My Facebook post from September 5 about various map projections has seemed to go, at least somewhat, viral. It's been forwarded 25 times and seen by around 15,000. At least that post is getting out and about. I set my preferences on Facebook so people, beyond just my friends list, can see what I share.
I also put things on this blog for a few more viewers not using Facebook and for archival use. I sometimes call Facebook the McDonalds of the internet. Hard to beat it's continued convenience and popularity. Nothing is perfect, but it can be a good tool. Some people don't like Facebook, but people also use oil companies and claim they don't like them either. I don't drive.
Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts
Monday, September 07, 2026
Saturday, August 22, 2026
In search of a good little radio for bicycle touring.
I found the best radio for my bicycling. Thinking I would have to buy from Amazon as radios are a rare item, web searching also directed me to REI, a local retail outlet where I could pick it up here in Bellingham.
People often say, "why not use the smartphone for everything?" Then they run down the battery trying to do everything.
For long trips, I find just an old fashioned radio is useful. It can play for hours preserving my phone battery for other things.
I just put the earphone into one ear as it's always good to use the other ear for traffic. This sometimes means cutting off one side of stereo earbuds.
REI is an outdoors and camping store so a durable simple radio fits their inventory. It's also on Amazon and other places, but most local retailing doesn't do much for obscure products like radios anymore.
Speaking of new technology, I also have an HD radio. I use that more at home. It gets special HD signals that old fashioned radios don't get. We have a few HD stations in this area. It's portable also, but I found out it's picky on what type of rechargeable batteries it takes.
The batteries it likes are digital themselves. They have electronics to stabilize their voltage output. The battery electronics creates so much static that my fancy new radio doesn't work on the AM band. It works okay on house current, however.
We live in a complex technological time, but I do find technology interesting; at least if one has some patience. Patience is in short supply in modern times.
Rechargeable batteries are better for the environment than throwaway batteries. I recently learned that rechargeable batteries put out less voltage than the throwaways. That's why my HD radio kept turning itself off with regular rechargeable batteries. I got some special batteries for it from Amazon (good luck finding them locally). Then I discovered the static problem.
I can use those rechargeable batteries in bike lights so all is not lost. My new radio just takes the regular old rechareable AA batteries, but it doesn't get the special HD signals. That's not a big loss.
First world problems, but not really. I hear that there are more smartphones than toilets in Africa. Technology can be complex, but people keep wanting it, or at least the prosperity it implies. AI helped me navigate the complexity of this situation.
Glad I at least have some patience and interest in this kind of stuff. The Prosperity, that people seek, provides these things. I still don't wish to open the Pandora's box of automobiles, however.
People often say, "why not use the smartphone for everything?" Then they run down the battery trying to do everything.
REI is an outdoors and camping store so a durable simple radio fits their inventory. It's also on Amazon and other places, but most local retailing doesn't do much for obscure products like radios anymore.
Speaking of new technology, I also have an HD radio. I use that more at home. It gets special HD signals that old fashioned radios don't get. We have a few HD stations in this area. It's portable also, but I found out it's picky on what type of rechargeable batteries it takes.
The batteries it likes are digital themselves. They have electronics to stabilize their voltage output. The battery electronics creates so much static that my fancy new radio doesn't work on the AM band. It works okay on house current, however.
We live in a complex technological time, but I do find technology interesting; at least if one has some patience. Patience is in short supply in modern times.
Rechargeable batteries are better for the environment than throwaway batteries. I recently learned that rechargeable batteries put out less voltage than the throwaways. That's why my HD radio kept turning itself off with regular rechargeable batteries. I got some special batteries for it from Amazon (good luck finding them locally). Then I discovered the static problem.
I can use those rechargeable batteries in bike lights so all is not lost. My new radio just takes the regular old rechareable AA batteries, but it doesn't get the special HD signals. That's not a big loss.
First world problems, but not really. I hear that there are more smartphones than toilets in Africa. Technology can be complex, but people keep wanting it, or at least the prosperity it implies. AI helped me navigate the complexity of this situation.
Glad I at least have some patience and interest in this kind of stuff. The Prosperity, that people seek, provides these things. I still don't wish to open the Pandora's box of automobiles, however.
Friday, August 07, 2026
My experiment with an AI assisted cartoon.
Here is what I got. Not bad, but I added a few things and altered the layout a bit using my old graphics program called Neopaint. AI generated what's in black while I added what's in red.
Then I ask, "how much power does it take to generate this image?" It takes about as much a it takes to charge a smartphone. More than just asking a simple question as image generation takes more power. Video generation takes much more power.
Really, not that much except that so many people are using AI, that's a lot of smartphones charging. Still not a lot compared to heating and cooling a home or driving a car; my favorite nemesis.
Sunday, July 12, 2026
I tend to only use Facebook from a desktop. Not while distracted on the go.
I basically only use Facebook from a desktop computer. It's not that I don't want it on my phone, but it seems to always come up in Spanish on my phone. I tried to fix that once and English came back for a while. Then it went to Spanish again.
I don't multitask and use Facebook on the go anyway. I like to focus on deeper thinking so I prefer a desktop in my quiet apartment.
I don't multitask and use Facebook on the go anyway. I like to focus on deeper thinking so I prefer a desktop in my quiet apartment.
Friday, July 10, 2026
Tips I got from Google AI for saving energy on the servers when I ask that question.
I use AI like a personal tutor. Still I think about how much energy it uses, so I ask Google AI. It provided tips which I'll share.
