Easily Distracted

I intended to write in this blog as a sort of journal, since I used to write in a journal a lot, and I decided that I would just modernize from pen and paper to an electronic record, but I am easily distracted, and haven't written anything here for a few weeks.

Has anything important happened in that time?

Sure. Important things happen every day, at least important to someone. I have celebrated my wedding anniversary, my mother-in-law's 80th birthday, and some other events from my personal calendar without making any records of them. I'm not hiding these things from the data gods. I just didn't get to it.

I have read the comics, online, on most days. I visit Facebook most days. I don't post much there. I just look. I enjoy seeing what my acquaintances post. I know that Facebook calls them "friends", but I don't know all of them very well, and some are relatives, which is not the same as being friends. I comment on posts at times. Sometimes I provoke a response. Mostly, I click the "like" button.

Today, I shared an article from Slate Magazine about why we should not have term limits for Congress. I think term limits have a detrimental effect on legislative bodies, including the state legislature of Ohio, where I live. The article supports my conclusions, that with term limits, elected officials are all too new to be true experts in the legislative process or areas of specialization in law and policy. That shifts power to the executive, and also to lobbyists and private interests with lots of money and expertise. Mine is not a popular position. People seem to love term limits. I have some trouble understanding why people can't take the time to look at the available data, which shows pretty clearly that term limits make legislatures less effective.

But I have realized that I have unusual habits, and make conclusions a lot of people don't care to consider. Today, I saw an article about a Supreme Court decision, which struck down a federal law banning gambling on sports. I read the opinion and the dissent. I found the dissent more compelling, though I understand the argument for why part of the law was unconstitutional. How many other people read the opinions? I don't know.

Of course, the data gods have access to those opinions if I do, but I don't know how they would use such things. My vision of the algorithms that are supposed to become the data gods doesn't include self-awareness, which makes them about as important as mosquitoes, in some senses. Mosquitoes can be vectors for disease, and can even cause epidemics. In that sense, mosquitoes are powerful, and must be reckoned with. But I have no qualms about swatting one when it buzzes around me or lands on my skin of clothing. I'm also not afraid of pissing off the whole population. Maybe I need to consider that possibility with the algorithms, but since I don't think algorithms have emotions, that doesn't seem like a real concern. Modern algorithms on the Internet, and in other places, are becoming quite powerful, though still apparently under control of their creators, but I can still mock them, or turn them off when I want.

Do the algorithms know that I walk around my yard, popping the heads off dandelions? What would they do with that information?

I like writing this stuff. Maybe someday I'll do something more significant. But I am easily distracted.