The blog home of Jeff Putz

The value of my therapist is pretty extraordinary. She helps lead me to interesting things that are thought provoking and useful for the purpose of better mental health. Today we were talking about the malaise I feel following external validation. Let me see if I can codify what we discussed. It makes sense in my head at least.

For better or worse, people find purpose in work. My earliest career ambition was to work in radio, and when I got there after college, it wasn't what I hoped. It kinda sucked. I did local government TV stuff for three years after that, then left it all for software. I've been doing that ever since. For much of the first half of that career, I kinda let it just happen to me. Then I started to actively manage it. Going to Microsoft was a big deal, and frankly the only time I've really felt any sense of career achievement. I felt this just slightly when I started contracting for SeaWorld, but I think much of that joy was just landing something in Orlando. But as it stands today, I don't know that I'm really reaching for any specific milestones in my career. I like my job and what I get to do, reaching challenging outcomes, but as much of it appeals to my strengths, but I'm not thinking about promotions or salary targets (though I welcome the latter).

Humans seem to struggle, a lot. For many people, especially in poorer nations, a significant portion of their lives are committed to survival. They don't have the luxury of even basic career management. The weird thing is that, even if we are wealthy by comparison, wealth doesn't mean that you're without struggle. I'm not trying to compare looking for food to the kinds of things that I struggle with, because that would be absurd, but it feels like there's always something. Parenting is really, really hard, and I don't feel like I'm doing it right. That's one of my struggles, and there are others I don't really write about.

Still, my struggles do not preclude me from maintaining a sense of curiosity about the world. I'm wondering if that realization explains the overwhelming feeling that I don't feel like I'm moving toward... something (other than the obvious). I know, midlife or whatever. But I keep coming back to the fact that I've hit certain milestones already. I mean that in good and bad ways, in terms of life experience, like I've seen some shit, and experienced a lot of joy. When my therapist asked me, if I could make something happen tomorrow to bring me great joy, what would it be? I didn't have an answer at first. What I did discover is that there are a great many situations that bring joy in the moment, and they are not destinations or milestones.

OK, sometimes they're literal destinations, but not milestones, because I like to travel. Wandering down a random street in London or seeing steam vents in Iceland certainly brought a lot of joy. Meeting people in that context, and even making new friends for life, is also joyful. Making stuff, virtual or otherwise, is great. I really love to see someone succeed in some small part because I enabled them. The thing is, I'm not a box checker, but my cultural indoctrination suggests that I should be, as if that's your purpose.

So the indifference that I regretfully feel toward receiving deserved validation is mostly a function of me not being intrinsically motivated by milestones. They're nice, and I want to be recognized for what I do, but I don't really place the weight on it that I thought I did. In some ways, maybe this is good, because to seek joy means to seek smaller, present situations. It's not that I've achieved all of the things, it's that the achievement isn't what's important to me. Deep down, I knew this, but I couldn't sort it out.

I've stated that I begrudgingly would like to feel some validation now and then. I used to crave it in certain ways, but in adulthood I mostly just expect to never get it. I've had a lot of therapy to understand where validation should fit in my life, where it should reasonably come from, and how to move on when I haven't had it. I weirdly believe that I don't need it, but I kind of deserve it. A well-adjusted adult who is not a sociopath, and exercises humility, does not generally seek or feel entitled to validation, but maybe my damage is that I need it anyway.

Today I got it, and I don't know what to do with it. In leadership roles, I'm quick to defer recognition to others, because I know that's what the best leaders that I've known do. But doing that, it seems like it should be a cascading thing, and I'm in the middle. I'm just so used to shitty situations where I wonder if it's my personality or something else that keeps me from that loop.

Like a lot of things, I'm overthinking it. Still, it's a little upsetting that I'm so not used to it that my natural reaction is to wonder why I don't hear it more.

Last year I discovered that there were some gems to revisit on GOG, or Good Old Games, starting with Dungeon Keeper 1 and 2. It turns out that an Amazon Prime perk is a bunch of free games via their own gaming thing, though many of the titles they have are actually acquired via GOG or one of the other services. One of those recently was Tomb Raider: Anniversary, the cleaned up and remastered original game. She still has the absurd proportions.

Video games were exciting when that game came out, in 1996, on Playstation, Sega Saturn and the PC. I think it was the game that I bought with the Playstation, which for its time was a really big deal. Nintendo had the 64, and Sega had the Dreamcast a year or two later. PC's were for the first time coming out with dedicated 3D GPU's. They were expensive, though there were some reasonable models out in the coming years. At some point, I did have a PC remake of the original Tomb Raider that was made to run on my Rendition card, I think, though I think I had an S3 and ATi at some point. I couldn't afford a 3Dfx card, the state of the art at the time. Rendition had a compelling price-performance ratio, and they were relentless at improving drivers. They didn't make it, financially.

It is wholly absurd playing even an enhanced version of a game like Tomb Raider, which is closing in on 30 years, on a modern computer. I'm playing with a wireless controller (they weren't a thing back then) at 4K resolution and 60 fps locked in. The fans don't even get loud. But it's surprising that it still looks pretty good with the improved textures and such. It was made to run without 3D hardware, so that original version was not pretty, with blocky and pixelated everything. I do think it's fair to say that this game invented the third-person adventure game.

This one hasn't completely aged well though. The controls are kind of janky compared to newer games, and the game is littered with what I call dumb physical challenges that you may have to repeat over and over until you get it right. It's annoying, but not intolerable on a modern computer that reloads the scene almost instantly, but it was just brutal on Playstation. Remember, they had very little memory and had to load stuff off of CD-ROM's. You lost so much of your life to loading. I'm not sure if I actually finished any of the original versions, but I did this time. The game says it took me 14 hours, and yes, I had to look up some walkthrough videos because some of it was absurdly hard to find anything to do.

