The Curmudgeon Speaks

There are those who believe those of us who teach in higher education are too liberal. While I would accept that college profs are more likely liberal than conservative, I have always attributed this “lean” to the topics covered and the personal motives for pursuing these careers. As a psychologist, I did not deviate from the topics I would normally cover to offer political observations, but if a topic, say digital equity, had a political aspect I also did not shy away from making what I felt were accurate observations.

K-12 educators work in a different world. I would assume that as educators they have similar values to college educators, but I know they feel greater pressure not to offer personal opinions even when such comments would be relevant to the topics being considered. This is not a topic I understand as an area of expertise, but I am curious. So, I found this post from the Fordham Institute of some interest. I have no information on the political leanings of the Fordham Institute, but I place some value in the designation of specific legal cases.

I have not encountered the expression “hired speech” before, but this is a phrase used to describe the interaction of teachers and their students. As I understand the phrase it implies that K12 educators are expected to stick to the designated curriculum while in their classrooms. The example in the article describes the political activism of a math teacher online and I got the feeling in his classroom. Despite the strong feelings of the instructor, the article argues his online behavior was appropriate, but any similar classroom behavior was not.

I encourage your reading of the content I link. I have been trying to decide when comments some might regard as political would be defensible. For example, what about climate change? This topic would certainly be consistent with topics taught in several high school classes. I cannot imagine a class in which the resistance of some politicians to the findings of the great majority of scientists would not come up. How about topics related to the meaning of the Constitution of Bill of Rights? How about some of the literature selected for English classes?

I encourage educators to participate in public online discussions. This communication is not directed specifically at their students and there are topics that educators view from a different perspective not necessarily appreciated by citizens with other backgrounds.

Google+ has been sunsetted and will be shut down in about 9 months. The idea of sunsetting is to allow users to abandon a service so they can’t complain about not being told the end is near. Most users abandon immediately leaving a few die hards to soldier on. Continue reading →

If you watch 60 Minutes, you likely saw the segment this past weekend dealing with data privacy. The piece described what is likely to be political pressure for Google, Facebook and other online services to change behavior that collects personal information. The link I provide references the first segments of this program and the first portion of this segment is the piece about online tech and privacy. The segment includes the pro-Privacy statement from Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, and a description of the GDPR privacy policy now enforced in Europe.

I have mixed reasons related to this pressure. I doubt anyone would be in favor of the misuse of their personal data and it seems clear that personal data played a role in manipulating personal opinions during the 2016 Presidential campaign. To react negatively to this situation, it is important to understand that your beliefs were “understood” based on your online behavior and you received experiences designed to influence your behavior while you were assuming you were receiving information that was unbiased. This political approach was based on the same approach taken to provide you ads related to your interests. I assume most would perceive the political manipulation as a bad thing and the targeted ads as a benefit. One point that concerns policy people is that in both cases you might not be aware of how things work.

What I found lacking in the interviews conducted by the 60-Minute staff, e.g., the interview with Tim Cook, was the failure to address the business model supporting these online services. Apple makes its money by selling computers, phones, and selling apps and content for these devices. Apple does not provide free services. Google, Facebook and other social media and online service providers offer free access which requires considerable infrastructure and expensive personnel. These services make their money on ads. To compete in providing ads that are more desirable, they collect personal information to provide “useful” ads. In addition, they may sell the information used to provide targeted ads to other parties. I am guessing most would conclude that it is this selling of information that is most troubling.

There is more to the business model sustaining the present environment than the service providers. Some of the money from the ads goes to content developers. The online companies pay content developers to include ads and businesses (and politicians in some cases) pay the online providers to use ads for their causes. The content creators are the often unrecognized parties in these disputes. You may assume Google and Facebook make too much money – too much instead of a reasonable return. This assumption ignores the work of the content producers and how they are compensated

This is certainly a complex situation and I wonder how carefully citizens and politicians have made the effort to understand. Legislation is probably warranted, but must be sophisticated enough to recognize the situation of all parties involved. The wrong message – you have been wronged and have the right to block ads – will eliminate compensation to professional content creators. We may be left with pictures of dogs, cats, babies and with content not paid for by consumers. Content paid for by others will likely be heavily dominated by those with an agenda. The agenda will often be to influence consumers in one way or another.

 

 

 

The Minneapolis has a high-end coffee culture with numerous specialty shops and roasters. Cindy and I enjoy exploring these locations as a way to find something to do when we get tired of watching MSNBC. We should start keeping a “life list” like the birders do. I discovered the “flat white” in Australia and the Turkish method in Russia. I now have a fancy maker that automatically produces flat whites and a not fancy “pot” for preparing Turkish coffee given to me by our Russian friends. In both cases, the original experiences were superior to what I can do myself.

