The truth is that whether or not AI determines our future will be decided by a confoundingly small minority of humans who nevertheless control a counfoundingly vast majority of the world’s wealth. This is not a technology issue, really, but one of structural inequality.

From Out Random the AI.

See also, Jon Stewart on the False Promises of AI


We can engage with people outside the rule-bound linear progression of offline relationships, and discover information about another person, miles and years from the person they were when they were posted it. Try responding to a post on a message board dated a while ago, maybe 10 years or more. That person might have lived in five cities between then and now, and fallen in and out of love three times, but the person they once were remains a notational snapshot trace, as if it were yesterday, offering thoughts on gardens, allergies, movies, or recipe ingredients.

From Lurking: How a Person Became a User by Joanne McNeil. I’m only through the Introduction of this book and I’m already all 👀!


There were devices that simply did what they were for, without demanding attention. For their makers, they had some real problems. They had moving parts, which meant that they required more factory tooling and had more warranty returns. They were terrible for displaying advertisements. Without always-on internet connections, they were really bad for buying other things with.

From Glow by Tom MacWright.

Some of my favorite non-glowing devices that are still in use:

The LightPhone II An e-reader A digital watch


If your concept of “progress” doesn’t put people at the center of it, is it even progress?

Source: I’m a Ludite (and so can you!)


When my dad was sick, I started Googling grief. Then I couldn’t escape it. “There’s an assumption the industry makes that personalization is a positive thing.”