media studies

Like is different than trust. I think Jordan said at an uptrust session that he misses the like button. I’m having the same feeling lately, there are posts I like that I wouldn’t necessarily say I trust. Or I want to give it some sort of that was cool but I don’t want that statement in my trust algorithm.

But maybe that’s all for the best? Surely some not-insignificant portion of my trust isn’t in my conscious awareness, maybe feeling a sense of yes to something is functionally the same as trust.

Has the Left changed that much? During the Obama administration ICE used the exact tactics they are using today.  There were no riots or protests.  What changed?

The Cost of Letting main stream media and social media Do Our Thinking. Lately I’ve been thinking about how both the political left and right are pushing narratives through social media, and a lot of what’s being shared is made up of half-truths or no truth at all. It feels like emotions are being intentionally poked and prodded to build followers around ideologies, not facts.

Honestly, you can’t even scroll social media anymore without stopping to ask yourself, “Is this actually true?” And that the norm now.

Before you can even consider the message, you have to research it just to figure out if it’s real. That alone tells me things are out of control.

What worries me most is how much of this stuff gets absorbed emotionally. A lot of people don’t consciously assess what they believe or take the time to verify it. If something aligns with how they feel, it gets accepted and then repeated.

Sometimes something goes viral almost instantly and gets accepted as truth, whether it’s fact or fiction, simply because it hits people emotionally.

And I get it. When something hits you emotionally and connects to a belief you already have, human nature is to accept it as truth, because our own biases want us to believe it.

If this keeps going, I really think it damages our ability to function as a country, because we lose a shared understanding of what’s real and what isn’t. Everything becomes narrative instead of truth.

I think part of the problem is that we’re becoming mentally lazy. We stop thinking critically and let confirmation bias run unchecked, and it just keeps building on itself.

The solution is simple, even if it’s not easy. Slow down. Question what we’re seeing. Separate facts from feelings. Think logically before reacting emotionally. Truth shouldn’t depend on which side it benefits.

Just something I’ve been thinking about.

v/r Russ

Engage or Enrage. It is likely that we have family members or friends that we differ with greatly when it comes to politics, healthcare, etc.  I am no different.  When the inevitable hot topic arises, do you recommend flight or fight, engage or enrage?  How do you respond when this occurs?

Looking for bridges in views about the second Trump administration. I'm currently aware of four views:

• This is the worst thing ever, I'm terrified
• This is the best thing ever, I'm thrilled
• I don't pay attention to politics, so far my life feels exactly the same
• Some of the changes seem pretty cool so far, but we'll see

Where are the middle grounds? I want to know how to build bridges in my personal connections when politics comes up these days.

The Cost of Letting main stream media and social media Do Our Thinking. Lately I’ve been thinking about how both the political left and right are pushing narratives through social media, and a lot of what’s being shared is made up of half-truths or no truth at all. It feels like emotions are being intentionally poked and prodded to build followers around ideologies, not facts.

Honestly, you can’t even scroll social media anymore without stopping to ask yourself, “Is this actually true?” And that the norm now.

Before you can even consider the message, you have to research it just to figure out if it’s real. That alone tells me things are out of control.

What worries me most is how much of this stuff gets absorbed emotionally. A lot of people don’t consciously assess what they believe or take the time to verify it. If something aligns with how they feel, it gets accepted and then repeated.

Sometimes something goes viral almost instantly and gets accepted as truth, whether it’s fact or fiction, simply because it hits people emotionally.

And I get it. When something hits you emotionally and connects to a belief you already have, human nature is to accept it as truth, because our own biases want us to believe it.

If this keeps going, I really think it damages our ability to function as a country, because we lose a shared understanding of what’s real and what isn’t. Everything becomes narrative instead of truth.

I think part of the problem is that we’re becoming mentally lazy. We stop thinking critically and let confirmation bias run unchecked, and it just keeps building on itself.

The solution is simple, even if it’s not easy. Slow down. Question what we’re seeing. Separate facts from feelings. Think logically before reacting emotionally. Truth shouldn’t depend on which side it benefits.

Just something I’ve been thinking about.

v/r Russ

AMA with Nate Soares. Wednesday 2/4 at 10am CT

Author of If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies answers questions about why superhuman AI would kill us all.

Looking for bridges in views about the second Trump administration. I'm currently aware of four views:

• This is the worst thing ever, I'm terrified
• This is the best thing ever, I'm thrilled
• I don't pay attention to politics, so far my life feels exactly the same
• Some of the changes seem pretty cool so far, but we'll see

Where are the middle grounds? I want to know how to build bridges in my personal connections when politics comes up these days.