I really like the reboot trilogy that was released in the last decade. They all look great, and are playable on all kinds of hardware. They're cheap now, too. The control is excellent and you're not likely to get stuck. There's more stealth than combat, but all of the puzzles. Lara is even appropriately modeled as an athlete, which makes more sense with all of the climbing and running. The 2018 movie covers some of the ground in the reboot games, and you'd think that Alicia Vikander as Lara inspired the game, but the movie came years later.

This has been a fun diversion, and I hope that I'll find more. With Xbox Game Pass, it's pretty low risk to try new-to-me games, but I feel like it's such an investment to even get through tutorials. I'm lazy doing lazy things.

I was reading an opinion piece about evolving attitudes toward sexuality among women, especially Gen-X women, and then an accounting of the many recent movies where the bad guy is literally a bad guy who is controlling or violent toward women. And of course there's a bit of a, let's call it a wave, of thinly veiled racism posing as a combination of grievance and victimhood. One of the underlying themes of all this is a shared sense of white, straight American males who feel like they're not heard, displaced or otherwise threatened by cultural and societal changes. That's a useful thing to think about, if only to better understand where the sentiment comes from.

To be clear, white hetero males are not actually disadvantaged in any way in American society. Even if they were suddenly, it seems to me like that would be a valid course correction. Objectively, meaning it's measurable in data, white hetero males make more money and have outsized influence on the world compared to other cohorts of races, genders and sexuality. I'm not going to debate that with anyone, because any other view is just a an uninformed opinion. Math is not a belief system.

I was reading an account by an actor and writer who traced his lineage not only to slaves in Virginia, but was also able to identity the names of the slave owners. That got me to thinking, that significant parts of the population are born with a certain identity. The identities are rooted in being different, being oppressed, being treated not as equals. This does include some white Americans, certainly, if they are born within a generation or two of immigrants. That identity also comes to those who are any flavor of queer, even if they don't really know of that identity until later in life. Many variations on those groups don't necessarily choose the identity, or want to be defined by it, but even if they don't embrace it, it may be forced on them.

Which brings me back to the straight white guy. I'm one of those. I've honestly never had any specific identity that I, uh, identify with. There was a very brief moment where I identified as a college graduate, until I realized that nothing was special about it. I placed some identity in my work in the earlier parts of my careers, too. But I had no default identity, born with or chosen, that I can really think of. I only know that I'm about a quarter of Polish descent, but I've never leaned into it. For most of my life, I haven't been able to tell you who I am, only things that I've done.

Men through most of history have held a certain societal advantage, and their position was not based on merit at all. White hetero males were on top of the food chain without really earning it. As civil rights have evolved over the last century, this default position has left a lot of these guys wondering where that leaves them. I speculate (I leave it to the anthropologists to explain it) that this is part of the root of the whole MAGA nonsense, because they're lead by an unapologetic misogynist and racist. If a powerful person can be hostile toward women, and be racist, and embrace a silly stereotype of "masculinity," it makes it OK to be the same way, like the old days.

I can't pretend to explain why you would wrap up your identity in a "masculine" definition that's so terrible toward others. But again, if you don't have another identity to lean into, maybe this is all that makes sense to you. Losing it causes fear. That's a choice, and I don't think that it's a good one. A non-trivial portion of American has subscribed to this idea that being "manly" means ignoring consequences, controlling women, rejecting people who look different from you, and having a rigid definition of love that must be declared as the only way. Those are not admirable things to wrap up your identity in.

For me, being a dude hasn't really figured into things. In fact, my journey has been more about rejecting any expectations about who I'm supposed to be, and gender is just the tip of that. But there's no question that I'm freer to enjoy that lack of expectations because I'm a white hetero male. In just the last few years, and in watching my son grow up, I've come to understand what it means to be neurodiverse (read: have ASD), and that has further changed my outlook. I'm not sure that I make it about my identity, even though I'm open, maybe even anxious, to talk about it. The psychologist who diagnosed me suggested that much of my empathy for marginalized people may be connected to a lifetime of being different and not fitting in. I think that's probably true. But even with that being understood, I have never had to worry about driving while black or whether or not I could get certain healthcare.

The bottom line is that I'm oddly free to choose my identity, and connect to it in any way that I see fit. Any random person who meets me does not start with any biases. If I were a woman, or a person of color, or not shy about queerness, the same random people would already have connected me to an identity. That's the tricky thing, because being born any particular way need not dictate your identity unless you want it too, or find value in it. But this also includes being born a white hetero male. In fact, if you have that latitude and freedom, maybe don't pick the identity that's wrapped in hate and fear. It's not a good look.

I used to marvel at the fact that my eyesight was so good, because my mom wore glasses since she was young, and as my dad put it, he's "legally blind" without glasses. Then my child started on glasses pretty early. Genetically, I'm predisposed for shitty sight, I would think. But I've never required glasses.

I still don't, technically, but my eyes are not where they were even a year or two ago. My near-sight is not as good as it used to be, to the extent that I'm holding my phone further away just to see it, and tiny text is now unreadable... but not always. I'm not an eye doctor, but it seems like this is more of a function of fatigue than it is some kind of change in my eye. Maybe it's both, I don't know. But especially after being sick last week and backing away from near things (including my phone) more often than not, my phone is sharper than ever. Well, unless it's late at night. During the daylight hours, I've literally been surprised at the sharpness of text on the little screen.

