As usual, there's no subtext here. I'm not trying to be mysterious or send someone a message. I just think some truths are best summarized concisely. They may also be easier to remember that way.
What's wrong with hyperpartisan media? Pick your favorite example of a one-sided TV channel, YouTube channel, website, radio show, podcast, or magazine. If the problem is that these outlets promote overly simplistic, slanted perspectives, never reporting the other side of the story, then why are we not equally worried about social media filter bubbles, given that they are designed to do exactly the same thing?
TikTok, Facebook, and other social media platforms show us what we want to see. They reinforce our existing worldviews. One doesn’t need to think hard to understand why; anything else would be bad for business! Nobody logs on to be told they’re wrong. Nobody enjoys having their reality challenged. Validation is more fun, even when it's wrong.
I’m concerned about old-style hyperpartisan media, but this new, “social” version is much worse. Many of us walk around with personalized, digital propagandists in our pockets. They push our buttons and beg for our limited attention—buzz, buzz! Sometimes, we spend more time with them than with real human beings, with their nuanced and thoughtful perspectives.
I’ve often wondered what I do differently that makes me “good” with computers.
Being willing to make mistakes is huge, although I empathize with anyone who is unwilling to take that risk; a single button press can destroy hours of work… or at least appear to. Sure, many things can be undone, but what good is that if people aren't taught how to undo them? You might be like a high school friend of mine, who was amazed when I reminded him that his “lost” paper was probably just in the “Recycle Bin.”
In thinking about this question, I’ve also noticed one habit that seems to help: when I install a new app or set up a new device, I immediately peruse the settings. Doing so is a great way to learn what the software is and isn’t capable of. It makes the software seem less “magical.” It bounds the possibilities. I recommend giving it a shot.
Never say of anything, “I have lost it,” but, “I have restored it.” Has your child died? It is restored. Has your wife died? She is restored. Has your estate been taken away? That likewise is restored. “But it was a bad man who took it.” What is it to you by whose hands he who gave it has demanded it again? While he permits you to possess it, hold it as something not your own, as do travelers at an inn. —The Enchiridion of Epictetus
Some might find these comments on death to be callous and blunt. I find them helpful. The default is nothingness. We are lucky to have others while we do. Moreover, reality is what it is, whether we like it or not. We can either fight reality, an impossible task, or we can find some way to live in harmony with reality. It’s easier said than done, but it’s our only real option.
edit (2025-12-03): I'm tagging this as a favorite because I think about this often. I think it's good advice for anyone who finds themselves in a bad situation.
My love-hate relationship with Apple continues. In my earlier post on the topic, I only briefly mentioned what may be my biggest gripe with the company: vendor lock-in.
I'm honestly bewildered by how easy it is to export data from Google products. What is Google's incentive for helping with this? On the other hand, exporting data from Apple products can be almost impossible. Want to take your to-do list with you when you switch to the next big thing, without jumping through hoops? Good luck.
Using Apple products is like staying at the Hotel Cupertino: you can check out any time you like, but your data will never leave. As much as I admire Apple products, with their attention to detail and their focus on usability and user experience, this problem may be the one that prevents me from moving to Apple's ecosystem.
In the past, I wrote that we may need a digital equivalent to the awkward pause. At the time, I couldn't find the blog post where I first encountered that idea, but now, almost exactly one year later, I've found it. It really stood the test of time. I couldn't agree more!
Imagine you're at a dinner party, and you're getting into a heated argument. As you start yelling, the other people quickly hush their voices and start glaring at you. None of the onlookers have to take further action—it's clear from their facial expressions that you're being a jerk.
In digital conversations, giving feedback requires more conscious effort. Silence is the default. Participants only get feedback from people who join the fray. They receive no signal about how the silent onlookers perceive their dialogue. In fact, they don't receive much signal that onlookers observed the conversation at all.
As a result, the feedback you do receive in digital conversations is more polarized, because the only people who will engage are those who are willing to take that extra step and bear that cost of wading into a messy conversation.
Inspired by a series from my former colleague, Eric Shepherd, I'd like to write five-word movie reviews from time to time. I'll start with the movie Jules: