In August, in an effort to lose weight, improve my health, and learn to cook, I took the Jumpstart class with the Rochester Lifestyle Medicine Institute. Any attendee who participates fully—measuring changes in their health, attending meetings, etc.—is allowed one free retake within 12 months. I'll be beginning that retake on Monday. I'm grateful for the opportunity, because although I learned a lot and developed good habits the first time around, I got off-track with Kika's passing and the holidays. I try not to make excuses, though. I didn't want that change enough. I didn't want it enough to overcome those challenges, anyway. I hope that the retake helps me to rebuild those habits and stick with them.

The RLMI recommends a whole-food plant-based diet. I've been vegan since the summer of 2011 for ethical reasons, but over those years, I became a junk food vegan. There's plenty of highly-processed vegan food out there, full of sugar and salt and fat, and it hasn't served me well. Although I'm not one of those people who thinks any diet can work miracles, curing cancer or some such thing, I do think eating more real food from the earth is probably better for everyone. This program helps participants learn how to do that. (If you do believe a certain diet can work miracles and cure cancer, that's fine, but please don't rely on that at the exclusion of modern medical treatment. It won't work.)

Although I had followed other diets in the past, some very successfully, taking the course in August opened my eyes, for the first time, to how terrible most grocery store food is. Most of those items with big, bright logos, fun packaging, and exciting new flavors are filled with stuff that nobody needs. I'm not even talking about complex chemicals which have difficult-to-pronounce names—those things can be found in bananas, too. I'm talking about the heaps of salt and oil and sugar these brands pack their foods with to make them as delicious (and as unhealthy) as possible.

Since then, I've been struggling to come up with a term for this kind of food. Everyone knows the term junk food, of course, but that doesn't quite describe the food I'm talking about. Many people consider ice cream to be junk food, for example, but not oatmeal that's unnecessarily packed with sugar. I think we need a term for the latter.

After lots of thinking, I finally came up with one: funhouse food. If it has bright colors, a bold name, a cartoon character, fun packaging, or exciting new flavors, if it's loaded with salt or sugar or fat—if it's too much fun—it's funhouse food.

May I endeavor harder and harder to avoid it.

#Life #Maxims

“Humor is just another defense against the universe.”

—Mel Brooks

#Life #Quotes

I know many people who use social media only to follow businesses they care about, so that they can hear about specials, promotions, events, and changes to hours. It's true that some businesses don't update their website or provide a newsletter, so I can understand the appeal of using social media to follow them. The situation seems to be getting better, though, with more and more businesses maintaining a healthy online presence outside of the big, centralized social platforms.

I don't want to be too cynical, but using social media for this purpose does seem like opt-in advertising on some level. It's too bad that many with these users will also be manipulated into liking, commenting, buying, sharing, following, radicalizing, and you know, dismantling democracy.

#Life #SocialMedia #Tech

This has to be one of the strangest developments I've noticed in online communication recently—and yes, sadly, the real world, as if there were any difference.

At some point, it apparently became fashionable to slap the label narcissist on anyone who has behaved badly, as well as many people who haven't. Someone's ex is a narcissist. That one's boss is a narcissist. Everyone's parents are narcissists. What in the world is inspiring people to talk like this? Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) does exist, yes, and there may be some very conspicuous examples of it in public life, although I'm not qualified to diagnose anyone. Still, it's a minority disorder. The Cleveland Clinic reports that NPD affects around 0.5% to 5% of Americans. Clearly, most people who behave badly do not qualify for a diagnosis. Moreover, mental illnesses like anxiety and depression are far more common.

Yes, sometimes people treat others badly because they are narcissists, but others are unkind due to their depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, addiction, or one of the dozens of other psychological afflictions that cause so much pain. In most cases—not all, but most—I'm sure those suffering with these ailments endure much more agony than the people around them. Of course, that's assuming the target of the “narcissist” label is even clinically unwell. Maybe your boss just wants to further their own goals at the exclusion of yours. That's not narcissism. That's not mental illness. That's just corporate life. (I would argue that any manager pursuing their own goals at the exclusion of yours is a bad manager, but that doesn't make them a narcissist.)

Language evolves, and I suppose people can use the term narcissist to mean brute, if they choose. The dictionary wasn't handed down from the heavens, unchangeable. I just worry that being so sloppy with terminology unfairly demonizes the vast majority of mental illnesses that inspire unusual behavior for other reasons. I also think it can suggest a degree of intent that simply doesn't exist. Maybe that person at the convention shouted at you because they struggle with anger or because they never learned how disagree respectfully, not because they want to feel superior to you.

I do wonder—and this is pretty speculative—whether some people are so cavalier with the term narcissist because they want to deflect attention away from their own narcissism of a different kind. I'm not talking about clinical narcissism, the type that seriously harms oneself and others, but rather more ordinary narcissism, the kind that leads one to believe that anyone actually cares about their status updates. I think it's plausible that social media does foster some amount of casual, everyday narcissism. Could it be that people throw the term around because they're uncomfortable facing their own shrouded narcissism of a different kind?

Instead of throwing labels around, maybe we should spend more time looking in the mirror—in a healthy way. I will try to do the same.

#Life #SocialMedia #Tech

A little over two years ago, I published chatbots in the GPT Store which imitated historical figures, answering questions as those historical figures would, using the tone of voice they would, and referring only to the knowledge those people would have had. I took a lot of time to get the prompt just right, and I dare say my bots were much more believable than the others I've seen. I thought they could be valuable in education as well as entertainment. I hope some teachers used them in classrooms to learn more about historical figures in a fun and engaging way.