I'm not naive enough to think that it isn't going to get worse over time. I'm spending less time looking at my phone though, so that's a positive. I'm also glad that it's the near stuff that I'm having an issue with, and not things beyond 18 inches. There's no issue driving, or even looking at computer monitors. The robust detail and texture of things outside of that near range is as good as it has ever been. I really hope I'm able to retain that as long as possible.

Meh, this is what aging is. Seeing a bit of vulnerability in my wellness in this sense may be good for me. I need motivation to be more active to fend off other physical issues. Addressing that is so difficult for me, I guess because it's accepting a reality I'm not ready for, and admitting that I'm "wrong" about my activity choices otherwise. I think it would be neat to live to 100, which feels like an eternity, because, relatively speaking, it is. The odds of that increase with physical activity.

Meanwhile, I'm writing this at 6:30 at night on my laptop, which is right around that 18" range, and the screen is lovely (though not as lovely it would be if it were OLED, Apple).

There's a lot of backlash, doubt, frustration and anger over what social media is today. Well, unless it's your source of self-validation for things you believe that are morally questionable. In that case, the socials are awesome for you. For years there were a lot of algorithmic tactics intended to keep you engaged longer, but the intent is simpler than that. The intent is to get as many ads in front of you as possible. What it doesn't do is anything even remotely social, or at least, not in a way that is analogous to any real-life behavior.

If we go back far enough on the Internets, message boards, or even the ancient Usenet stuff, are in many ways one of the earliest forms of what we might call social media. The intent here was to gather people who care about some niche thing a place to talk about it. It was shocking at the time how terrible some people would act in these communities, especially where they weren't moderated, but the upside far outweighed the noise. Much of my social foundation exists because of these boards, and it's part of the reason I maintain them today. I think that value potential still exists.

Also around the turn of the century, blogs started to become a thing. I still love that format (seeing as how you're reading one), because it's more than drive-by food porn or photos of your cat. There's room for nuance and more complex thoughts. There was also a ping-back mechanism that most of the major blogs implemented back in those days, where if you linked to another blog, there was a link back to yours. It facilitated some interesting conversations, and while spam was a problem, it was an amazing, decentralized thing that did not involve a single platform.

Then MySpace came around, and while it had a concept of "friends," it mostly was for self-promotion, especially in music circles. I went to a party once at a conference thrown by MySpace, where they were recruiting, and heavily convinced they were gonna take over the world. Hilarious. Friendster was a thing too, which is apparently being resurrected. This was before mobile was really a thing, so keep in mind that this was all desktop computer activity, with photos uploaded from dedicated digital cameras.

When Facebook started to get some traction, it was college-only, but the intent of it was mostly to find out who was single, and who was having an awesome time at a party doing awesome shooters. When it went to general release, it was still that, but for a good decade thereafter, I think it did a good job connecting people, or keeping them connected. From there on, it became about the algorithms, engagement and ads. Instagram seems to be headed that way now too.

So when you look back at that history, I'm not sure that we ever reached an ideal of what social networks could or should be. I tend to project my own ideals as those that everyone wants, but they probably don't. Still, what I think is the right intent includes:

• Keeping in touch with friends and what they're doing. This means they announce that they've changed jobs, or taking a vacation, and yes, sharing food porn and cats.
• Not seeing ads. That's a negative intent, but an important one. I understand that this means something that isn't free, but I don't see how else you get away from the ads.
• Chronological posts. I don't see any reason why you'd want to know more about things that happened days ago. And if you miss things, you miss things.
• Get in and out, no doomscrolling. If I have even a hundred "friends," I don't imagine that they're all posting a million things a day. If I need a time waster, I can do crosswords or Two Dots or literally anything that doesn't involve ads.
• No behavioral tracking, taxonomies or algorithms. The network doesn't need "insight" into me, it just needs to show me stuff from my friends.
• Privacy. Nothing is public, nor is it possible to make public. Either you're an accepted friend and can see what I post, or you're not.

That's a pretty short, straight forward list. Nothing has ever existed that I think purely can do all of this. I'd be willing to pay for something that did, even if it's of limited utility because not a lot of people I know are on it. I don't know what the appetite for people paying is, but it's probably not high.

For better or worse, my life tends to revolve around food. That's tricky though, given how picky I am and texture averse, not to mention I only eat chicken (and turkey), as far as protein goes. I would say that makes me high maintenance if it weren't for the fact that what I tend to like is pretty simple. Sure, I'm a chicken and potato guy, but I do like a lot of Asian fusion faire, and moving west and south from there, I do enjoy a number of Indian dishes (the hotter the better). And it's worth noting that going out for lunch is one of the few things that I consistently do to balance out my day as a work-from-home person. It doesn't have to be fantastic, but it helps if I can eat outside.

What I don't enjoy, also atypical given my taste and desire for familiarity, is chain restaurants. Back when I was a beef-eating burger addict, and it wasn't all microwaved crap, I would find myself at a Friday's frequently. But when I think back to first meeting Diana, we may have gone there a few times, and some Cheesecake Factory stops, but mostly we went to local joints. In fact, when we moved to Seattle, honestly we didn't have a lot of choice, because chains were surprisingly hard to come by there.

Just before we moved back east, we did a road trip across Washington and into Idaho, staying overnight in Spokane. There we had few choices, and ended up at an Applebees as a last resort. It was bad in epic ways, and my trashing of the place is to this day my most popular blog post. In the years since, we have leaned into a few chains on an infrequent basis, like Red Robin because it was Simon-compatible. They've since gone out of business just about everywhere.