You can significantly lower the server-side energy consumption of your desktop AI sessions by adopting a few highly effective habits:
1. The "One Topic, One Chat" Rule.
If you keep using a single, massive chat thread for weeks, every single new question you type forces the server to re-read the entire history from day one just to answer a simple question.
The Green Solution: Start a fresh chat thread every time you switch topics or finish a task. A short, clean thread takes a fraction of the computational energy to process compared to a sprawling, 20-page archive.
2. Condense and Prompt Efficiently.
Sending dozens of rapid-fire, single-sentence follow-up questions keeps the server constantly recalculating.
The Green Solution: Take an extra moment to bundle your thoughts into one comprehensive, well-structured prompt. Fewer server requests translate directly to less electricity used.
3. Archive Locally.
Clicking back into old threads just to read or reference information you talked about last week triggers the server-side context reloading process.
The Green Solution: Once a conversation yields a piece of code, a piece of writing, or a breakdown you want to keep, use the Export to Google Docs feature. Reading that data from Google Docs or a local text file uses virtually zero computational power compared to waking up an LLM.
4. Rely on Search Engines for Simple Facts.
Asking an AI "What is the capital of France?" or "When does the local post office close?" forces a massive neural network to fire billions of connections just to give you a static fact.
The Green Solution: For straightforward lookups, direct links, or simple facts, a traditional web search is significantly more energy-efficient than generating text via an AI model.
---
Now I'll add that I mostly use AI for text based research. I also gather that image rendering, music and other uses use quite a bit more power for the AI servers; especially video rendering.
You can significantly lower the server-side energy consumption of your desktop AI sessions by adopting a few highly effective habits:
1. The "One Topic, One Chat" Rule.
If you keep using a single, massive chat thread for weeks, every single new question you type forces the server to re-read the entire history from day one just to answer a simple question.
The Green Solution: Start a fresh chat thread every time you switch topics or finish a task. A short, clean thread takes a fraction of the computational energy to process compared to a sprawling, 20-page archive.
2. Condense and Prompt Efficiently.
Sending dozens of rapid-fire, single-sentence follow-up questions keeps the server constantly recalculating.
The Green Solution: Take an extra moment to bundle your thoughts into one comprehensive, well-structured prompt. Fewer server requests translate directly to less electricity used.
3. Archive Locally.
Clicking back into old threads just to read or reference information you talked about last week triggers the server-side context reloading process.
The Green Solution: Once a conversation yields a piece of code, a piece of writing, or a breakdown you want to keep, use the Export to Google Docs feature. Reading that data from Google Docs or a local text file uses virtually zero computational power compared to waking up an LLM.
4. Rely on Search Engines for Simple Facts.
Asking an AI "What is the capital of France?" or "When does the local post office close?" forces a massive neural network to fire billions of connections just to give you a static fact.
The Green Solution: For straightforward lookups, direct links, or simple facts, a traditional web search is significantly more energy-efficient than generating text via an AI model.
---
Now I'll add that I mostly use AI for text based research. I also gather that image rendering, music and other uses use quite a bit more power for the AI servers; especially video rendering.
Wednesday, July 08, 2026
Is using AI cheating today? I remember when using the encyclopidia, for writing a term paper was considered lazy.
Like Facebook and other things, AI can be a useful tool. It's also a fad right now being pushed, in part, by its potential as a cash cow to our money addicted society. It's both loved and hated.
In some ways, it's just glorified reference books. Websites, like Webmd offered well organized FAQs before AI. Before that, there were reference books in the library. Some materials have been well organized for easy reference. Other writing and website designs are more complicated to navigate and find what one wants.
AI speeds up that process even more. I'm sure it has other uses, but answering questions is a big feature. Some answers may not be accurate, but that's the same with any media.
I remember, during my school days, teachers would often have you write a term paper. They would sometimes say, "Don't use the encyclopedia." That was considered too easy, almost like cheating. They wanted people to read through other books and magazines to learn how to fish out information the hard way, so to speak.
In some ways, it's just glorified reference books. Websites, like Webmd offered well organized FAQs before AI. Before that, there were reference books in the library. Some materials have been well organized for easy reference. Other writing and website designs are more complicated to navigate and find what one wants.
AI speeds up that process even more. I'm sure it has other uses, but answering questions is a big feature. Some answers may not be accurate, but that's the same with any media.
I remember, during my school days, teachers would often have you write a term paper. They would sometimes say, "Don't use the encyclopedia." That was considered too easy, almost like cheating. They wanted people to read through other books and magazines to learn how to fish out information the hard way, so to speak.
Wednesday, July 01, 2026
Is AI a better tutor? AI to the rescue when the time of professionals becomes a scarce commodity.
AI seems like it can be good at one on one individual tutoring. Yes, it's good to have redundant ways to fact check. Still, AI has time when lots of professionals advisors are too busy.
I had a conversation with someone who had recently graduated from college. I was amazed how hard she said it was to get an appointment with her faculty advisor. Advisement was sometimes booked out over a month.
I don't remember that being a problem during my college years. Faculty advisors and other faculty were easily available. I had many an informal conversation in faculty offices. If I needed something signed or an official consultation, it was easy to make an appointment within a day or two.
I assumed that would still be the case, but maybe not. How long does it take to get an appointment with a doctor? I can see why people go to AI for advice.
I had a conversation with someone who had recently graduated from college. I was amazed how hard she said it was to get an appointment with her faculty advisor. Advisement was sometimes booked out over a month.
I don't remember that being a problem during my college years. Faculty advisors and other faculty were easily available. I had many an informal conversation in faculty offices. If I needed something signed or an official consultation, it was easy to make an appointment within a day or two.