We take one of the lists that are available and find a location we have not tried. So, there is the best in Minneapolis type list, but others as well. For example, there is a best coffee shop for studying list and a best coffee shop with free wifi list. I have not tried to find a coffee shop without wifi, but I am guessing they are very rare. Perhaps not having wifi has become a feature.

Spyhouse coffee appears on most of the lists. There are actually a number of Spyhouses, but all seem to be positively rated. I can’t remember is it coffee or wine that you look for “legs”. Wouldn’t you need a clear cup/glass?

No idea why Cindy looks so solemn here. She seems to be waiting patiently for something. We don’t perform any tasting rituals before we try the coffee. Maybe it is the delay while I get the picture I want.

I thought I should try to write one more post before the election of 2018. I understand that my efforts to explain likely reach very few that disagree with me, but this is the reality of social media. We tend to focus on those who think as we think.

My take on the political scene since 2016 is that the country elected a leader that appealed to individuals fears and self-centeredness. Trump was able to free feelings of resentment and mistreatment and to blame the “elites”, other countries, our country, and “others different from us” We have been cheated even though we are of great intelligence no matter the education we have or effort we have invested in learning. We have been cheated by other countries that have taken advantage of the softness of the United States. We have been cheated by others just assuming they can become citizens like us. We have been cheated by folks who just sponge off the government rather than work for what they need. We are more intelligent, more hard-working, more Christian, more honest, and as a consequence simply deserve more.

All of this is a convenient, but inaccurate reality justified by occasional anecdotal examples, self-serving bias, and ignorance. The truth is government oversight is necessary to deal with universal needs. Unbridled capitalism leads to tremendous advantages to those who already have and supports the development of the magnifier of stable families, inherited money, and a history of quality education and connections. Those without these advantages seldom overcome. They must rely on support so their children can be cared for when they work or attempt to go to school. The are unlikely to be able to afford the type of education necessary for most to escape low income careers. They find themselves in more difficult and unstable situations making a stable family situation, healthier life circumstances, and the learning opportunities in school and out that allow the children they have to not face the same predictors of lower opportunities.

This cycle is just the reality for those in this country. The potential immigrants that seem to raise such great fear face not only these circumstances but also violence beyond the comprehension of those who see them as an invading horde.

Most politicians likely have these advantages. Trump makes a great example of someone who denies and ignores so much. Much of his wealth and education can be attributed to what he inherited. He promotes fear of the other while marrying several immigrants from other countries and ignoring the chain migration that allowed the family members of these individuals to become citizens. He has declared bankruptcy multiple times taking advantage of government protections for those with failed businesses. He relies heavily on investments from other countries to fund his businesses. I have no idea what to make of these facts or the reality that the money he can access make legal challenges to his practices difficult for those who received no payment for their work or investment. My point is that there is a lack of sensitivity in his behavior that should have been created by his own experiences is a major character flaw among many character flaws.

When you vote, be thoughtful regarding your own life situation and the situations of others. If you don’t have a pre-existing condition, you are lucky. If you can send your kids to college, you are lucky. If you have a good job allowing you a reasonable income and a feeling of being meaningful, you are lucky. If you are a citizen of the United States, you are lucky.

I think we are in a unique and dangerous political situation in this country and I dispute those who try to dismiss what seems a very negative and divisive time as “politics as usual”.

I have no idea how to test my argument. I suppose that historians have a way or at least an informed opinion. I suppose there were times when physical fights broke out between politicians of different parties. Anyway, in my life time, I think we are in a unique time period.

I have been a blogger since 2002. I have written several thousand posts to my blogs and Facebook in this time period. I thought one way to evaluate my own impression would be to examine my writing on political issues during this time period. It would have been too much work to review all of these posts, but I did make the effort to look at all posts during the month of October which would provide some info on the run-up to elections and a comparison from off years. The values represent posts on “political” topics.

I am not sure everyone has reacted in this way, but my focus has definitely shifted to political topics.

Curmudgeons are introverts by nature. This does not mean we are bad people. It just means that being in the midst of lots of people who want to engage with us makes us uncomfortable. It is not really the number of people, it is the vulnerability of unpredictable access that is the problem.

Anyway, I found this t-short that explains just how this feels. It was brought to my attention by family members who are constantly witness to my weird personality. It takes some effort to understand. I can speak to hundreds of people in settings that intimidate most and prefer to sit on the sidelines at far smaller events rather than make small talk. For some reason, expressing ideas in writing is also easy. Unless I know people well, I prefer conversations on matters of substance. This does not mean I avoid people. I just prefer not to interact unless I have something to say.