Fortunately, the food scene is pretty robust here in Orange County. Obviously there are the theme park places that are unique and interesting, especially on the Disney property, but there are so many local places. We even have a few local chains, like 4 Rivers BBQ and Tijuana Flats. The latter varies in quality, but it'll do in a pinch. Our new favorite is a place called The Hangry Bison. Not only is the food fantastic, but their bar service is great, the atmosphere is great, and the hospitality in general has been great. It happens to sit on a street with a number of places that we've visited over the years, including a Thai restaurant that makes a solid red curry.

I bring this up because, recently on PointBuzz, there was a thread about restaurants, and people go on and on about the chains. I don't get it. Even Sandusky, Ohio, has to have some local places that are better. I've been to a few over the years. In general, I'd rather give money to a local business owner than some corporation owned elsewhere. The world is Walmarted enough, I think it's justifiable to spend a little more to keep it local.

This has been one of the hardest parenting weeks we've had in awhile. Actually, several weeks. Simon ended up failing a class last quarter. Then we recently got the warning that he was failing several classes. While certainly there are challenges to the way that he learns, this came about because he simply wasn't doing the work. When we had been asking about it the last few weeks, he would always insist that he was caught up. Well, now we know he wasn't.

The hardest thing is that there is a confluence of issues, and we're trying to solve or address them all at once. It's still not clear what the path forward is, but I think I can catalog it all like this:

• Processing speed. Last fall he went through a diagnostic to qualify various functions. For processing speed, he was in the lowest percentile. That particular block of tests tells a weird story, because his visual-spatial intelligence is in the highest bracket, while working memory and fluid reasoning were high average. What I've read about processing speed deficiencies is that it's like a hydraulic lift. The lift doesn't move fast, but it can lift many tons. What this means in the classroom is that he doesn't roll well at a fast pace.
• Panic. Emotional regulation is, in general, difficult for neurodiverse kids (and frankly, adults at times). So when he gets behind, his instinct is to freak out and get overwhelmed.
• Social stigma. Various school folk have suggested all kinds of mitigation and adaptation strategies, but the problem with all of them is that it makes him different. So for example, if he were to use speech to text technology, that's ripe for shitty kids making fun of him or calling him stupid.
• Discomfort. All of the above create uncomfortable situations. I can't blame him for wanting to avoid that, but I also want him to try to adapt and challenge himself when faced with discomfort. My expectation is probably not reasonable.

That's all difficult, but the getting behind and saying he was caught up was a poor choice, and so there are consequences. We literally took the computer off of his desk. I hate it. He really enjoys working with theme park simulations and games, and it's also his social outlet. Taking that away is taking away his happiness, and I know it. (I also have the damage that wanting to use computers as a child, I was treated like that was a burden or a bad thing.) The volume of tears and generally terrible feelings around here is high.

It doesn't help that his psychiatrist basically said that public schools suck at accommodating neurodiverse kids. While I'm definitely seeing that now, in high school, I think it's a bit of an overgeneralization. They did OK in elementary, and even middle. I didn't worry that he would fall between the cracks in the lower levels. But now, does a school with 3,000 kids really have the ability to be effective? And sure, I know that the law requires certain things, but that doesn't make it so. And with the dipshits in Washington trying to make us even dumber, who even knows what to expect.

I don't know how to teach him to be more self-reliant. We're in a time when you have the world's knowledge (and misinformation) at your finger tips. But he always has a reason that he can't learn on his own. Tonight it's that he was worried about the district looking at his browser history, which I don't even have words for.

As I said, I don't think that general intelligence is the problem, but rather how he is wired to learn. Last weekend, Diana was helping him with evolution, and he understands it in a non-trivial way. But he can't have someone holding his hand at every step, and that's what he seems to want. I'm not convinced that it's what he needs.

Let me just put this out here... I'm not soliciting solutions. I'm ranting to get it out, and the only thing I really need is empathy. More neurotypical adults suggesting things without context is not helpful.

Some years ago I worked for someone who approached parenting like running a business. I always found this laughable, because despite supervising people for half of my professional life, kids are just not the same. Not even a little.

For one thing, when you start the process, the stakes are very different. If you don't feed them, they die. If you don't change their diapers, they wallow in their own shit. The relationship is totally different. Employees are there to feed your company and clean up your shit, while parenting is the other way around.

But the biggest, fundamental difference is that you can't fire your kid. If they don't do their laundry or clean their room, they're still on the "payroll," so to speak. This is what's so hard about parenting, at least for me. At work, you define outcomes, and try to build people around the execution of reaching those outcomes. At home, the only outcomes that ultimately matter is that they get an education and end up self-sufficient enough that they can exist in the world without you. I can't think of any endeavors more different from each other.

I happen to be in overlapping "seasons" of stress in parenting and at work. The stuff at work will settle down, as it does, and even if it didn't, the company could disappear tomorrow and I'd just have to move on to another job. Parenting, especially for a teenager, involves a relatively short window to help build all the life skills that make independent survival possible. For real, think about that. I've never been more scared of failure at anything in my life. You can't just exact consequences, because the human can be indifferent about consequences, and you can't fire them. And that doesn't even get to the love and feelings that (should) come with being a parent. It's daunting.

I've often wondered why some people turn out one way, and other another way. I attribute a lot of that to environment, but I don't know what percentage could be assigned to that. Brain function, teachers, social interaction, intrinsic motivation, etc., all play a part. I can't accept that parenting isn't the most important part. That's a lot of pressure.