I assumed that would still be the case, but maybe not. How long does it take to get an appointment with a doctor? I can see why people go to AI for advice.
Sunday, June 28, 2026
AI and other new technologies are often a boom to consumers, but a mixed bag for workers.
There is worry that we are in an AI bubble. Could it burst?
Through most of my life, new technologies, from automated factories to the internet, have brought a plethora of useful and sometimes free things for the consumer. This has not always been a blessing for workers.
During these decades, asset values have also gone way up compared to most wages. Assets like land, homes and stocks have appreciated so much in value that there is a lot of loose money, around the world, looking for lucrative parking spots. This vast amount of private capital drives a lot of investment in emerging technologies, such as AI.
There is great pressure to keep up with the Joneses. Everything from keeping up at work to the US feeling pressure to keep up with China has created a pressure cooker that leaves many workers behind.
In past decades, such as the 1970s and 80s, automation and globalization in manufacturing brought more abundance for consumers, but also brought layoffs and the hollowing out of high paid manufacturing employment to many communities.
The internet boom of the 1990s brought many low cost and free services to consumers. We have free long distance phone calls and 24-7 banking from home without having to conform to banking hours. We have social media as well as millions of websites and media channels at our fingertips. These blessings have been more dubious for workers and in the long run for consumers as well. Since consumers are often also workers, lower wages effect consumers as well.
The benefits of online services has brought the cost of more surveillance. There are algorithms pushed by the need for clicks so advertising can pay the bills. From this we get echo chambers of similar belief as well as what's called "manufactured outrage."
Now we have the AI boom, also driven by a desire to keep up, plus all that private capital, from rising asset values, looking for lucrative places to park money. Huge fortunes drives the AI buildout.
Consumers are now seemingly benefiting from the free AI services while workers fear the loss of control over the fruits of their intellect. Admittedly, I use AI quite a bit as it sorts through lots of reading saving me time as I research and fact check for my own writing. In the past, teachers often didn't have the time to provide individualized instruction for people, like me.
Yes, I know, AI can make mistakes.
AI can benefit the user providing personalized services, such as teaching, tutoring and counselling, while Professional services, from humans, can cost a pretty penny and have been subject to budget cuts.
Still, this comes with hidden costs and consequences that we can't predict for the long run, let alone the moment.
Behind these buildouts, whether it's been automation in factories, internet technology, or the most recent rush to AI, is the question of whether the whole thing is sustainable. Will AI ever make a profit, or will the bubble burst and lead to a panic?
Will there ever be a sustainable business model of paying consumers and workers, with livable wages, for continuing these business models into the future?
These are questions that we keep needing to ask?
Through most of my life, new technologies, from automated factories to the internet, have brought a plethora of useful and sometimes free things for the consumer. This has not always been a blessing for workers.
During these decades, asset values have also gone way up compared to most wages. Assets like land, homes and stocks have appreciated so much in value that there is a lot of loose money, around the world, looking for lucrative parking spots. This vast amount of private capital drives a lot of investment in emerging technologies, such as AI.
There is great pressure to keep up with the Joneses. Everything from keeping up at work to the US feeling pressure to keep up with China has created a pressure cooker that leaves many workers behind.
In past decades, such as the 1970s and 80s, automation and globalization in manufacturing brought more abundance for consumers, but also brought layoffs and the hollowing out of high paid manufacturing employment to many communities.
The internet boom of the 1990s brought many low cost and free services to consumers. We have free long distance phone calls and 24-7 banking from home without having to conform to banking hours. We have social media as well as millions of websites and media channels at our fingertips. These blessings have been more dubious for workers and in the long run for consumers as well. Since consumers are often also workers, lower wages effect consumers as well.
The benefits of online services has brought the cost of more surveillance. There are algorithms pushed by the need for clicks so advertising can pay the bills. From this we get echo chambers of similar belief as well as what's called "manufactured outrage."
Now we have the AI boom, also driven by a desire to keep up, plus all that private capital, from rising asset values, looking for lucrative places to park money. Huge fortunes drives the AI buildout.
Consumers are now seemingly benefiting from the free AI services while workers fear the loss of control over the fruits of their intellect. Admittedly, I use AI quite a bit as it sorts through lots of reading saving me time as I research and fact check for my own writing. In the past, teachers often didn't have the time to provide individualized instruction for people, like me.
Yes, I know, AI can make mistakes.
AI can benefit the user providing personalized services, such as teaching, tutoring and counselling, while Professional services, from humans, can cost a pretty penny and have been subject to budget cuts.
Still, this comes with hidden costs and consequences that we can't predict for the long run, let alone the moment.
Behind these buildouts, whether it's been automation in factories, internet technology, or the most recent rush to AI, is the question of whether the whole thing is sustainable. Will AI ever make a profit, or will the bubble burst and lead to a panic?
Will there ever be a sustainable business model of paying consumers and workers, with livable wages, for continuing these business models into the future?
These are questions that we keep needing to ask?
Monday, May 18, 2026
As CBS crumbles, the internet provides more platforms where talent and freedom of speech still thrive.
Corporate powers have decided to end CBS Radio News. Our local affiliate, KGMI, has switched to ABC Radio News.
Sometimes I liked listening to John Batchelor's CBS Eye on the world. Though it was a bit conservative (I am open minded) I learned a lot about the workings of the economy from his interviews. Now, like so many things, his show survives on the internet. We live in an era of diversity on the internet. Lots of things taken off traditional media may even have more followers on YouTube.