Why does it have to be blue vs. red? Whatever happened to meeting in the middle on political issues? I am old enough to remember when American politicians were generally more moderate, not so partisan and seemingly unwilling to compromise as they have been recently. "Working across the aisle" sounds great in speeches but it is not being practiced by a majority of elected lawmakers and other officials. Why can't we have a legitimate third party that has some real support and influence. I believe that a majority of Americans would place themselves in the middle third of the political spectrum and we are not being represented accordingly. 

Looking for bridges in views about the second Trump administration. I'm currently aware of four views:

• This is the worst thing ever, I'm terrified
• This is the best thing ever, I'm thrilled
• I don't pay attention to politics, so far my life feels exactly the same
• Some of the changes seem pretty cool so far, but we'll see

Where are the middle grounds? I want to know how to build bridges in my personal connections when politics comes up these days.

Leave the country or stay? There was a time period where my friends and I were getting invited to these new exciting community projects in the Central America and Asia and Europe. Crypto millionaires and retired billionaires trying to bootstrap whole new civilizations and villages and large retreat centers.

Yet, all of us felt a certain affinity and even responsibility to stay in the States.

Which is a little strange considering probably all of our families also have immigrated here at some point.

How does one assess whether to establish a new home abroad and call it quits on the homeland? Or stick it out and try to make it work?

It reminds me of the dilemma that's often posed around do you try to reform an institute as a player within or do you go off and establish a brand new thing? Does staying in the current system doomed to be corrupted and compromised? Or is going off naive and doomed to failure as a retreat from life?

As I'm writing this, I could see the same dilemma in deciding whether to stay working for a corp or start your own business. Or stay in a currently challenging relationship or call it quits to find a new partner. Or even try to be a lay person in the world or go off to be a monk in the mountains.

I suppose the answer is ultimately context is what matters most.

And I've yet to see a really compelling abroad experiment that seemed actually integrated or likely to deliver on the promises.

I, myself, have been increasingly interested in building out more of the physical and social infrastructure locally to create the new type of village community in AVL. But, those billionaire communities or even rural Portugal tiny communities do tempt me at times.

Deliberately Development Orgs are bullshit? I expect others here read and were influenced by An Everyone Culture: Becoming a Deliberately Developmental Organization by Kegan and Lahey?

I remember first being introduced to it in a circling retreat probably 8 years ago or so. One of the example orgs they use is Bridgewater Associates with Ray Dalio at the head.

I loved their believability-weighted decision making algorithm (nod to Uptrust's setup here) that would score people's expertise in different fields. I loved their radical transparency and recording of meetings. I loved their "baseball card" feature for all employees showing where they're strong and weak.

But then I read The Fund: Ray Dalio, Bridgewater Associates and The Unraveling of a Wall Street Legend. The author peels back the surface and basically shows Dalio ran essentially a narcissistic cult in his hedge fund. The algorithm was hard coded so that Dalio was ranked highest in every category. The recordings were highly edited to make him look good and his targets bad.

I haven't spent time looking at the other examples in the DDO book yet but I question maybe a for-profit huge corporation is going to be fighting really uphill to be a virtuous company in today's systems.

How Google and AI are Killing Travel Blogs Like Mine

I just finished reading this blog post by Amanda Williams, a travel blogger of 15 years, on the impact of Google's "helpful content" algo changes and AI on her ability to financial sustain herself.

And man- I might sound dumb here, but I totally had not connected the dots re: how AI will absolutely destroy ad revenue for creators-- specifically creators that produce written content. 

Ad placement is driven by site visitors, and AI totally bypasses the need for a site visit. Instead, it harvests the information from blogs like Amanda's and puts it in a neat list along with the content of 10 other bloggers so a person trying to find the top sites to visit in Paris never needs to even visit the site. 

This is a problem in that, bloggers like Amanda have to switch strategies-- she now needs a new means of making money to continue producing trustworthy travel content. That might be creating a substack with individual subscribers, creating courses, etc. But her content likely won't be publicly available in the future, non-harvestable by AI... and that's a problem too in that AI's knowledge sources are going to get worse and worse. 

Also, I just can't imagine that the 1:1 subscriber model won't be a losing game for soooo many great writers/creators. It's very different to be a person creating content that people are willing to pay for month over month, especially in niche fields like travel, instead of being paid by relevant brands through ads. 

What do y'all think?