Gorillaz & Moby & Van Vaudeville & Soulection

Gorillaz, Demon Days - this one holds up, still a solid album.

News to me, Moby has been making extended ambient tracks in some manner of partnership with the Calm app. They make good “I need to focus and get stuff done” music, but aren’t particularly high energy, if that’s your thing. Says Moby, “my suggestion is to not approach this as music, but to approach it as a sleep aid or tool”. Okay!

I would like to some day learn enough piano to play and sing the songs of the original Van Halen line-up, e.g. “Panama”, “Hot for Teacher”, “Beautiful Girls”, and “Unchained”. My theory here is, the original Van Halen is very Vaudeville, except louder and more late-seventies. Corollary: played literally and with a little bit of a vaudevillian spin, they’d work perfectly. Case in point: “Ice Cream Man”.

Somehow, I’ve never mentioned Soulection Radio. It’s equal parts new R&B/hip-hop, classic soul, and a lot of sample culture. It’s one of the best things going on Apple Music, Spotify, and Soundcloud.


Robocalls. What a concept!

They’re on our phones, in our voicemails. Computers or sometimes even humans calling in massive volumes, funneling people into bad purchases. Questionable insurance at best, outright fraud at worst. Sometimes, depending on the state you live in, politics!

There’s no reason to pick up on an unknown number in 2019, or even 2009. For many of us, Dunbar’s number for phone calls is in the low single digits. Outside those few numbers, why answer an even remotely questionable number, ever?

If you squint right, robocalls appear they were  designed for the technological landscape of 1995, of Friends and cordless, landline phones. Robocalls,  could have made sense in 1995. You get a call, it’s Friday, there are no repeats of your favorite show on, you’re a bit bored. Sure, maybe you’ll pick up. Or in 1992, when receiving a phone call was not only a big, exciting deal!, but also a social imperative. You can’t just let the answering machine pick up? It could be…someone. Probably a human!

Sadly, the technological landscape I just described is exactly folks who aren’t “technology natives”. I suspect that’s largely who Robocalls prey on: the bored and lonely, those who grew up before the pace of technological evolution surged and haven’t developed a layered defense to those who would prey on them.


How we get back to space

Space isn’t a dead-end, it’s just taking us longer to figure out than our earliest trajectory. The New Yorker has a great look at The Race to Develop the Moon for industrial purposes:

Lunar construction projects now look feasible. “Down the hall, we have a telerobotics lab,” Burns said. “You could print components of habitats, of telescopes. You use the lunar regolith”—the dust of the moon—“as your printing material. You could print the wrench you need to fix something.” Fifteen years ago, the moon was believed to be a dry rock; now we know that there’s water there. Both private industry and national agencies regard the mining of water and precious materials as something that’s not too far off.

Only twelve people have walked on the moon, all of them between the summer of 1969 and Christmas, 1972. All the moonwalkers were men, all were American, all but one were Boy Scouts, and almost all listened to country-and-Western music on their way to the moon; they earned eight dollars a day, minus a fee for a bed on the spacecraft.

Buzz Aldrin had hoped, and briefly expected, that it would be he, and not Neil Armstrong, who would take the first human step on the moon. The astronaut Michael Collins, who manned the control module that orbited the moon while Armstrong and Aldrin walked below, has said of Aldrin that he “resents not being first on the moon more than he appreciates being second.” On the moon, Armstrong took photos of Aldrin posing, but Aldrin took none of Armstrong doing the same. One of the few photos that shows Neil Armstrong on the moon was taken by Armstrong himself—of his reflection in Aldrin’s helmet, as Aldrin salutes the flag. We are petty and misbehave on Earth; we will be petty and misbehave in space.

​Futurism isn’t dead, it’s just not all around us like Tomorrowland promised.


The notes - May 6, 2018

Unclogging the blog pipes here…

Think better

I feel seen - Satisfaction and progress in open-ended work:

For more open-ended problems, much of the challenge lies in figuring out what to do next. These rich questions offer deep satisfaction on longer time scales, but without a clear sense of progress, each day ends ambiguously. Was today good? Will these tinkerings add up to anything? In what timeframe? Who knows. Ultimately: what structures around progress, self-correction, and operations can help us in open-ended mode?

Times Jason Kottke or Austin Kleon wrote about thoughtfully engaging with the news: Things you notice when you quit the news, A tip for a better media diet: delay reading the news, You can be woke without waking up to the news.