Yes, the billionaire tycoons run much of traditional media as well as the social media platforms, but the platforms are a bit different. Diversity of opinion can still thrive.
Traditional media used to always say that the newsroom and editorial staff had a "firewall" between them and the sales department. News and opinion could be objective from being bought, supposedly.
Looks like the billionaires do try and run everything, including government, but freedom of speech still finds its way.
RIP CBS Radio, at least, and maybe eventually CBS TV? Oh, I didn't say that did I?
Sometimes I liked listening to John Batchelor's CBS Eye on the world. Though it was a bit conservative (I am open minded) I learned a lot about the workings of the economy from his interviews. Now, like so many things, his show survives on the internet. We live in an era of diversity on the internet. Lots of things taken off traditional media may even have more followers on YouTube.
Yes, the billionaire tycoons run much of traditional media as well as the social media platforms, but the platforms are a bit different. Diversity of opinion can still thrive.
Traditional media used to always say that the newsroom and editorial staff had a "firewall" between them and the sales department. News and opinion could be objective from being bought, supposedly.
Looks like the billionaires do try and run everything, including government, but freedom of speech still finds its way.
RIP CBS Radio, at least, and maybe eventually CBS TV? Oh, I didn't say that did I?
Tuesday, April 28, 2026
AI has time to work with individuals while people often don't have the time. That's a good thing, but AI has downsides as well.
I'm sure there are both good and bad things coming from the advent of AI technology.
One potentially good thing is that AI has more time to interact with individuals. Many of the people, who's job involves interacting with the public, seem to be overwhelmed and don't have the time; for instance teachers, counselors, doctors and politicians. AI can answer questions and carry on a conversation with each individual.
I use Google AI quite a bit to answer questions. Some of the questions are medical. Others are fact checking of historic news events.
I often use the news, I remember from the past years, in my own writing. My own memory is pretty good, but I don't remember the details exactly. AI can factcheck my own thinking.
I realize that AI isn't always accurate as in "garbage in, garbage out." Still, much of it's input is curated and Google AI includes citations to its sources. Many sources, such as Wikipedia and articles written by professional journalists, are cited. I can fact check the AI. Reputable publications in science and medicine are also cited.
There's lots of snake oil sales and fake news on the internet that people fall for, but AI doesn't seem to bring that up. Part of that is possibly being driven by the way I use the AI as I already have a scientific background.
AI tends to answer my questions by condensing pages and pages of writing that I don't necessarily take time to read through. Yes, I could research those things, myself, but I tend to spend more time on my bicycle than reading through many books and articles. I do read some, but I'm not a bookworm.
Nowadays, lots of quality writing is going behind thousands of paywalls. AI can provide information without me having to subscribe to thousands of publications.
I also use AI to critique some of my own writing. It seems to work good for grammar, clarity and organization.
I've found that some of my own writing tends to ramble over so many topics that people can find it confusing. AI has caught that and the two of us have had dialog about it. Most people wouldn't have time for that. I don't always agree with everything the AI is saying, but at least I'm learning and having the conversations. Real people are often too busy or distracted, though I do have lots of friends. I'm actually quite social with real people.
I think one of the biggest problems with AI is simply the human problem of greed. AI is being pushed as an economic engine to prosperity. There is also the US push to try and stay ahead of China. This haste, to development, could be dangerous.
There seems to be no end to the hunger for money, so people can earn their livings in an increasingly expensive world. There are so many needs, from charity to public safety to national defense that are crying out for funding.
Like any tool. AI has both its good and bad sides The main problem is how we humans, who are still in the driver's seat (at least for now) are pushing it forward.
* AI stands for Artificial Intelligence.
One potentially good thing is that AI has more time to interact with individuals. Many of the people, who's job involves interacting with the public, seem to be overwhelmed and don't have the time; for instance teachers, counselors, doctors and politicians. AI can answer questions and carry on a conversation with each individual.
I use Google AI quite a bit to answer questions. Some of the questions are medical. Others are fact checking of historic news events.
I often use the news, I remember from the past years, in my own writing. My own memory is pretty good, but I don't remember the details exactly. AI can factcheck my own thinking.
I realize that AI isn't always accurate as in "garbage in, garbage out." Still, much of it's input is curated and Google AI includes citations to its sources. Many sources, such as Wikipedia and articles written by professional journalists, are cited. I can fact check the AI. Reputable publications in science and medicine are also cited.
There's lots of snake oil sales and fake news on the internet that people fall for, but AI doesn't seem to bring that up. Part of that is possibly being driven by the way I use the AI as I already have a scientific background.
AI tends to answer my questions by condensing pages and pages of writing that I don't necessarily take time to read through. Yes, I could research those things, myself, but I tend to spend more time on my bicycle than reading through many books and articles. I do read some, but I'm not a bookworm.
Nowadays, lots of quality writing is going behind thousands of paywalls. AI can provide information without me having to subscribe to thousands of publications.
I also use AI to critique some of my own writing. It seems to work good for grammar, clarity and organization.
I've found that some of my own writing tends to ramble over so many topics that people can find it confusing. AI has caught that and the two of us have had dialog about it. Most people wouldn't have time for that. I don't always agree with everything the AI is saying, but at least I'm learning and having the conversations. Real people are often too busy or distracted, though I do have lots of friends. I'm actually quite social with real people.
I think one of the biggest problems with AI is simply the human problem of greed. AI is being pushed as an economic engine to prosperity. There is also the US push to try and stay ahead of China. This haste, to development, could be dangerous.