Just remember – introverts are people too.

This is about the time of year when Cindy and I like to take the Ranger out on the trails to photograph the leaves. Actually, because of other obligations, we were a little late this year and missed the peak of the color. Still, riding through the woods of northern Wisconsin and Minnesota in the cool of autumn is, well, pretty cool.

The destination today was Markville. Yes, Mark was returning to Markville to see how this little backwoods village in Minnesota was doing. We are able to get to the trail system in Wisconsin from our lake home. After making our way to the nearest town, Danbury, we can pick up the Gandy Dancer . As I understand the meaning of Gandy Dancer, it refers to those who work on railroad tracks. As rail lines have changed over the years, many sections of track were no longer needed and some have been modified to serve as bike, snowmobile, and ATV trails.

Crossing the Saint Croix into Minnesota near Danbury, WI.

A couple of photographs along the Gandy Dancer.

Mark in Markville.

Our destination was the village of Markville, MN. We discovered this “town” a couple of years ago. It has no cafe, no gas station, and no bars. The no bars thing is really strange because bars along the trails in northern Wisconsin and Minnesota are a big thing. We did find remains of a bank building with the date of 1915. There was no post office, but a dropbox and boxes for residents. I should have taken a few more photos in what remains of the town. I am guessing the town was once a stop along the railroad.

This post was written in 2011. I am bringing it back because the vague claim of political candidates that they support the values of their state always annoys me. The 2011 post was written when I lived in North Dakota and was directed at candidate Rick Berg. Rick Berg won that election and is now challenging the incumbent to become a senator from the state. My negative reaction still holds. The annoyance about claiming the values of your state continues to annoy me in my new state of residence – Minnesota. The claim of common values sounds so great, but is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. It is general claim that “I think like you” so I must be the candidate you should vote for that is pretty much untestable.

I am reposting my comment from 2011 after reading the Cramer position on #metoo.

———-

Now freshman Congressman Rick Berg labeled his campaign with a phrase that annoyed me then and now. He urged citizens to vote in favor of North Dakota Values. It is really difficult to know just what that means or how the values of one state would be different from the values of another. I think it is one of those phrases intended to generate a sense of we vs. them – as in we are special and they are not. We have good values and they don’t.

The video accompanying the ads tended to portray the opponent, Democrat Earl Pomeroy, as having lost his North Dakota values. While Pomeroy has obviously done tremendous things for the state of North Dakota, he supposedly had fallen in with the politicians in Washington and lost touch with his North Dakota roots.

I have opinions about many political issues. I am what most would consider a liberal democrat. I understand what I am. There is one particular issue and one component of this issue that will get me upset enough to spend my time doing things like writing this post or contacting the politicians who represent me. I support a better approach to health care. I have particular concerns about the number of individuals with no health care and a personal concern with the way the healthcare industry treats those with pre-existing conditions. My wife has suffered through two bouts with breast cancer and has the genetic condition that is evaluated using bracanalysis. This is what might be called a pre-existing condition.When you propose it is fine for the health care industry to ignore pre-existing conditions I react to your position in a personal way. Succinctly, I think you are selfish and lucky enough not to have had to deal with some of the realities of life.

So, when Representative Berg voted to repeal the existing health care plan, I sent him an email explaining my wife’s situation and expressing my concern that he was not willing to address the problem of pre-existing conditions. BTW – my wife has health coverage, but this is because she cannot be denied as part of my plan. On her own, or when seeking coverage unique to her (e.g., long-term care insurance) she is out of what some would describe as LUCK. Representative Berg evidently is concerned that there is some relationship between the present health care approach and jobs which he explained on the house floor. I am not exactly sure I understand the connection between ignoring the uninsured, the problem of those who cannot acquire insurance, and jobs, but you are free to listen to his comments yourself.

I did not really expect him to reply directly to my concern – what would he say? I did expect one of his minions would send a response probably indicating that while the representative was sensitive to problems of those unable to purchase coverage, health care is a complex issue and he has to make decisions on what is best for the country. I could have generated the same blather, but I have yet to receive a response so I am not certain what his position is.

Back to the issue of North Dakota values.

What am I to think at this point? I noticed that Berg voted with the rest of Republicans on this issue. This looks pretty much like politics as usual to me. Politics is politics no matter how long you have been in Washington. Anyone surprised?

So, just what is the North Dakota position on health care. What values is Representative Berg now promoting? Really hard to say, but it looks from here like the Representative assumes North Dakotans support some kind of “I got mine, too bad for you” value system. We certainly are special.