I’m always in search of good playlists and albums to listen to while doing work or writing. This site is a superb resource.
Datassette presents a series of mixes intended for listening while programming to focus the brain and inspire the mind (also compatible with other activities).
Source: musicForProgramming();
In all my recent conversations with peers about AI, this idea – we’re all letting the agents cook and we don’t understand, but we’re cool with it – has come up. There’s a novelty factor that makes it easy to overlook what’s happening to our brains. Maybe it’s ok. I don’t really understand how plumbing and electricity get made, but I like the world we have because of them.
But the real threat isn’t either of those things. It’s quieter, and more boring, and therefore more dangerous. The real threat is a slow, comfortable drift toward not understanding what you’re doing. Not a dramatic collapse. Not Skynet. Just a generation of researchers who can produce results but can’t produce understanding. Who know what buttons to press but not why those buttons exist.
I’m testing out the capability where I use Claude (and eventually Claude Code) to update my WordPress website.
I love the easy, calm way Anthropic talks about their agentic “coworker”. It all sounds so benign. Can you imagine all the bad emails that are going to go out as a result of this?
How is using Cowork different from a regular conversation? In Cowork, you give Claude access to a folder of your choosing on your computer. Claude can then read, edit, or create files in that folder. It can, for example, re-organize your downloads by sorting and renaming each file, create a new spreadsheet with a list of expenses from a pile of screenshots, or produce a first draft of a report from your scattered notes.
I mean, really, what could go wrong.
From BookRiot, a discussion about how we can improve our reading. I’m doing a slow read of War and Peace, and while I’m enjoying the story, it’s good practice for improving my attention overall.
Saw an announcement of a new publishing company that's focused on male writers, primarily. Interesting (in a not-great way) set of discussions on Reddit. Quick dismissals, concerns about the manosphere, complaints about the historical dominance of men in publishing (up until the last 20 years). I actually think this is a good idea. We *all* would probably benefit from more men reading fiction.
This episode of the Ezra Klein podcast was worth listening to twice.
It’s great for a lot of reasons:
But, what caught my ear was a consistent theme: our current leaders aren’t serious about a good outcome with China.
Serious. Are we serious? Are our leaders?
Here’s a long quote that demonstrates the exasperation of two guys who are deep thinkers about how to sustain American power:
I want to go back first to the point we were discussing about just the unseriousness of this administration.
The morning after Trump announced he was putting this massive tariff on China when the markets really melted down, I actually called our editors and said, not the most important story of the day, not the most disturbing story of the day. Please don’t lose sight. Of this story:
On the day before, we learned, or maybe in the same day, that Laura Loomer a conspiracy peddler who believes 9-11 was an inside job, was in the Oval Office , and we have since learned, apparently or reportedly, urged Trump to fire the head of our national security agency and his deputy, two of the most respected intelligence professionals in the world, because they weren’t pro-Trump enough.
Who knows what it was, Ezra? And Trump did that. Fired the head of basically two of our most important cyber warriors, defenders and warriors, widely respected around the world. He did that on the advice of a political witch doctor.
Holy mackerel.
… How can we be a serious country? Talk about things that filter down. That then filters down through the whole bureaucracy. Can I offer up intelligence that Trump will not like? So that’s to me, just we have to get that in there.
How could the president take such critical advice from someone like Loomer? How did she even get in the room where it happens?
And, as a result, what does tell us about what it mean to be “serious”?
What’s the difference between “serious” an unserious people? Between Tom Freidman and Loomer? And, in fiction, between Logan and the rest of the Roy family?
Time to do a little research.
some useful words ahead of a long drive:
(Walt Whitman)
1
Afoot and light-hearted I take to the open road,
Healthy, free, the world before me,
The long brown path before me leading wherever I choose.
Henceforth I ask not good-fortune, I myself am good-fortune,
Henceforth I whimper no more, postpone no more, need nothing,
Done with indoor complaints, libraries, querulous criticisms,
Strong and content I travel the open road.
The earth, that is sufficient,
I do not want the constellations any nearer,
I know they are very well where they are,
I know they suffice for those who belong to them.
(Still here I carry my old delicious burdens,
I carry them, men and women, I carry them with me wherever I go,
I swear it is impossible for me to get rid of them,
I am fill’d with them, and I will fill them in return.)
2
You road I enter upon and look around, I believe you are not all that is here,
I believe that much unseen is also here
Here the profound lesson of reception, nor preference nor denial,
The black with his woolly head, the felon, the diseas’d, the illiterate person, are not denied;
The birth, the hasting after the physician, the beggar’s tramp, the drunkard’s stagger, the laughing party of mechanics,
The escaped youth, the rich person’s carriage, the fop, the eloping couple,
The early market-man, the hearse, the moving of furniture into the town, the return back from the town,
They pass, I also pass, any thing passes, none can be interdicted,
None but are accepted, none but shall be dear to me.
3
You air that serves me with breath to speak!
You objects that call from diffusion my meanings and give them shape!
You light that wraps me and all things in delicate equable showers!
You paths worn in the irregular hollows by the roadsides!
I believe you are latent with unseen existences, you are so dear to me.
You flagg’d walks of the cities! you strong curbs at the edges!
You ferries! you planks and posts of wharves! you timber-lined sides! you distant ships!
You rows of houses! you window-pierc’d façades! you roofs!
You porches and entrances! you copings and iron guards!
You windows whose transparent shells might expose so much!
You doors and ascending steps! you arches!
You gray stones of interminable pavements! you trodden crossings!
From all that has touch’d you I believe you have imparted to yourselves, and now would impart the same secretly to me,
From the living and the dead you have peopled your impassive surfaces, and the spirits thereof would be evident and amicable with me.