There seems to be no end to the hunger for money, so people can earn their livings in an increasingly expensive world. There are so many needs, from charity to public safety to national defense that are crying out for funding.
Like any tool. AI has both its good and bad sides The main problem is how we humans, who are still in the driver's seat (at least for now) are pushing it forward.
* AI stands for Artificial Intelligence.
Wednesday, April 22, 2026
Bailing out the ocean with a teacup.
It may seem like commenting on world issues is futile; like trying to bail out the ocean with a teacup. My mom used to say that, when describing an overwhelming task.
Still, I do enjoy sharing ideas so at least it's therapeutic and could be helpful.
I am starting to learn a new platform called Substack. At first, it seemed like just redundant to my blog with little momentum of audience, for me at least. Like reinventing an already existing wheel, but I have found a feature that my blog doesn't have. Substack Notes.
The reason why it's different is that it links to articles in other media, like Facebook does. It provides a thumbnail image from the media source similar to Facebook, but can be seen on the open web.
Facebook is still more of a "membership only" platform, yet it has the momentum of interaction that's lacking on other platforms, unless one is a celebrity.
If one is not a celebrity, for instance, having your own thing like Truth Social isn't likely. That's Trump's bully pulpit. Yes, most of you will groan. Mediocrity does seem to rise to the top.
As for fame and fortune, I sometimes am a bit envious of folks who are being chased by reporters with microphones and cameras.
Still, it's good to have more privacy; the privacy of being a nobody. These things are always tradeoffs.
My Substack Notes works well for linking to articles in other media with my own introductions. I just started it today. By the way, it happens to be Earth Day 2026.
My website is a repository for my own writing and photography.
Sorry. Your eyes are probably glossed over by now.
Still, I do enjoy sharing ideas so at least it's therapeutic and could be helpful.
I am starting to learn a new platform called Substack. At first, it seemed like just redundant to my blog with little momentum of audience, for me at least. Like reinventing an already existing wheel, but I have found a feature that my blog doesn't have. Substack Notes.
The reason why it's different is that it links to articles in other media, like Facebook does. It provides a thumbnail image from the media source similar to Facebook, but can be seen on the open web.
Facebook is still more of a "membership only" platform, yet it has the momentum of interaction that's lacking on other platforms, unless one is a celebrity.
If one is not a celebrity, for instance, having your own thing like Truth Social isn't likely. That's Trump's bully pulpit. Yes, most of you will groan. Mediocrity does seem to rise to the top.
As for fame and fortune, I sometimes am a bit envious of folks who are being chased by reporters with microphones and cameras.
Still, it's good to have more privacy; the privacy of being a nobody. These things are always tradeoffs.
My Substack Notes works well for linking to articles in other media with my own introductions. I just started it today. By the way, it happens to be Earth Day 2026.
My website is a repository for my own writing and photography.
Sorry. Your eyes are probably glossed over by now.
Wednesday, March 18, 2026
AI can engage in discussions that most professionals, in fields of expertise, don't have time to discuss with me.
I recently had a productive conversation, with Google AI, about cosmology. Experts, in the field, usually don't have the time to converse with me. AI can discuss and critique some of my educated speculation on various topics. I have plenty of friends, but most "professionals" just don't have time to deal with lengthy conversations outside their limited circles of colleagues.
I have also used AI to answer questions and do some fact checking. It seems to be able to cut through piles of reading, saving me time, to answer a question.
I've had it critique some of my writing for clarity as well. I'm old enough to remember a time when there wasn't even spellcheckers.
My spelling was terrible before spellcheckers. Teachers would say that evaluating my work was like looking at intelligence through the dirty window of poor spelling and sloppy writing. Even the typewriter has been an innovation.
I'm sure AI has it's downsides as well.
As for power consumption, I'd guess that systems, like Google, don't have to think up an answer each time a question is asked. People, like me, who have speculative ideas, are asking these questions all the time. The system, probably finds it's answers to the questions and repeats the answer it's already given to others. There are millions of people asking questions all the time.
My speculations, about things in cosmology and other topics, are not necessarily unique. I'm always learning, even before AI, that others, including "experts," have come up with the same ideas before.
Much of the value of tools, such as AI, social media and even our transportation devices, is about how we are using them. We can be using them for harm or for good.
I have also used AI to answer questions and do some fact checking. It seems to be able to cut through piles of reading, saving me time, to answer a question.
I've had it critique some of my writing for clarity as well. I'm old enough to remember a time when there wasn't even spellcheckers.
My spelling was terrible before spellcheckers. Teachers would say that evaluating my work was like looking at intelligence through the dirty window of poor spelling and sloppy writing. Even the typewriter has been an innovation.
I'm sure AI has it's downsides as well.
As for power consumption, I'd guess that systems, like Google, don't have to think up an answer each time a question is asked. People, like me, who have speculative ideas, are asking these questions all the time. The system, probably finds it's answers to the questions and repeats the answer it's already given to others. There are millions of people asking questions all the time.
My speculations, about things in cosmology and other topics, are not necessarily unique. I'm always learning, even before AI, that others, including "experts," have come up with the same ideas before.
Much of the value of tools, such as AI, social media and even our transportation devices, is about how we are using them. We can be using them for harm or for good.
Friday, March 06, 2026
Spellcheckers that are now taken for granted have made a big difference in accessibility.
In response to a recent article about an alarming rate of college students claiming to need accommodation for disabilities I wrote:
When I was in school, my spelling was terrible. My professors informally gave me accommodation before that terminology became widespread. They just let me pass, in-spite of all the spelling errors.