The Smartless podcast recently had Luis Elizondo as a guest. He's known for being a former intelligence guy and has repeatedly said there are things the government is hiding that we are likely ready to hear. Whether that means aliens or something else, it serves to show that humanity needs to understand its relative place in the universe, which may cause it to realign its priorities. The interview is excellent, in that he gives a lot of analogies that help you understand how much humanity doesn't know. Whether or not what he's talking about is real, or if he's legitimate, doesn't matter. The point is that our cultural departure from reason, science and expertise is hubris at best, willful stupidity at worst.

If we found out today that aliens were real, how would we respond? And I mean "aliens" more in the metaphorical sense, as something so profound and surprising that it causes us to reframe our understanding of our place in the universe. It's hard to believe that people are trying to scapegoat diversity as something preventing hiring on merit, when in fact diversity efforts are intended to guarantee that people are hired on merit. It's hard to believe that basic economic principles are being ignored in order to placate people who feel like they're victims of... something. It's hard to believe that government thinks that art is dangerous. But here we are.

My understanding of humanity is that we are little more than a rounding error in the grand scope of the universe. What makes us human, and different from the other animals, is our ability to be empathetic and help each other. A subset of the population leans into rejecting that humanity, largely to exercise power over others, and that's a function of survival that "lower" animals exhibit. If we're to really embrace our superiority, it seems to me that we need to embrace that humanity.

The weirdest thing about this is that I think a majority portion of the humanity rejection committee is older, which is to say they have fewer years ahead of them than behind them. I'm in that cohort now, probably only by a few years (if we're to forecast a continual improvement in life expectancy), and my motivation has shifted from a youthful sense of morality to an appreciation for the relative brevity of our lives. But in both cases, my m.o. is to want the best for all humans, regardless of where they landed in the birth lottery. Trying to put me and people who look or think like me at the top feels pretty stupid, and anti-humanity, considering we'll all be dust before too long anyway.

So maybe we need the aliens to shock us into that reality. Trying to appeal to a sense of humanity isn't working, maybe because they don't have that sense. Maybe they need something to fear that isn't other humans. I don't understand why we need to fear anything, other than to satisfy our animal instincts, but clearly we've not evolved enough.

Right now would normally be the time that I'm posting a Playbill selfie of me and Diana at a show. Unfortunately, I've been sick for three days, so she went with a coworker. It started out Sunday night with a sore throat, then turned into what I imagine is a sinus infection. Yesterday, my head felt like a brick. Not a lot of sleeping going on, so by today, I was just fried. I slept four hours during the day.

In the last two days I optimistically thought I could work, but didn't last long. Today I just gave up and slept, which is probably what I needed. This has been a thing with me for most of my adulthood. I don't allow myself to just be sick. I don't know why. Part of it is that I have some important work to do this week, sure, but I'm sure it's related to my sentiment that I should be creating things all of the time.

Time is awfully important.

I've been making the unfortunate joke for some time that social media is not very social these days. It's all the algorithm and engagement, with ads, and not very much in the way of food porn, cats, kids and vacation selfies from your friends. In fact, many of your friends have probably bailed completely, and I'm sure their mental health is better for it. But the biggest thing that I've noticed lately is that the bullshit isn't even that hard to spot anymore. Let's break down the screenshot below.

It's no secret that Elon Musk appears to have gone batshit crazy, what with the Trump servicing and apparent Nazi salutes. But for whatever reason, there are people willing to make excuses for poor behavior, and are even compelled to try and boost the image of people like this. That's a special kind of asshole, if they have that kind of time on their hands. Generative AI means that you don't even need Photoshop skills anymore.

But start with the Facebook page itself. No one really knows who "Entrepreneur Mindset" actually is, but if research into other nonsense is indicative of anything, it's probably either a foreign influence campaign or domestic opportunists hired to make a buck. That already probably doesn't matter to the 139 people who share this, or the thousands that posted hearts and praise in the comments. Of course, who even knows it they're real either.

But the photo itself is so obviously nonsense. Did Musk wear two different things at this Starbucks? Do you honestly even think he's been in a Starbucks? Did the woman take off her tie, and since when do baristas wear ties? She doesn't even have the same earrings or hair line in the photos. And why would she be buying a gift for his daughter? Anyone with even the slightest bit of critical thinking knows this is fake.

But that's the problem. Critical thinking is effectively dead in America. Expertise isn't cool, it's the elite cabal. The only thing that matters is absurd tribalism and loyalty to your team. I'm pretty sure the clinical term is "cult."

And remember, Facebook has decided to stop fact checking, because 'Merica or whatever stupid shit Zuck thinks he's qualified to have an opinion on.

There are a lot of eyes on Tesla and their earnings report tomorrow, because they already released their delivery numbers, and they're essentially flat over the previous year. Despite the gloom you read about in the press, EV sales haven't flat-lined or reversed. Recent data says sales were up 15% last quarter over last year, and 7% for the year, making 8% of new sales electric. Tesla is still selling more than anyone else, but according to that article, they sold fewer this year. If the market is up 7% and you sell less, that's not a good look. So what's the problem with Tesla?

A lot of eyes are on Elon Musk, obviously, because he's gone from Tony Stark to Lex Luthor, and we all know the DC Universe sucks. It's upsetting to see an industrious, genius immigrant literally invent new markets, then lose his shit and do one stupid thing after another, and align himself with felons and fascists. I'm sure that's not helping Tesla, especially with his focus split all over the place, because his strong association with the brand isn't great when his brand is batshit. To me, it's not logical to "boycott" Tesla because of Musk, when 120,000 other people work for the company. I'm sure most of those people are just making a living. I think there are two other things going on.