Code better

I revisited thinking about code on my iPad again this weekend. On the one hand, the status quo continues: you can type programs in, but you can’t navigate, compile, or run them on the device. Textastic, Working Copy, Codea, and Swift Playgrounds continue to exist and continue to set a high standard but leave me wanting. I did make it further using CodeSandbox than last time I tried. If you don’t mind living entirely in a mobile Safari tab, you can do non-trivial things with JavaScript!

Related: Muse is a prototype for an iPad-based thinking environment and I want this running on a dozen iPads spread across a big table in a well-lit room. The demo video and accompanying essay are full of great ideas.

SRE School: No Haunted Forests:

You've heard the euphemism tech debt, where like a car loan you hold a recurring obligation in exchange for immediate liquidity. But this is misleading: bad code is not merely overhead, it also reduces optionality for all teams that come in contact with it. Imagine being unable to get indoor plumbing because your neighbor has a mortgage!

Preact - a cool way to understand React as a UI runtime is to look at smaller, single purpose implementation of the concept. To my surprise, much of React’s API surface area is about delivering values to components, passing those values to components, and letting the component help decide if it should re-render. All implemented in two not-so-tricky functions which handle render components.

Listen better

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse - fresher than it is essential, carries the vibe of the movie nicely.

Ben Folds Five, The Unauthorized Biography of Reinhold Messner - I forgot how strongly this album starts, “Narcolepsy is a real gem”.

New-to-me band whose whole catalog I’m celebrating: The Middle Kids.

Vampire Weekend, Father of the Bride - meets but does not exceed expectations.


Possibly the biggest upsight I’ve had on software estimation in a while - the blowup factor: erikbern.com/2019/04/1…


What makes Into the Wide Open such a great album?

Into the Great Wide Open strikes me as a singular album. Perhaps it’s not even the best Tom Petty album, but it stands out from the rest in some kind of way.

Maybe it’s nostalgia? It’s the first Petty album I bought.

Maybe it’s humble? None of the songs are flashy, sitting right on the fence between songwriting and rock ‘n roll.

Maybe it’s the lyrics? I’ve listened to this album a lot, so I’ve actually heard the lyrics and they’re the right balance between clever and storytelling, for me.

Maybe it’s Jeff Lynne? Love that guy’s production work. Great touch.

It’s not too long, it’s not too short. All the moving parts do their job without getting showy. Perhaps, it’s just more than the sum of its parts.


Typo’d GraphQL as “GraphSQL” and was like “that’s a little on the nose there, fingers”


A nice reminder that our work is often more about storytelling than we think - Name It, and They Will Come — Overreacted


TIL, Vim hybrid absolute + relative line numbering: jeffkreeftmeijer.com/vim-numbe…


Does Clojure style still rely on writing a lot of chains of higher-order functions (with -> IIRC) or have they moved on to something else?


Sometimes software rewrites don’t fail - if you focus on escaping a local maximum for the product and customers.


Leaning into the impostor syndrome here, I did a little bit of GraphQL hacking to see how the ecosystem is coming along. Not too badly! github.com/therealad…

Also, semi-literate programming 🤓🤠💪!


Stephen Anderson on The Future of Design: Computation & Complexity. Like everything else, its going to get more weird. But, the large-scale outcome remains the same - design is deciding which elements are essential and which elements to remove:

The real world isn’t so simple, and often has many competing goals and constraints. As a designer, what are you already doing, to help define the objectives and goals for a project? As critical as this is to teamwork, it’s the single, driving factor for machines. We can — and should — absolutely lean into defining these things. This has always been important, but will be vital as we hand over more decisions to Machine Learning.

This definitely sounds like the future…

Now, what if I told you nothing could be designed that can’t be pitched, coded up, and released in an afternoon. Sound insane? I know of at least one company — the largest in their industry — that works this way.

…and we have to invent a future where we solve this future we created without thinking through the ramifications:

Never before has technology allowed individuals to do more harm (or good) with such low effort. — Christian Beck

​Any practice where we can drive the iteration time to zero will end up requiring a new way of working where the computer generates a bunch of possible designs/systems/artifacts and a human applies education and intuition to determine which one to keep:

Play this out, and the role of human shifts from that of hands-on creator using software to render an idea to that of a conductor (or curator or cultivator?) working with software to explore possible options. In a sense, we develop a sort of symbiotic relationship with the machine; the machine generates possibilities that we then direct or tweak until arriving at an optimal solution. We see this playing out in nearly every industry, from manufacturing to the design of web sites to healthcare.