Since then, I've learned that I was dyslectic and probably on the autism spectrum, though not officially diagnosed. Also, since then, has come the advent of spellcheckers. Autocorrect is something people take for granted these days. They have been a godsend for me.
In college, realized that the job market of resumes would be less accommodating than school. It was called the "real world." I settled for being a custodian with a college degree as my financial needs were moderate. People sometimes called me a gifted janitor.
My creative thinking has gone into my avocations online and so forth. I still feel like I've had a happy life even though not fitting traditional expectations.
Since then, I've learned that I was dyslectic and probably on the autism spectrum, though not officially diagnosed. Also, since then, has come the advent of spellcheckers. Autocorrect is something people take for granted these days. They have been a godsend for me.
In college, realized that the job market of resumes would be less accommodating than school. It was called the "real world." I settled for being a custodian with a college degree as my financial needs were moderate. People sometimes called me a gifted janitor.
My creative thinking has gone into my avocations online and so forth. I still feel like I've had a happy life even though not fitting traditional expectations.
A future world with far less obligatory need to find work.
I saw an article recently from Fortune Magazine that said, OpenAI investor Vinod Khosla predicts today’s 5-year-olds won’t ever need to get jobs thanks to AI.
There are still big dreams about the future. “People will still work on the things they want to work on, not because they need to work.” I'm sure there's a downside to this, but it does make me somewhat envious of 5 year old kids.
My envy of youth could be a sign of optimism about the future, but maybe I shouldn't be envious. Looking at my own life, work was kind of an afterthought for me. Not being as motivated by money, family obligations, or car expenses, my working career was pretty laid back. Much of my energy went into unpaid interests, writing, photography and bicycle touring. For the most part, I did what I wanted to do during my working life which was not that much different than my life in retirement.
While some people found their jobs gratifying and felt they made important contributions to society, others felt like they worked their assess off and ended up with little to show for it. My job didn't take a lot out of me and I felt that it made a valuable contribution to society, in a modest way at least. I worked on the custodial crew. Not necessarily a job of fame and fortune, but meditative and friendly at least. I liked the organization I was working for, the YMCA.
There are still big dreams about the future. “People will still work on the things they want to work on, not because they need to work.” I'm sure there's a downside to this, but it does make me somewhat envious of 5 year old kids.
My envy of youth could be a sign of optimism about the future, but maybe I shouldn't be envious. Looking at my own life, work was kind of an afterthought for me. Not being as motivated by money, family obligations, or car expenses, my working career was pretty laid back. Much of my energy went into unpaid interests, writing, photography and bicycle touring. For the most part, I did what I wanted to do during my working life which was not that much different than my life in retirement.
While some people found their jobs gratifying and felt they made important contributions to society, others felt like they worked their assess off and ended up with little to show for it. My job didn't take a lot out of me and I felt that it made a valuable contribution to society, in a modest way at least. I worked on the custodial crew. Not necessarily a job of fame and fortune, but meditative and friendly at least. I liked the organization I was working for, the YMCA.
Tuesday, March 03, 2026
When oppressed people around the world cry out for help, what can we do?
Fighting is usually not a good way to improve the human condition. Since WWII, the US has tried using war as a tool to liberate people from oppression. The plans seem to fail most of the time.
While most Americans have a certain amount of human rights, parts of the world are enslaved in authoritarian regimes like in Iran. There may be better ways through foreign aid, education and communication, such as the availability of internet access, to melt oppression. Voice of America broadcasts are good, but Trump has cut funding for that. Military intervention seems to seldom work and is a lot more expensive.
In our collective memory is the liberation of Germany and Japan after our victory in WWII. Since then, our attempts to repeat that have not been that successful. Our second invasion of Iraq to "liberate" the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein brought chaos and continued autocracy. I fear that bombing Iran may not help the people overcome that theocracy.
Often people do look to the US for help, however. In the 1990s, there was an intertribal genocide in Rwanda. I remember hearing about that in the news. We mostly stayed out of that and many people died. In other cases, we have tried to intervene, especially if world oil supply and economic interests are in question.
Are there good strategies for promoting democracy around the world?
We are certainly affected by the lack of democracy in other countries as many folks, trying to escape oppression, come knocking on our borders as well as the borders of most democracies, such as Canada and UK. The recent reaction, in many democracies, is to tighten borders; especially when world migration becomes overwhelming to our infrastructure.
Is there enough housing? Is there enough water in the drought stricken Colorado River to meet the need of growing population in that area? One thing we don't hear much about now is the drought in much of Iran. Climate change and local mismanagement, by Iranian authorities, has created a water crisis. Could innovative ways to address these problems help more than going to war?
Even here at home, mismanagement of our economy is evident. We have a president who wants to rededicate USA to fossil fuels. The world may be turning more violent and authoritarian, rather than smarter in addressing the changes that we need for a better and more sustainable future.
While most Americans have a certain amount of human rights, parts of the world are enslaved in authoritarian regimes like in Iran. There may be better ways through foreign aid, education and communication, such as the availability of internet access, to melt oppression. Voice of America broadcasts are good, but Trump has cut funding for that. Military intervention seems to seldom work and is a lot more expensive.
In our collective memory is the liberation of Germany and Japan after our victory in WWII. Since then, our attempts to repeat that have not been that successful. Our second invasion of Iraq to "liberate" the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein brought chaos and continued autocracy. I fear that bombing Iran may not help the people overcome that theocracy.
Often people do look to the US for help, however. In the 1990s, there was an intertribal genocide in Rwanda. I remember hearing about that in the news. We mostly stayed out of that and many people died. In other cases, we have tried to intervene, especially if world oil supply and economic interests are in question.