The first is that there are simply more choices than there were a year ago. EV's are finally out of niche status, especially for people who generally don't buy used cars. The Hyundai group has said flat out that they're not selling at a loss, that this isn't some experiment or gradual ramp (I'm looking at you, GM). And while the Korean brands are positioned to occupy the low end, the Germans are making some beautiful cars at the high end. And in China, apparently Tesla has fallen out of favor and has insane competition with BYD. For years, Tesla was the only viable game in town. Those days are long gone.

My problem is more about the quality issues. Don't get me wrong, we've had four of these cars and, mechanically and from a safety standpoint, these cars have been flawless. Even the Model 3 that eventually got creamed by a Disney maintenance guy was in great shape after six years, with very little battery degradation, still-new brakes, just cabin filter replacements and a new set of shoes. But the fit and finish has been suboptimal. The Model S was OK, but given the cost and the slower rate of production, I think it was easier to get it right. The now-totaled Model 3 had a weirdly aligned trunk and sloppy panel alignment overall. My 3-year-old Model Y was atrocious from the start. I drove it home with a rattle that I still can't find, and it has since developed at least two more. The front quarter panel, the first thing I'd see entering the garage, has a crease that continues to the door, and they weren't even close to lining up (I had them fix that). Panel alignment is beyond sloppy on that one. Diana's Y, going on a year, has been much better, with no rattles, and you have to look a little harder for panel stuff. But with 1 in 10 cars in our area Teslas, I see the poorly aligned trunks everywhere.

Maybe the quality issues aren't that big of a deal, given the mechanical soundness, but you don't have to accept that. Even the lower end Hyundais appear perfect when you look close. And also, everyone else isn't doing stupid control things like ditching the stalks on the steering column and using shitty capacitive buttons for turn signals. No one wants that.

The bottom line is that they went from making electric space cars that seemed like a miracle of engineering and science, to boring products that are sloppily assembled. What a bummer.

I wasn't sure if "neuroawareness" is a thing, and it seems like it's a company with a dead trademark, but it's also a dumb name I'm giving to the self-awareness that one may develop when diagnosed with not neurotypical things like ADHD and ASD. Made up word or not, mine has been developing a lot over the last few years, and that's good and bad.

On the plus side, if you know things, you can act on those things. A year ago I wrote about how noisy it can be in my brain. That was hardly an epiphany, but it's funny how some things seem obvious once you see them. I suppose if we were any good at seeing ourselves, therapists wouldn't get any work. But that's one of many examples where I understand more about how my brain works and how to work with it. Yeah, I realize that sounds like some kind of mind-fuck, as it can get into questions about what consciousness itself is. I try not to go there, usually by reminding myself of the science. It's all about dopamine and my brain cells partying together. I don't take anything for ADHD, so my cells are kind of like "squirrel!" and "let's ride bikes!" most of the time. Bupropion is said to have some minor impact, as it's a dopamine reuptake inhibitor, but I don't think it does much. This winter I wondered if it was even heading off depression.

Unfortunately, knowing isn't always half the battle, G.I. Joe. While I understand how the hellawhack shiznit that happens inside my brizzle works, it's hard for me to logically accept that I can't just will myself to have better concentration. This is part of the thing that I've been trying to unlearn since I was diagnosed. My difficulty in school and college was not me being lazy. I just couldn't reliably plug in when I had to. But I'm surprised at how many daily mundane things I can't easily finish, let alone big things like editing my documentary. This is particularly evident when I sit down at my desk in the morning, and somehow within the first minute I'm bouncing around between work email, personal email, checking bank balances, scanning news headlines, etc. Or when I make grilled cheese for Simon, I burn it, a lot, because I can't stay on watching the stove. Instead I'm trying to optimize by washing a dish, pouring a drink, whatever, when I start to smell burning.

Still, I'd rather know and understand than not know. As I said earlier, it does allow me a little grace to overlook self-directed frustration. Sometimes, not often, I do catch myself on the path of bouncing between things, and can correct for it. I can only imagine how many other people might be better off if they were diagnosed.

I'm at the point in life where I've decided that I don't need to hide my attributes that some may consider weird. It's exhausting.

Because the only protein I really eat is chicken and turkey, no red meat in 20 years. Sometimes programming is fun. I wear shorts when it's cold. I have a lighting truss in my office and I'm learning to program light shows. I could eat Chipotle every day (brown rice, chicken, hot salsa, cheese). I'm not very nostalgic about the music I liked in high school. I hate the texture of my own body hair. I've had a pierced nipple for 20 years (the other one migrated out). When I can't sleep, I hold my breath and try to contract every muscle in my body at the same time. I think Sara Bareilles has an attractive nose. I'm triggered by people who don't understand basic civics. I don't own a suit. I've hit 100% achievements on at least eight Xbox games.

But there are a lot of ways that I'm not weird.

I generally care about the welfare of others. Children shouldn't be hungry because they lost the birth lottery. The scientific method isn't that complicated. Things that make me uncomfortable aren't any less real. I don't care what religion people follow, as long as they don't use it to harm others. I think we have a long way to go to correct racism. I know that, objectively, immigration boosts GDP and the economy. I understand basic economics, like supply and demand and how commodities are priced. I think government should stay out of healthcare decisions, even if it pays for the healthcare. Trans people are real humans, and deserve the same dignity as everyone else. People can decide for themselves (and their own children) what kind of art is appropriate for them to consume. People who plead guilty to violent crime should not be pardoned. Voting should always be easy. I believe critical thinking makes it obvious that scientists and experts are better qualified to assess their areas than I am.

Weird can be fine. It's the "normal" that is broken.

Let me start by saying that the following is all my opinion. I don't speak for my employer. That said, I do sit on the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) council at the company. It's also not the first company I've worked at that has a DEI program. In the last year, you'd think those letters translated to KKK or something equally horrible. I'm here to tell you that, as you might expect, the vitriol is nonsense and not rooted in any reality.

