I guess the good news is, solar is available when demand is highest. Nonetheless, is it helping to solve a problem or is it serving more as an enabler of the status quo?

But to your point, you might not like the slop, but that slop, sadly, is still better than what it would have been otherwise.

- Most people don't communicate as thoroughly and complete - written and verbal - as they think they do. Very often there is what I call "assumptive communication". That is, sender's ambiguity that's resolved by the receiver making assumptions about what was REALLY meant. Often, filling in the blanks is easy to do - as it's done all the time - but not always. The resolution doesn't change the fact there was ambiguity at the root.

Next time you're communicating, listen carefully. Make note of how often the other person sends something that could be interpreted differently, how often you assume by using the default of "what they likely meant was..."

- That said, AI might not replace people like you. Or me? But it's an improvement for the majority of people. AI isn't perfect, hardly. But most people don't have the skills a/o willingness to communicate at a level AI can simulate. Improved communication is not easy. People generally want ease and comfort. AI is their answer. They believe you are replaceable because it replaces them and they assume they're good communicators. Classic Dunning-Kruger.

p.s. One of my fave comms' heuristics is from Frank Luntz*:

"It's not what you say, it's what they hear." (<< edit was changing to "say" from "said".)

One of the keys to improved comms is to embrace that clarify and completeness is the sole responsibility of the sender, not the receiver. Some people don't want to hear that, and be accountable, especially then assumption communication is a viable shortcut.

* Note: I'm not a fan of his politics, and perhaps he's not The Source of this heuristic, but read it first in his "Words That Work". The first chapter of "WTW" is evergreen comms gold.

I’m not saying no-charge for public transportation is a bad idea per se. But nothing is free.

In short, my key takeaway (as an outsider) is that with AA it’s helpful to get people sober and there’s value and comfort in that. Unfortunately that comfort has diminishing return. People (e.g., my ex) put in the time (in a comfortable sorta way), but then don’t put in the work (read: progress to address the root problem).

Finally, as an unrelated / random side note, my theory is that if you evaluated late in life alcoholics (read: 30 yo and up) most would test positive for NPD. In the hands of someone suffering from NPD, alcoholism is one hell of a weapon (e.g., manipulation, avoid accountability, etc). Also, within the context of The Program you will never be encouraged to seek help for your NPD.

Shifting from a Freudian paradigm to an Adlerian one has been massive. I’d rather be an accountable self-determining adult than an adult who attributes my flaws to traumas long gone.

If you’re serious about self-directed change, Adler is a good place to start.

I learned about this from Pollan’s “How to Change Your Mind.” I’m sure it’s documented elsewhere.

The sole reason? That’s over the top. Did it contribute to the feasibility? Of course it did. Aside from loving to play offense, Trump is a master at the distraction(s). He knows ppl are obsessed with him (read: haters are going to hate) and he uses that to his advantage.

But to say this was a cover for the whole Epstein show is overthinking it.

But sure, I’ll entertain your theory… where is all the cocaine coming from then? North? Canada? East? Europe? South East? Africa???

Note: I not commenting on the relevance of the event / issue, only that putting Musk’s name in the headline is heavy-handed and adds zero journalistic value.

Is anyone that naive at this point? The majority of us have learned to realize that these things are not as simple as they are presented (either by conspiracy theorist, the media, a/o politicians.) Put another way, is anyone saying it was purely about oil?

We do know Trump likes playing offense. His favorite strategy? Put the defender on its heels and keep them there. That said, was the drugs issue a cover? Could be. But does any other drug exporting country want to take that chance?