si dawson » geek

Are You Using The Internet, Or Is The Internet Using You?

Si — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:05:11 +0000

I've been giving my internet use a bit of thought recently.

I realised (wild generalisation alert!), there are two primary ways I use the internet:

To waste time
To find information

and, of course, a few secondary ways:

To build, create, produce, expand (eg, write a blog post, build a business, send love to people)
To communicate
To provide services to others

Sites like Facebook, Twitter etc are built on communication — but even there, most of the time we're really just doing something because it fills in time. I.e., we're firmly in category 1.

The time-wasting sites are easy to spot. We go there when we're trying to avoid or escape from something else (drudgery, unpleasant tasks, boring work). We look up and the next thing we know, hours have passed. We have slightly more information in our head, sure, but it's of dubious benefit.

The question underneath all this is simple: Are we expanding or contracting our life? Are we producing or consuming?

If all we're doing is consuming, that's a contraction. We're not adding anything to the world and generally, we're actually disconnecting from the people & things around us. Trite chit-chat is no substitute for a heart felt conversation.

If we're producing something, that's an expansion. We're adding value to the world.

If we're using the internet as a conscious tool, then it's working for us. If all we're doing is wasting time? Really, we're working for it (and the pay rate is lousy)

Based on this, I've switched off access to my primary time waster sites (reddit, slashdot, hacker news, boing boing, kottke). As interesting as they are, it's time for me to more consciously choose what I put into my mind.

Minimise the external (and typically trivialising) influence, maximise my internal choice.

How Do You Suck?

Si — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 00:18:00 +0000

I was talking with a good friend last night, and she mentioned that I was a great programmer. I found that a little surprising, as despite the unlikeliness of a lot of what I achieve, I don't generally think of myself in this way.

pic by striatic

I've thought a lot more deeply about this since, and I've realised a few things — that apply to any area of skill.

People who are not-so-good in any area tend to look down the tree at those below them on the skill ladder — "Look! I'm better than all those people!"

People who are good in any area tend to look up the tree "See how much more I have to learn!"

This is also part of a natural continuum (great word!) of learning:

unconscious incompetence (you don't realise you suck)
conscious incompetence (you realise you suck)
unconscious competence (you don't realise you don't suck as much as you thought you did)
conscious competence (you know you don't suck — and why!)

For example, in Aikido I'm somewhere between step 2 & 3. I'm aware of how much I suck (the more deeply you learn, the more you can see that needs improvement) — but I don't realise that I don't suck in general (and am always a little surprised when someone points this out). This isn't a negative self view, as much as a genuine desire to improve & a focus on this, rather than comparison with others.

Interestingly, I can very concretely remember a time when I genuinely believed I was awesome at Aikido. How wrong I was (in hindsight)!! *laugh*

The real trap, of course, is being aware of the dangers & massive difference between stage 1 & 3. Unwarranted ego-centricism is, after all, known as hubris, & we all know how dangerous the ego is, right kids?

War Games Cracks Me the Hell Up

Si — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:50:00 +0000

So I'm reading an interview on Wired with a bunch of the people behind the 1983 hit WarGames, and I stumble across what I think may be the funniest sub-interview ever to grace a sidebar.

It's with Ally Sheedy, the then 20 year old love interest of the movie (who set many a heart pattering in her day, I can tell you)

Wired: So it wasn't a love for microprocessors that drew you to this role.

Sheedy: I couldn't make heads or tails of the script. It was easy for me to do the part where she's asking questions.

Wired: What about now?

Sheedy: To be honest, I haven't seen the movie since it came out. It's probably kind of quaint.

Wired: Nowadays, cybercrime might outrank nuclear warfare as a source of collective anxiety. I sometimes feel really at sea with technology. I love email.

Sheedy: All this communicating has created a world where no one's accountable. And I have a 14-year-old daughter, so I worry.

Wired: Wow. You have a 14-year-old daughter. That just set off a wave of cognitive dissonance among the hackers who'd like to hit on you … Do hackers hit on you?

Sheedy: No, I don't hear so much from hackers. No. No, no, no. I don't. Thankfully. No.

Wired: Just one no would've been fine.

The rest of the Wired piece is actually kind of fascinating too. Those guys really did their research.

ok, ok, one more funny quote, from the director (they had a stack of geeks on set the whole time)

You could get all the hacker geekiness you wanted just by standing on the set. We were dealing with things like when Matthew sits at the computer, we've got an actor who can't even type. I'd say, "No, I just really want him to type in 'David' and have him get on." They said, "No! You can't do that! You have to go through all these elaborate sequences!" I said, "No, we're not doing that. Audiences will have left the theater by the time he logs into the computer one time."