​A phase transition has already happened where the most successful systems occasionally touch the lives of city-sized populations. “Scale” means the most successful systems/platforms touch entire societies and a major fraction of the human population. I missed this forest amongst the trees of frameworks, languages, and databases. I suspect leaders like Zuckerberg and Dorsey missed it amongst the trees of growth and market acquisition.

Again, we have to invent a future where we fix the future we accidentally created:

What is new in all this is visibility into the scale and scope of problems we now work on — we have to ask questions about impact and outcomes. Facebook and Twitter are platforms that have changed the world. The addictive properties of Pinterest and SnapChat are changing human behavior and social interactions. We can’t treat these things like simple web apps. They aren’t.

Part of inventing the future to fix the future is thinking more about feedback loops and how small changes in forces and incentives create outsized results:

Much of the literature on formal systems thinking is dedicated to this topic of small changes. Reinforcing loops and balancing loops are the two foundational structures of systems thinking. The idea goes like this: Want to introduce a change? Don’t try to change the system (you can’t!). Instead, introduce a small change, or tweak an existing rule, then see what happens.

More optimiscally, this last bit leads me to (continue to) think that the skills designers need aren’t so far off the skills developers need:

I’ve identified about 11 ways of being that describe design. I won’t go into them all — there’s a post coming for that. But you’ve heard me mention some of these:

  • Frame & Reframe Problems
  • Work from Principles & Values
  • Think in Systems and Contexts
  • Focus on Human Needs & Motivations
  • See Possible Futures (where Others See Present Realities)
  • Thrive on Ambiguity

Since I can never remember their individual names, it’d help me a lot if all pugs were named “Puggers” from here on out. “Mugsy” would also be acceptable, but I might get them confused for bulldogs idk.


At least once a week, I wish I could go show fourteen-year-old Adam Diamonds and Pearls and Enter the Wu-Tang so that I’d have much better musical taste much earlier.


Coding without a computer, designing without a design

A thing I want to try is coding offline, per se. Without a functional computer (like a tablet). Think first. Outline and sketch a solution. Maybe pseudocode it up. Then fill it in and make it work once a “real” computer is available.

Related: think first, outline/sketch a solution, only use the computer once I’m ready to build.

Related related: what if frameworks like Rails, Django, etc. are scaffolds that we attach boilerplate-ish behavior to while we’re trying to figure what a program really wants to be? How many essay-sized programs are hiding in novel or encyclopedia-sized systems?

Basically: I want to code without computers more often, and discover more program designs that are lurking within the design of a framework.


Vacation reads

It used to be that all the programmers were ladies. Arguably, they were higher skilled programmers since they didn’t have little luxuries like text editors, REPLs, and online communities to problem solve with! Things were different back then, and they could be better again - The Secret History of Women in Coding - The New York Times

I finally looked into The Pudding and came upon many a delightful visual essay: Rappers, sorted by the size of their vocabulary and The Structure of Stand-Up Comedy on the cycles in Ali Wong’s famous set.

A list of non-hacks, mostly about sleep, that might help you feel better. 7 Biohacks That Actually Work - The Atlantic

A bit dismal: Dictators have reemerged as the greatest threat to the liberal democratic world - The Washington Post. Improvements to liberalism that could counter said rise of dictators and nationalism: The Economist at 175 - Liberalism.

The degree to which the tradecraft of national intelligence agencies are applied in the private sector continually appalls me. But apparently its part of the game for at least one activist investor. Paul Singer, Doomsday Investor | The New Yorker I think probably we’re doing capitalism wrong at this point?

On James Cameron. A man creatively possessed, but a crude man at a best.Man of Extremes | The New Yorker

Javier Grillo-Marxuach (LOST and a bunch of other stuff) on running a television show, but absolutely applicable to any creative leadership discipline.

On Barry, the loveliness, and apparently the sadness that is Bill Hader. Bill Hader Kills | The New Yorker


I think with my mouth. Often that means I start talking with some idea, realize that the idea isn’t as hefty as I originally thought, and end up talking until I reach a moment of mild truth. Which often ends up being a platitude.

Shutting up: it’s a thing I’m working on.


In the world where data-privacy and GDPR compliance matter, owned/onsite analytics stacks like this seem promising bostata.com/post/clie…


Technologies which I am 🤔 about adding to a product but 🤷‍♂️ if someone has already gone through the process of setting them up and getting the developer experience right: React, Docker, ELK, (probably others)