content from their services they deem “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected”, as long as they act “in good faith” in this action.

I agree with Tom Friedman’s assessment. However the election turns out, the Trump years have revealed the hidden ugliness in America. Some folks always knew it was there, but those of us who are white, privileged, and comfortable financially could pretend. Trump did not change his focus on division and selfishness and making these values evident over time did little to diminish his level of support. Biden offered a normal, if bland, but principled alternative and it is clear American values remain what they were only now more visible.

The Google doodle has a get out the vote message. Click the doodle for resources.

Conspiracy theories abound in the Trump era. I think we have reached the point at which we consider an award. It could be called the Hokey – kind of like the Hobie for college hockey, but awarded for a different type of accomplishment. The election is still a few days away and anything is possible, but as of today my vote for the Hokey would have to go to Tucker Carlson. If it were possible and I guess it is because this is my idea, Carlson deserves a double Hokey.

While this would be the first year for the Hokeys, we definitely need a Lifetime Achievement category. Experts in this area doubt Donald Trump has an equal in this category so if you bet you will get great odds on almost anyone else. Stay tuned.

Hokey of the year nominee