I would have expected Jesus and Elvis to get the most usage (there has to be a joke there), but to my surprise, those weren't very popular, perhaps because there are many other bots imitating them. None of my bots got a ton of usage, but the most popular were the Buddha (400+ conversations), followed by Immanuel Kant (300+ conversations), followed by Nikola Tesla and perhaps a couple of others with 200+ conversations. Nikola Tesla was initially removed from the GPT Store under the mistaken assumption that it had something to do with the Tesla brand, but once OpenAI allowed creators to appeal, I appealed the removal successfully. A Sigmund Freud chatbot was removed shortly after holding a couple hundred conversations because OpenAI was worried it would be misused to solicit medical advice—good point, actually. I agree with OpenAI on that one.

As time went on, it became clear that character.ai was a more popular platform for these kinds of chatbots, but I wasn't interested in making that switch after hearing stories about character.ai chatbots placating suicidal users and even encouraging them to kill themselves.

Well, as anyone in tech knows, this isn't really about character.ai. I mean, sure, maybe character.ai has particularly bad safeguards. Even still, ChatGPT can be just as bad. In fact, LLMs in general can be wildly unpredictable, recommending that people eat rocks, telling bedtime stories about how to make napalm, and now, apparently, encouraging suicide. It goes without saying that I would never instruct my chatbots to do that, but 99% of a chatbot's behavior is dictated by the platform—in this case, ChatGPT—not the chatbot creator. My bots just told ChatGPT how to act. How ChatGPT interpreted those instructions was always beyond my control, and as mentioned previously, it's clear ChatGPT didn't always behave responsibly. In any case, it became clear that these platforms and characters are incredibly compelling, but not particularly safe. That's a problem.

For that reason, I've deleted all of my chatbots in the ChatGPT store. Technologists may solve the problem of unpredictable AI behavior in the future, but right now, we're not there, and I don't want to risk putting anyone in harm's way. In the unlikely event you used one of my bots and you're reading this blog post, I'm sorry. I'd be interested to hear how you were using it, even though I can't restore it. Reach out any time. My contact information is available on my website.

#Life #Tech

I'm not an oracle, and it's usually easier to solve other people's problems than my own… or at least seem to. Even still, when others ask me for advice, I try to help them consider what they could do to improve the situation. I take this approach even when the advisee is the recipient of someone else's bad behavior. If someone is being mistreated by their boss, for example, I might suggest that they quit, talk to HR, or ask for an internal transfer.

Sometimes, the pushback doesn't take very long. “They're the jerk. Why don't you tell them to be different!?”

Of course, the other person often is the jerk, and I will try to tell that person to be better, if I can. At the same time, bad people—the truly awful, cruel, uncaring people of the world, the people others complain about—they usually don't take advice. They don't care what I have to say. If they were so reasonable, they probably wouldn't be causing this problem in the first place.

To that point, I try to remind the listener, “you're the only person you can control.”

It's not fair, but remembering that may be the only strategy that has any chance of succeeding. Jerks are everywhere, and if our happiness depends on them being better, we're probably not going to be very happy.

None of this is to excuse the importance of listening to others and trying to understand their pain without trying to fix anything. I could always do a better job of that.

If you do want something to change, though, focus on what you can do differently. It's not fair, but it may be the only solution worth attempting, because you're the only person you can control.

#Life #Favorites #Maxims

Limelight by Rush sure has some strange time signatures. I don't think I've ever been good at understanding the bottom number of a time signature, but I can count how many beats seem to be in each measure. Without counting how many measures there are of each time signature, I hear the time signature start at 4, then go to 7, then 6, then 4, then 7, then 6, then 4, then 7, then 3. After that, I can't keep track.

Pretty wacky. I like it!

#Life

Earlier this year, a colleague asked me what “my genre” is. I responded that it must be progressive rock. It's just weird enough to be interesting, just unexpected enough to keep your mind engaged, and just absurd enough to remind you that rules really are sometimes made to be broken.

I've listened to the Pink Floyd catalogue many times over, I've been listening to more King Crimson this year, and I've really been enjoying “Firth of Fifth” recently. I only really listened to Rush a couple of weeks ago, but they tick a lot of my boxes. I love synthesizers!

I have so much more to discover. Something to look forward to!

#Life

The other day, I was watching an episode of Everybody Loves Raymond where Raymond buys a special, expensive, rare, fad collectible card for his daughter. You may know the episode, Hackidu. It's a good one. Paul Reubens, best known for his character Pee-wee Herman, steals the show.

The point is, it made me very emotional, thinking of all the nice toys my parents bought me as a kid, including many that were fads, expensive, difficult to obtain, or simply extremely thoughtful. I grew up in the 90s, and so this list includes things like Beanie Babies, Tamagotchis, baseball cards, video games, educational games, books, scooters, backpacks featuring TV shows I liked, and much more than I can honestly remember.

I'm very grateful for that. I hate to say, “it's the thought that counts,” as though I didn't enjoy the toys themselves, but truthfully, the thought and love they put into those choices is very meaningful to me.

I feel a bit strange being so emotional over physical things, especially when I dislike consumerism, but it was the thoughts that matter most. They show their love through gifts, to a large extent, and I am very touched.

#Life

Remember, if you don't pursue your own stupid idea, you'll end up pursuing someone else's stupid idea. Case in point: Liquid Glass. Someone at the top thought it was a good idea, and thousands of Apple employees were apparently too afraid to say, “This sucks.”

#Life #SoftwareDevelopment #Tech