Are there good strategies for promoting democracy around the world?
We are certainly affected by the lack of democracy in other countries as many folks, trying to escape oppression, come knocking on our borders as well as the borders of most democracies, such as Canada and UK. The recent reaction, in many democracies, is to tighten borders; especially when world migration becomes overwhelming to our infrastructure.
Is there enough housing? Is there enough water in the drought stricken Colorado River to meet the need of growing population in that area? One thing we don't hear much about now is the drought in much of Iran. Climate change and local mismanagement, by Iranian authorities, has created a water crisis. Could innovative ways to address these problems help more than going to war?
Even here at home, mismanagement of our economy is evident. We have a president who wants to rededicate USA to fossil fuels. The world may be turning more violent and authoritarian, rather than smarter in addressing the changes that we need for a better and more sustainable future.
Sunday, March 01, 2026
When war happens.
I've been following the news and reading a wide range of perspectives from various media sources as well as postings from friends on Facebook. Many interesting perspectives are out there.
It's hard to figure out where to begin in expressing my own thoughts and inserting them into the vast amount of opinions that fill the medias. As events happen quickly, I tend to wait till the dust settles, though it never totally settles. I tend to try and express what I think is best for the long term. What is best for the long term isn't clear in short order.
It's hard to figure out where to begin in expressing my own thoughts and inserting them into the vast amount of opinions that fill the medias. As events happen quickly, I tend to wait till the dust settles, though it never totally settles. I tend to try and express what I think is best for the long term. What is best for the long term isn't clear in short order.
Tuesday, February 24, 2026
Trump takes up a lion's share of the attention span. In the shadow, my blog is hardly noticed.
It was Theodore Roosevelt who coined the phrase Bully Pulpit.
Today is planned a State of the Union speech by Trump. Every time Trump opens his mouth, or posts something on social media, it starts a national conversation. I wish my posts would get even a tiny fraction of the conversation started whenever Trump posts something. His conversation seems to suck most of the oxygen out of the room, meaning attention span. There's only so much attention span to go around.
Glad I'm not super famous as there are drawbacks to that. Just a modest amount of attention span and interaction is good enough for me.
Today is planned a State of the Union speech by Trump. Every time Trump opens his mouth, or posts something on social media, it starts a national conversation. I wish my posts would get even a tiny fraction of the conversation started whenever Trump posts something. His conversation seems to suck most of the oxygen out of the room, meaning attention span. There's only so much attention span to go around.
Glad I'm not super famous as there are drawbacks to that. Just a modest amount of attention span and interaction is good enough for me.
Friday, October 10, 2025
Can a message get though the static? These days, static is information overload. In the past, it was distance and natural static.
In the old days of broadcast radio and TV, much of the audience size was determined by the power of the station's transmitter. How far could the signal reach before it was drowned out by distance and static?
On today's social media, even small signals, like my website, have a global reach. The limit is not natural distance and static, but another kind of "static" - information overload. Can a small website and Facebook presence get much audience, given all the other information sources competing for attention time?
These days, the static is information, not just the random radio hiss, or television snow of past eras. Continued below.
In the past, some TV static was said to come from the Big Bang's cosmic background radiation while most of it was from local sources, such as thermal noise, or appliances and thunderstorms. Photo I found on Wikimedia Commons.
When I was in grade school, I was impressed with the new transistor radios that people had. I remember thinking, "The more transistors radios had, the more amplification for picking up distant, faint signals. Most transistor radios had 6 transistors. I thought, "If one had 100 transistors, maybe it could pick up stations all around the world?"
Later I realized that no matter how much amplification a radio had, the faint signals would still be lost in the static. Amplification would also amplify the static so the faint distant station could still not be heard above the static.
On shortwave international band, stations could still be heard around the world, but that was different from the AM band used by those pocket transistor radios.
The power of the radio station was important back then. At night, some AM signals could travel farther due to nighttime ionospheric skip. 50,000 watt KGO, in San Francisco, was a powerhouse that could send a clear signal up and down the entire west coast. It was top rated for audience size for many years.
Then along came the internet so transmitter power became less relevant. KGO basically imploded into a low rated business, in terms of audience share. Continued below.
Above: Old nighttime coverage map from another big San Francisco station; KNBR 1970s.
Below: Part of a bicycle trip I took in 2009. Past KGO transmitter visible from bike path on Dumbarton Bridge.
Today, there is the concept of "going viral;" a term not even known during my childhood. For audience size, some information reaches huge audiences just because it went viral. An idea, meme, song, artwork or even a politician can reach an audience in the millions, or even billions. It's hard to tell why somethings go viral while others don't. This seems to follow various patterns of mass psychology. Why did Kim Kardashian get so famous, or even Donald Trump, for that matter?
The power the transmitter, itself is no longer the issue, but media power is still a factor. I recently read an article by Robert Reich warning about growing consolidation of corporate media power; especially in cable TV networks. The consolidation of ownership and control of media, by a handful of billionaires, is becoming more alarming.
Folks on the left have been talking about this for years, while I have tended to place more blame on people's attention priorities, themselves, versus control from the top. That was past decades, but control from the top seems to be getting more serious today.
It may have also been serious in the days of only 3 big TV networks and the control of big corporations, such as RCA; owner of NBC. I remember hearing, from my parents, that NBC also owned ABC. In old radio days NBC was called the Red Network while ABC was called the Blue Network until such a time that anti trust laws broke it up. I guess CBS was always, somewhat, independent.
