The Desian Universe

This weekend hasn't been a great one for my mental state. Going in, I was already feeling generally overwhelmed and inadequate in life. Then I had trouble sleeping, and Othercat is off visiting one of their other partners, so I'm home by myself for the entire four-day (for me) weekend.

It's been rough.

That said, today has been much better than I was expecting. It got off to a slow start (I woke up at 10 and finally rolled out of bed at like, 11?), but I went for a nice walk earlier, and I've been knocking some important things off my list. It's nice to feel for once like I'm doing a good job at something.

That "something" is performance reviews for all my folks at work. Yeah, working a whole bunch on the weekend sucks, but in this particular case, I feel like it's worth it. I'm hoping that if I get as many of them done as possible, it will significantly reduce my stress over the next couple weeks.

I rarely have time when I'm in the office to sit, focus, and relax/de-stress enough to get big things done. So even though I'm burning weekend time to do it (at least some of which I'll be able to get back later), it feels like a worthwhile trade-off for my emotional health. I can also feel good about the fact that I'm giving each of my folks the undivided attention necessary to give them proper feedback (rather than scrawling "Good Job!" across the top of all their forms with a purple whiteboard marker).

I'm still not good enough, and I probably need to get back into therapy for that. But today feels like a small victory, and I believe there will be more small victories to come.

I hope, if I string enough small victories together, they will gradually turn into a big one.

— Des

Had my routine checkup yesterday, and everything looks pretty good. Still need to do my STI tests and such, but in general I’m healthy. My blood pressure, in particular, is near optimal, which is a marked improvement over last year, and I think it's due to both eating healthier and the fact that I've started holding walking meetings at work.

I also learned something new about my migraines: some of those things that feel like tension-type headaches (where they start in my neck and move up/forward) are actually more likely migraines. We’ve changed my treatment plan to take the migraine pill first and the standard NSAID painkiller second, even if I'm not sure at first if it's a migraine. The migraine pill is actually probably safer, and it’s overall better for my brain to abort the migraine as soon as possible. (As long as I'm not taking more than 9 per month, which shouldn't be a concern for me.)

I have a newer migraine drug to try, which should hopefully have fewer side effects, and I'm hopeful that changing the strategy will help overall.

Mental health is a different story. My partner has been pushing me to go back into therapy again. I had a discussion with my doctor, and she agrees. I scored in the "moderate" range for both depression and anxiety, despite the previous year-plus of therapy I went through, which ended roughly a year ago.

That's somewhat disappointing, honestly, because it feels like I'm back to right about where I was two years ago. I know that life is a journey, and the road is twisty, narrow, and doubles back on itself a lot, but come on. :^)

I'm more grounded, certainly, but it's also true that I'm still not on solid emotional ground. My excuse so far for not getting back into therapy has been that I'm not sure what it would accomplish—I don't feel like I have a clear problem I can define that I can ask for help with. Plus, I have a lot of good tools for dealing with anxiety and depression, I just don't use them when I should.

But maybe that last bit is the problem. How do I consistently motivate myself over the long term to use the coping skills I have, and maintain the kind/amount of vigilance necessary to realize when and how I need to use them?

Anyway, I'm going to give it some more thought—I'm not entirely convinced it's going to be super helpful for me at this stage, but it can't hurt, either.

— Des

I've never been particularly thrilled with Twitter, but I've been getting progressively less happy with it over time, and I think it's time to take a step back and re-evaluate whether it's really working for me.

Twitter as a Social Tool

I'm mainly interested in Twitter as a way to keep up with the goings-on in my friends' lives. In this case, it largely fills the role that LiveJournal, IRC, and AIM used to fill when I was in college; I would check in periodically to see what was happening, get caught up on discussion, and contribute my own responses as appropriate. For IRC and AIM, those might be one-off/casual bits of conversation; for LiveJournal, they would be more thought-out, detailed, (sometimes not-so-)nuanced discussions of whatever was on my mind at the time.

For both types of interaction, however, Twitter is worse than what it replaced.

For casual interactions, there's no sense of space or privacy like there is with an IRC channel or AIM conversation. That means there's much less shared context, and no opportunity for localized social norms to develop. A vague or otherwise intellectually-lazy statement intended for consumption only amongst friends might get picked up, re-interpreted, taken out of context, etc. Because Twitter is a public forum, one has to be thoughtful and precise in any statement, even something hidden in an @-reply.

Sure, you can sh!tpost, or retweet funny pictures of cats, but express an opinion on something, even in passing? You're opening the door for a more thoughtful, nuanced conversation, and those (literally) just don't fit on Twitter.

Why? The 140-character limit actively discourages any form of nuance. There's no space for prevarication, or qualifying/limiting statements, or further explanation of any kind. Yet those details can provide important context, clarifications, or factual support. They can take a black-and-white statement and turn it into one of those all-important shades of grey.

In my experience, trying to squeeze more deliberate discussion into the 140-character limit can be dangerous, in the sense that it's easy to miscommunicate and misinterpret. For example, Twitter has become something of a political hotbed lately; politics is already a fraught topic about which it's difficult to communicate, and the limit really doesn't help matters.

There are only three ways around the 140-character limit that I know of, all of which are horrible hacks: (1) write something in a text editor, take a screenshot, and post the screenshot; (2) write a really long chain of self-replies (and flood everyone's timeline); or (3) post on another site (like Dreamwidth ;) ) and link to it. There are also DMs, but the point here is to interact with a group of people.

In short: Twitter is designed around the public sound bite. Falling into a deeper conversation, even by accident, carries with it an increased risk of miscommunication compared to other platforms. I've gotten into trouble frequently enough that I now think very carefully before engaging, even with people I know well.

Twitter as a Broadcast Medium

Twitter works much better as a broadcast medium (or at least, a headline dissemination medium), but even there it falls short of what I'm looking for. Most of the "broadcast" type material (news, calls to action, and so forth) that ends up in my timeline is some combination of alarmist, poorly-sourced, or not especially relevant.

It's not hard to figure out why: The easiest way to interact with something on Twitter (short of scrolling past it) is to push the "Retweet" or "Like" button. "Like" is pretty harmless, but because "Retweet" is so easy, the gap between "I saw the thing," and "I retweeted the thing," is exceedingly small—small enough that there isn't much room for conscious thought.

Moreover, it's been my observation that people tend to engage more with things that provoke strong emotional reactions, especially negative reactions. My own posts are a good example of this; in the last week, I've retweeted more political anger than I've written in original content (including replies).

Combine the bias toward strong/negative content with the ease of retweeting, and it's little wonder my timeline is filled with things that make me angry (and may or may not be true).

So what now?

Twitter is failing pretty hard at what I want from it. But there's one criterion I haven't mentioned: all my friends are there. So, I'll probably keep using it for the foreseeable future, even though I'd really like to replace it with something better.

But I do think how I engage with the platform needs to change. I'm going to try out a few guidelines for myself, as follows:

• No opinionated or political retweets. It's too easy to pass on things that are alarmist or don't reflect my actual thoughts on the subject at hand. Retweets are also a great way to spread unsubstantiated rumor. I may strengthen this to "no retweets at all", if it turns out that I'm still reflexively hitting the "Retweet" button too much.

• Start or move most deeper conversations in/to another venue. That could be a DM, Telegram, Dreamwidth, or in person, but it can't be in a context with a 140-character limit. I have a hard enough time communicating without cutting down my responses to fit into a tweet, and spreading replies across a series of tweets is generally difficult to write and to read.

• Move my news consumption entirely to RSS. I've been following political and high-profile figures from my public/semi-professional account for extra color on various news stories, with somewhat mixed results. I think it's more trouble than it's worth to try to parse meaning on complex topics from individual tweets.

• Unfollow anyone that is primarily political, and find other venues to interact with them. It's fine if my friends want to be political on Twitter. But I know that I won't get a lot of value out of interacting with them in that venue, and chances are high that we'll end up in the communication quagmire discussed above.

Let's see how this goes over the next little bit.

— Des

I slept like ass, so I took a sick day today. I probably didn't need to—I could have gone to work and pretended I knew what I was doing—but it seemed like a better idea to stay home.

And, really, if you look at how little sleep I've gotten in the past week or so, and how disturbed my sleep has been, it's little wonder I've been feeling depressed recently. When I don't get enough sleep, I feel powerless and worthless.

I know I'm neither of those things, but when I'm sleep-deprived, my emotional reality doesn't match my rational reality. It becomes much easier to string together a consistent narrative of failure, of not doing enough. Things at work are way behind and it's all my fault; I don't spend enough time with my partner; I have a million house projects that I've not completed; I haven't seen any of my friends in too long; none of my creative projects are coming together; I can't sit and focus on one thing for more than two minutes.