The origins of DEI are part of a larger movement for companies to consider their ESG (environmental, social and governance) practices. ESG is actually rooted in investing, and the desire to invest in responsible and ethical companies. For that reason, many companies issue ESG reports that cover a broad spectrum of internal practices, policies and aspirations. It's the closest thing I can think of to morality checking capitalism.

In practice, DEI is not a rebranding of affirmative action. The intent is not to meet hiring quotas, it's to make sure that there are not systematic ways in which discrimination occurs. That's probably the biggest misconception. It doesn't facilitate discrimination, it prevents it. And honestly, it's the kind of thing that was going on before it had a name anyway. For at least a decade, I've worked for companies that actively train people to be aware of unconscious bias, which means actually hiring and treating people on the merits of their ability, which is exactly what the critics call for. Your diversity is artificially limited if the bias creeps into the way you operate.

But there are other bits to it as well. The equity part is largely about making sure that bias and other factors don't cause a disparity in pay across gender, race, age, etc. That's not even a political intent, because companies that let that slide have a tendency to get sued (just ask Apple, among others). HR departments everywhere audit salaries and overall compensation and make sure that there aren't disparities along demographic lines. Again, this was happening before DEI became a thing.

The inclusion bit is just about being good human beings. Tech companies in particular went through a pretty rough patch, where "tech bro" culture systematically pushed out women from the industry. Uber under prior leadership is one of the more widely publicized stories in this area. These days it focuses on making sure that various groups who are marginalized outside of work are a part of the conversation at work. This covers all kinds of areas, including gender, race, sexuality, accessibility, etc. My personal angle on this is to recognize folks who are not neurotypical, as they may not "fit in" necessarily, but it doesn't preclude them from being significant contributors.

So yeah, there's a lot of noise on this subject, and unfortunately it's the stereotypical grievance politics not rooted in experience, just feelings.

I remember when Facebook opened beyond colleges vividly. I signed up the first day. I had a few friends who were in college, and a number of my former volleyball kids were also in college, so it was useful the first day. Then a few friends from my college days trickled in, as did a few coworkers. When I moved to Seattle in 2009, it became essential, and frankly easy to not completely lose contact with folks back in Cleveland. After that it was folks from Seattle and Cleveland when I moved to Orlando. Gen-X'ers for the most part seemed to enjoy the utility of it all. Obviously, things changed.

A lot of focus is put on the performative nature as a usage pattern for many folks, generally but not always sub-Gen-X people. The harm that usage and consumption may cause, especially among younger people, has become well studied. But things got extra weird when these public companies running the networks started chasing endless growth through constant engagement. That's the algorithms. They learn what you like, and show you more of that. This means that you see more ads, so they can make more money, but it also has the nasty side effect of radicalizing people. For others, they get so stuck in their bubble that it appeals to their worst tendencies. Tech-skeptic Boomers got in and frankly made it worse.

In 2020, amidst an election and a pandemic, the networks at least seemed to acknowledge their role in spreading disinformation, and the feds gave ample evidence that their algorithms were further being manipulated by foreign actors. This year, however, they pretty much said fuck it, picked sides, and here we are. That changes the math quite a bit. The negatives that I mentioned were already there, but once you throw mistrust on top, it starts to feel pretty bad. The only upside, ironic as it might be, is that it can still be a tool for organizing against all of the nonsense.

So if you crave the 2010 utility of Facebook, but already find less use for it given that you don't really see much of what your friends are doing, or the friends bailed, then what? The problem is that these networks are only useful if it's where your people are. With Facebook no longer pretending to care about "bad" content, a lot of folks are moving to Bluesky, which is definitely having a moment. It's a lot more mature than I thought in terms of product development, but it does lack the privacy control that made Facebook useful. When I say privacy, I mean controlling which humans see your stuff, since you can lock down your FB profile so that literally no one can see what you post. (The algorithms make privacy otherwise nonexistent.) Bluesky is intended to be public, which I'm not crazy about. I'm OK showing some of the things, and I do that on Instagram, but a lot of stuff is not for public consumption, it's friends only.

Where does that leave things? Not in a great spot. I could retreat completely to my personal blog, but all of the cross-pinging and conversation that happened on blogs in the old days doesn't work anymore. That's a bummer, too, because it was truly social and there were no walled gardens.

Have I prototyped a social app? Of course I have. I got as far as being able to post photos and text, and compose a feed that is the classic, chronological, friends-only thing. If I were writing high level requirements, that's what I'd want. No algorithms, no ads. It couldn't possibly be free, or at least, not forever, but who knows if anyone would pay for that sort of thing. Oh, it would also be a web app, so no more downloads and platform-specific implementations. And I think I would probably want to implement a Facebook import function, while you can still get all of the data.

I'd use it, but I don't know if invited friends would. I suppose if I'm that disenchanted with the established networks, and don't see friend stuff anyway, maybe it wouldn't even matter.

In the last year or two, I've found myself feeling disappointment about disappointing people. Again, I understand I'm not puppies and rainbows to everyone, and that's fine. But whether it's professional leaders, relatives or public figures, it doesn't feel great when the people that you want to look up to, to be heroes in some capacity, let you down. So it shouldn't be surprising that when I find the opposite, I want to celebrate it.