Back in the 1990s, I thought that ease of access to the internet for artists and writers, such as myself, would bring on a golden age of diversity, global interaction and enlightenment. Today, it looks like that thought was a bit naive.
I still fault people for most of this problem. Folks are gullible and can easily be manipulated by the rich and famous. Billionaires from Taylor Swift to Donald Trump are able to manipulate us like pawns.
I still hope there will always, somehow, be conversations beyond the command and control of big money.
On today's social media, even small signals, like my website, have a global reach. The limit is not natural distance and static, but another kind of "static" - information overload. Can a small website and Facebook presence get much audience, given all the other information sources competing for attention time?
These days, the static is information, not just the random radio hiss, or television snow of past eras. Continued below.
When I was in grade school, I was impressed with the new transistor radios that people had. I remember thinking, "The more transistors radios had, the more amplification for picking up distant, faint signals. Most transistor radios had 6 transistors. I thought, "If one had 100 transistors, maybe it could pick up stations all around the world?"
Later I realized that no matter how much amplification a radio had, the faint signals would still be lost in the static. Amplification would also amplify the static so the faint distant station could still not be heard above the static.
On shortwave international band, stations could still be heard around the world, but that was different from the AM band used by those pocket transistor radios.
The power of the radio station was important back then. At night, some AM signals could travel farther due to nighttime ionospheric skip. 50,000 watt KGO, in San Francisco, was a powerhouse that could send a clear signal up and down the entire west coast. It was top rated for audience size for many years.
Then along came the internet so transmitter power became less relevant. KGO basically imploded into a low rated business, in terms of audience share. Continued below.
Below: Part of a bicycle trip I took in 2009. Past KGO transmitter visible from bike path on Dumbarton Bridge.
Today, there is the concept of "going viral;" a term not even known during my childhood. For audience size, some information reaches huge audiences just because it went viral. An idea, meme, song, artwork or even a politician can reach an audience in the millions, or even billions. It's hard to tell why somethings go viral while others don't. This seems to follow various patterns of mass psychology. Why did Kim Kardashian get so famous, or even Donald Trump, for that matter?
The power the transmitter, itself is no longer the issue, but media power is still a factor. I recently read an article by Robert Reich warning about growing consolidation of corporate media power; especially in cable TV networks. The consolidation of ownership and control of media, by a handful of billionaires, is becoming more alarming.
Folks on the left have been talking about this for years, while I have tended to place more blame on people's attention priorities, themselves, versus control from the top. That was past decades, but control from the top seems to be getting more serious today.
It may have also been serious in the days of only 3 big TV networks and the control of big corporations, such as RCA; owner of NBC. I remember hearing, from my parents, that NBC also owned ABC. In old radio days NBC was called the Red Network while ABC was called the Blue Network until such a time that anti trust laws broke it up. I guess CBS was always, somewhat, independent.
Back in the 1990s, I thought that ease of access to the internet for artists and writers, such as myself, would bring on a golden age of diversity, global interaction and enlightenment. Today, it looks like that thought was a bit naive.
I still fault people for most of this problem. Folks are gullible and can easily be manipulated by the rich and famous. Billionaires from Taylor Swift to Donald Trump are able to manipulate us like pawns.
I still hope there will always, somehow, be conversations beyond the command and control of big money.
Friday, September 19, 2025
Deflation isn't all bad. In the electronics industry, it means prices go down and quality goes up with time. People buy anyway.
I hear that economists dread deflation. "Heaven forbid, consumerism might slow down and put folks out of work as people postpone purchasing to wait for lower prices."
The electronics industry has thrived in spite of deflation there. Computing prices come down, but people still buy cause the new stuff is more powerful than the old stuff. Imagine that, lower prices and better products to boot.
The electronics industry has thrived in spite of deflation there. Computing prices come down, but people still buy cause the new stuff is more powerful than the old stuff. Imagine that, lower prices and better products to boot.
Fossil fuel industry may go the way of Polaroid.
The fossil fuel industry could go the way of Kodak and Polaroid when they failed to adapt to digital photography.
In the past, people might have accused me of being an apologist for that industry as I thought they were trying to adapt to clean energy sourcing when British Petroleum changed it's name to "Beyond Petroleum."
I thought consumers were more to blame being slow to adopt alternatives, thus driving market forces.
Now, in the era of Trump, it looks like the establishment is rededicating America to a fossil fuel economy. Stupid.
I can see the reality that fossil fuel infrastructure is still useful given the way things are today. It can maybe even be somewhat beneficial to the environment such as replacing coal with natural gas, or replacing dirty overseas fossil fuel with fuel produced in USA under higher environmental standards; for production at least.
Still, carbon dioxide looks and smells deceptively clean, but mass production of carbon dioxide, by consumers burning fossil fuels drives climate change.
In the past, people might have accused me of being an apologist for that industry as I thought they were trying to adapt to clean energy sourcing when British Petroleum changed it's name to "Beyond Petroleum."
I thought consumers were more to blame being slow to adopt alternatives, thus driving market forces.
Now, in the era of Trump, it looks like the establishment is rededicating America to a fossil fuel economy. Stupid.
I can see the reality that fossil fuel infrastructure is still useful given the way things are today. It can maybe even be somewhat beneficial to the environment such as replacing coal with natural gas, or replacing dirty overseas fossil fuel with fuel produced in USA under higher environmental standards; for production at least.
Still, carbon dioxide looks and smells deceptively clean, but mass production of carbon dioxide, by consumers burning fossil fuels drives climate change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)