I'm not smart enough, socially-aware or friendly enough, hard-working enough, politically active in the right ways, sufficiently creative ... just not good enough.

I can't [exercise the modicum of self-control required to] go to bed on time every night. Instead, I stay up and play video games. I don't [have the discipline required to] exercise regularly. I eat poorly because it's expedient and I'm making a tradeoff[I make poor decisions], and then feel bad about it afterwards.

But I know that's bullshit. It's bullshit because:

• I'm writing this blog entry. That's producing something and honing my writing skills, even on my "sick" day off. [Fuck you, depression. I'm doing something right now, as I type this, to make myself feel better.]

• I spent a good chunk of this weekend learning Rust by trying to create a game, and I'm forming and writing down my opinions about Rust. I may not produce any shippable software, but I will have learned something new, and I can share what I learned with others.

• I saw my parents this weekend, and laid the groundwork for a significant conversation later. My parents aren't my friends, exactly, but they definitely count as an important social interaction.

• I played some Stellaris this weekend, and finished Frog Fractions 2, both of which were things I was looking forward to. Even if they weren't "productive" tasks in their own right, they're still a valid way to take care of myself.

• I have an OmniFocus reminder to eat veggies and such regularly. I'm even pretty good at following it. I also mostly only drink water (and mochas, but again, tradeoffs ;) ).

• For my 1:1s at work, I take my folks on walks when possible, rather than sitting in a conference room. That's an extra 2-3 hours of walking per week.

• At work, I'm pushing myself to learn new social and leadership skills, both of which are areas where I feel I've been historically weak (Boy Scouts notwithstanding). I'm making a lot of progress, and my coworkers have noticed and commented on the difference.

• At work, my team and I are tackling our most ambitious project ever. Yes, progress is slower than anyone would like, but we're learning a lot along the way, both technically and about project and self-management.

• I've recently gotten more involved with my local community, since I'm helping our HOA with their newsletter.

So I'm not doing bad at all, not on the whole. I'm not on solid emotional ground, by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm not doing bad. Everyone I know, at work or at home, or wherever, needs to take the occasional sick (or even "sick") day. Nobody can be on 100% of the time, and nobody can be expected to deliver creative output, consistently, over a long period of time. (A very few people can, and I envy them.)

There are plenty of things that are legitimate problems I need to work on, like getting enough sleep, or that occasional feeling of dread that crops up in response to various social situations. (That social anxiety-thing really fucks with me sometimes.) And a lot of those things are the seeds for the kind of runaway negative self-talk that leads to me feeling depressed. There's absolutely more that I could be doing.

But I need to take time to explicitly remind myself that even though I spend so much time focused on problems, there's a lot to be grateful for, and there's a lot I can be proud of.

Otherwise, I'll have more days like today.

— Des

I'm continuing to struggle with feeling like I have enough spoons (and so are a lot of other people I know). I feel like I should be able to power through an 8-hour workday, then come home and have enough energy left over to do literally anything else. But, especially over the last few weeks, that definitely has not been the case.

I was talking to Othercat about it, and I think there might be a couple reasons why.

( Read more... )

I've been spending more and more time lately trying to keep up with the news. Quite frankly, it's overwhelming, and probably unhealthy—spending 2-3 hours a day reading about Donald Trump is enough to drive anyone crazy.

I think there are a few reasons for this: I just like reading, I'm afraid of missing something "important" (which my friends/coworkers/etc. will catch), and I'm afraid of missing something actionable. I don't want to find myself in a position where something Really Bad(tm) happened, and I didn't do everything I could to prevent it.

That said, I also need to make sure I take care of myself, and that means spending time on things that aren't politics. It means having my own hobbies and projects at home, spending time with friends, exercising, eating, sleeping, and generally relaxing.

So how do I balance my fear of missing out with taking care of myself?

The first and most important thing I need to do is limit my time in front of a news reader. I can make the choice that all of the aforementioned self-care tasks are more important than keeping abreast of everything that's going on.

I can also change how and when I check news. I can set guidelines like the following:

• Always check my RSS reader before Twitter.
• Sort articles newest-first so I'm starting with the most up-to-date information.
• When I've spent "enough" time catching up, mark as read everything I didn't get to.