Nick Cave’s work answering questions from readers will be, in the future, as esteemed as his songwriting.
This answer to the question “why are we here” is beautiful and one I’ll come back to again and again.
“Personally, I do my best to move through life with a joy that is reconciled to the sorrow of things but is not subsumed by it, that apprehends darkness and is not afraid of it. I try to receive some form of salvation in this life by paying witness to, and being lifted by, the great, uncontested value of existence. I feel duty-bound to unearth, enhance and promote the world’s beautiful things rather than obsess, worry and agitate over the worst of things. I believe in creation over destruction, compassion over cynicism, mercy over vitriol, friendship over hostility, truth over lies and love over hate. I remind myself that, at this moment, I am here as a happy and humble participant in the complex and relational nature of the universe – a person who loves life but draws the line at bathing with strangers in pineapple jelly.
Yesterday on my afternoon walk I was listening to a podcast episode with a famous writer talking to a well known podcaster and author. They are both media-makers who get paid for clicks and impressions, but they deal in ideas. They are very well respected, smart, successful and, because they’ve been doing their media-making so long, wise. They are good examples of what current “thought leaders” look like and how they work.
The episode is a couple hours long. They made some great points about leadership, management, growth and professional development, and how to stay fully engaged. The principles they shared sounded relevant. But, both of them sound a little burned out and – maybe this is me being a little cynical – not 100% committed to their own ideas.
Despite all that, I loved it and may even listen again.
This is just one podcast episode among millions. There are thousands of other thinkers that are in our queues, ready to share some ideas from their TED talks, or their courses, or their mastermind sessions, or their book. 1 month from now, no one will remember these 120 minutes.
It’s a classic good news/bad news scenario:
The good news: We’re in a golden age of self-help and advice and personal growth. Ideas and approaches have never been so readily available. There have never been more perspectives and unique voices. Episodes like these offer a helpful dose of thinking and the advice given is usually practical and actionable. I’ve rarely come across thinking that’s demonstrably “bad”. Almost is in the “good, but not great” category of thinking. It’s “content”, a stimulating conversation that, on a good day, pushes my thinking a bit.
The bad news: It’s only “pretty good” advice, overall. These hosts are giving the people what they want, but the business needs them to tune in next week, too. The content is designed to have a short shelf-life. The editorial agenda is driven by the business model: clicks, sponsorship, ads, selling classes, etc. I wonder how much of the audience is turning to podcast episodes instead of time-tested, enduring ideas. Is “pop” management advice taking the place of “classic” thinking?
As I look to 2025 and beyond, as AI generated slop meets media-hustling content overload, I’m looking for something solid to turn to. I feel pulled towards the classics.
That’s why I’m spending more time reading history books, literature from the last two hundred years, and going back to some of the core philosophical works. I’m seeking the ideas and wisdom from earlier eras because i don’t think much of the advice i’m hearing these days is “built to last”.
In 2025, I’m going to be focusing my business reading on a handful of experts that I believe stand the test of time.
The top of my list is Peter Drucker.
Why Drucker? Why should we listen to an old white immigrant guy who died in 2005?
The Arc of Professionalized Management – He wrote about business strategy and leadership effectiveness from the early 1930s through the 2000’s, a remarkable span in the history of the global economy. He had a front row seat as the American economy became the most powerful economic engine in the world and was in the board rooms (and on the shop floor) as management professionalized and became thing to study.
The journalistic skepticism – Although he was a lawyer and a historian, he came to his work with the eyes and critical perspective of a journalist. He sought out the stories, dug into the truth, and came out with a compelling narrative based on facts and his own insight.
Supremely good communicator – He wrote so much and so eloquently that he made the inner workings of General Motors interesting. The writing today – judged by our modern standards – is a little academic, perhaps a little stilted, but the insights and narrative deliver incredibly important points. In many ways, he brought “management” as subject to the masses, giving main street access to the best of what was happening in leading organizations.
A visionary guide to leading through transformations – He saw what was coming before others, and translated the future for the present. He described the modern corporate conglomerate before it was a thing. He coined the term knowledge worker. He articulated the impending changes in American culture as the economy moved from agriculture and manufacturing to a services-based organization. He was an advocate for technology as a way to unlock better results and create a more meaningful workplace. More importantly, he shared actionable, practical ways to be a better leader and manager while the transformations were underway.
Hugely influential to generations – Because he wrote for so long and covered so many facets of business management, multiple generations of leaders were shaped by his thinking. Corporate culture is still showing some signs of his teachings, for the better, mostly.
Management as Liberal Arts – He saw management as one of the Liberal Arts, a pathway for leaders to continue their development as humans. More importantly, he designed programs to help leaders and executives apply a “Liberal Arts” approach, arguing management effectiveness comes from critical analysis, informed by a cross-domain perspective, based in core of history, literature, arts and philosophy.
Exemplar – I see him as a model for how we can all continue to grow as humans and as leaders, evolving our thinking and our work as we move through the different phases of his career. He never stopped being curious, never slowed down his thinking and was always optimistic about what the future held.
Drucker is one of those “classic” thinkers that all business people should have on their bookshelf. With 39 books (more?) and countless essays and academic papers, there’s something for everyone and for just about every situation.
In a time when everything seems to be changing around us, there are too many “real time” experts with an opinion to share. We need the wisdom of those who have gone before us, and we can learn from history through their perspective.
For business leaders today, thinkers like Drucker are valuable for their ideas on how to make the most of transformation while becoming better leaders and managers at the same time. The podcasts and Youtube videos can be energizing, but when we need insights with integrity, we should be grateful we’ve got a large body of Drucker’s work to turn to.