Almost five years ago, we hosted a former server from the cruise line for a little less than 48 hours as she transitioned through Orlando to visit a friend in Columbia. It kind of happened by accident, when she told us about the then forthcoming end of her contract, and we invited her to stay with us for what amounted to an extended layover. She was no less delightful outside of work, and we periodically checked in during the pandemic (she was in the UK), and have been doing so ever since as she's moved around through Europe and Canada. Her next move was to eventually work in Sweden, but she stayed with us for a week before returning to Europe.

Kairi is originally from Estonia, and as an EU citizen can move around there as much as she likes. She also has residency status in Canada and the UK. She can pack up her life into three (very heavy) bags. In the last five years, she's seen even more, and quite honestly I kind of live vicariously through her and her travels. This sort of thing appears to force all of the perspective you think that it would, and I respect and value her opinions in a way that is different from others. She has more data, so to speak.

More importantly though, Kairi is a kind, empathetic and warm person who is easy to be around. She is charming, funny and authentic. We could talk to her for hours, and she's every bit as interested in you as you are in her. There's nothing transactional about her friendship. We consider her chosen family. Plus she's a cat person, so how can you not adore a person like that? If I could pick a favorite quality though, it's her ability to be optimistic and see the best in people. As an example, she pointed out that on paper, as a non-American, it wouldn't be unreasonable to write off our entire country as pretty terrible, given the outwardly hateful politics. But she's met too many Americans who are not that, and will also say that you can find similar sentiment in most nations, even if they're not as vocal about it. Humans of all kind looking out for each other is more the rule than the exception. I love that.

I've spent a lot of time in the last year trying to understand what fills my social cup, so to speak. Unsurprisingly, I find little value in settings with many people having trivial conversations (though I do still like to throw a party, now and then). Having deeper, more meaningful connections with people like Kairi, however, fills my soul. There are a small number of people in my life that have no specific expectations of me, and I don't have any expectations of them. And yet, despite this, there's a dynamic free of judgment, score keeping or status. Sometimes it's a person exactly my age in the same profession, sometimes it's a colleague that freely shares experiences, sometimes it's an Estonian in her late 20's that I have almost nothing specific in common with. Don't write off younger people, because they will surprise you.

Last night we dropped her off at Terminal C, in the cold, where she waved us off until we were out of sight. I'm sad to see our friend go, but even if it wasn't her intention, she gave me clarity about what's important. That's pretty great. Those are the people that I want in my life.

OK, so I'm exaggerating, because corporate travel has already been back for awhile, but it just seems really back because I did two trips three months apart. Last (last) year I went for the first time in August, then last year I met my team in real life in October. This time it was to get all of the leaders from all areas together, some 300+ people converging in Denver. It was cool to meet some of the execs in real life.

It got me to thinking, as a remote worker, we went quite a long time with this not being a normal thing. I don't have any strong opinions about what the right amount of in-person stuff is, but it's nice to have it at all. I strongly believe in the efficiency, productivity and flexibility of remote work, but it's also different to have conversations with folks face to face. I think it helps ground people a bit and makes those professional relationships more real.

As I said before, there is definitely a cognitive cost for me, since these things usually involve all-day interaction. It's a lot of time to be plugged in, for 12 hours at a time, several days in a row. It's also hard to make it work when you have a kid and a full-time working partner. Hopefully these are more limited to being six months apart.

I never really understood what "sensory challenges" were despite having them many times in my life. It wasn't until Simon that I could see what it was, as sometimes certain amounts and kinds of sounds would cause him to cover his ears. In more extreme instances, he would basically melt into a puddle on the floor covering his ears, and boy would that trigger some Papa Bear instincts in me.

After my own ASD diagnosis, I would eventually come to recall instances where I felt the same. In adulthood I have largely developed coping mechanisms to roll with it. As is the case with Simon, I can't easily predict what might be difficult, and even the same circumstances on two different days could yield different results. But now I've had two episodes of being sonically overwhelmed, and I'm angry about the way I feel. I feel like I'm less, and I shouldn't.

I don't know what the experience is like for others, but the best way that I can describe it is that it's the auditory version of being in a room with a bunch of asynchronous strobe lights that never stop flashing. It's like someone stabbing your brain, which is too abstract, but I don't know how else to describe it. Maybe for a neurotypical person it would be like standing in a fire station where the truck is blaring its siren.

My previous situation was only a month ago, on our last cruise. Aboard the Wish, one of the dinner nights is in a Frozen themed restaurant with live music. I've generally enjoyed it, but this time we were very close to the stage, and the lighting was also in my eye line. Despite wearing noise-cancelling ear buds, I found it overwhelming, and I just kind of shut down. Diana saw that I was struggling, and encouraged me to leave.

Then tonight I was out for dinner with an arranged group of people that I don't typically work with. The restaurant was extra noisy, an old building with no soft surfaces on the interior. On top of that, they had loud music, which might be fine if it was music I knew and I wasn't trying to hear people talking at the table. (Also, they didn't have the one dish on the menu that I would eat, and the waiter was kind of a dick about it.) I found myself involuntarily holding my ear, and I stepped out to reset for a minute. I was back in for about five minutes before I just couldn't take it anymore. I apologized for bailing, and I bailed.

I felt embarrassed, inferior and high maintenance, even though I logically know that this was a reaction to the way that my brain processes stimuli. I can't explain why even the night before, I had no issue in a noisy bowling alley/bar/arcade. Maybe it's lighting, sound frequencies... I don't know. My emotional response is that I don't want to be limited in any way, and this felt like a limitation that I should be equipped to handle.

If there is a positive, it's that I recognize the situation. Even four years ago, I would only know that I had an overwhelming desire to run, and I would chalk it up to other feelings of discomfort, like social things, and attribute that to personality instead of something truly physiological. Even being able to give myself that grace, it still doesn't feel good.