But I'm also thinking about how to best use the time I do spend on news, and the reality is, I'm spending a bunch of time just sifting through headlines looking for things that are relevant. I want to cast a wide net; I have probably 20 newsfeeds that I'm following (not counting "fun stuff" like xkcd), and that means a lot of headlines. Maybe 1 out of every 30-40 headlines actually holds my interest, which is a pretty low signal-to-noise ratio.

So how do I reduce the noise? Can I still cast a wide net and see only the things that are most relevant across all my chosen sources?

By now you're probably thinking, "No, Des! This isn't a software problem!" And you're right, I'm not super keen on letting software decide what I do and don't see at any given moment, at least not without a clearly-defined, easy-to-understand set of rules governing that decision. But I do have to wonder if there's some socially-responsible way to do algorithmic filtering.

What kind of tradeoffs would be necessary? Sources notwithstanding, could we even reach something that approximates "unbiased" and "fact-based" (or at least, not consistently biased in any particular direction)? Can we avoid the pitfall of, "this is popular, therefore it's right"?

I'm not sure much of this is possible without human intervention (and probably isn't possible even with human intervention). But it would be interesting to try.

— Des

The Internet, large corporations (even brick-and-mortar stores), your credit card companies, etc. are all collecting and selling your personal information. Other companies are buying that information, aggregating it, and using it to build a detailed psychological profile of you. That profile, in turn, is being used to target you with fine-tuned, individually-tailored ads and political messages.

The Data That Turned the World Upside Down

Psychologist Michal Kosinski developed a method to analyze people in minute detail based on their Facebook activity. Did a similar tool help propel Donald Trump to victory? Two reporters from Zurich-based Das Magazin went data-gathering.​

The end result, in at least one recent political race of consequence:

From July 2016, Trump's canvassers were provided with an app with which they could identify the political views and personality types of the inhabitants of a house. It was the same app provider used by Brexit campaigners. Trump's people only rang at the doors of houses that the app rated as receptive to his messages. The canvassers came prepared with guidelines for conversations tailored to the personality type of the resident.

Trump's data-driven approach meant that his people were able to focus on the people that mattered most—the bystanders most receptive to his message. (Compare this to Clinton's failed model-based approach to campaigning.)

Liberal organizations can learn from this—these are powerful tools, and they're available to anyone with the budget. How many receptive bystanders in swing states could we have recruited to vote for Clinton if we had been paying attention to the data?

Individuals can learn from this, too—when you use those loyalty cards, or when you "Like" that post, you're making it just a little bit easier for a stranger, armed with a bunch of data about you, to change your mind.

— Des

Posting this here for posterity, and just in case any of you feel inclined to write similar letters. ;)

Dear Sen. Feinstein,

I’m a constituent from the Bay Area. I’m writing to let you know that I was, frankly, appalled by your vote to confirm Rep. Mike Pompeo as head of the CIA. A man who has a long track record of supporting both torture and mass surveillance has no place running an organization with a history of abusing and misusing its powers, even to the point of spying on you and your staff.

A man such as Rep. Pompeo has neither the willingness nor the capacity to bring this rogue agency in line, and I have no confidence in his desire or ability to follow the law and the Constitution when it comes to the privacy and due process rights of American citizens or citizens of other nations.

Furthermore, while I am well aware that you and I disagree on the issue of mass surveillance, you should know that a Pew Research survey conducted in 2015 showed that “65% of American adults believe there are not adequate limits on the telephone and internet data that the government collects.” While I don’t know (and Pew did not publish) the number for California specifically, you are clearly out of step with your constituents and the rest of the country on this issue. I hope you will take these views into consideration in your dealings with Director Pompeo and others in the intelligence community in the future.

Going forward, I expect you to thoroughly investigate all of Pres. Trump’s cabinet nominations, and vigorously oppose any nominees who have a history of (a) failing to recognize the serious threat to global security posed by climate change, (b) advocating for the imprisonment, deportation, or unequal treatment of any protected class (Muslims, Blacks, Latinos, LGBTs, etc.), (c) advocating for the repeal or dilution of the Voting Rights Act or similar provisions of law, or (d) disregarding established fact in favor of “alternative facts”, propaganda or similar fabrications. I expect you to oppose these nominations REGARDLESS of what might be said in their confirmation hearings.

In particular, I expect you to vigorously oppose the appointment of Sen. Jeff Sessions as Attorney General, and Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education. Both of these individuals are unfit to serve for some, if not all, of the reasons listed above.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best Regards,
[signature]