Algorithms are the best way to improve computing power

14 Wednesday Aug 2024

A return to what I do best

For the first time in six years, I’m returning to writing about a topic within my professional field. This is where my true expertise lies, and frankly, it’s what I should be focusing on. If I were being cynical, I’d say this subject is entirely unrelated to work since it lacks any organizational support. It is clearly not our chosen strategy. Given that it’s neither a funded nor managed strategy, it’s essentially a hobby. Yet, it represents a significant missed opportunity for advancing several critical fields. Moreover, it highlights broader issues with our leadership and aversion to risk even when the rewards are large.

“Never was anything great achieved without danger.”

― Niccolo Machiavelli

Years ago when I blogged regularly, I often wrote one or two posts about upcoming talks. Some of my best work emerged from this process, which also enhanced the quality of my presentations. Writing is thinking; it forces deep reflection on a talk’s narrative and allows for refinement. By outlining ideas and considering supporting evidence, I could strengthen my arguments. Without this preparatory writing, my talks undoubtedly suffered. With this post, I hope to rectify this shortsighted but logical detour.

So, here goes!

“Don’t explain computers to laymen. Simpler to explain sex to a virgin.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

Algorithmic Impact and Moore’s Law

In recent years, the significance of algorithms in scientific computing has diminished considerably. Algorithms have historically been a substantial component of improving computing. They provide a performance boost beyond hardware acceleration. Unfortunately this decline in algorithmic impact coincides with the slowing of Moore’s Law. Moore’s law is the empirical observation that computing power doubles approximately every eighteen months leading to exponential increases. This rapid growth was fueled by a confluence of technological advancements integrated into hardware. However, this era of exponential growth ended about a decade ago. Instead of acknowledging this shift and adapting, it was met with an increased focus on hardware development. I’ve written extensively on this topic and won’t reiterate those points here.

“People who don’t take risks generally make about two big mistakes a year. People who do take risks generally make about two big mistakes a year.”

― Peter F. Drucker

Simultaneously, we’ve neglected advancements in algorithms. Improving algorithms is inherently unpredictable.Breakthroughs are sporadic, defying schedules and plans. They emerge from ingenious solutions to previously insurmountable challenges and necessitate risk-taking. Such endeavors offer no guaranteed returns, a requirement often demanded by project managers. Instead, progress occurs in significant leaps after extended periods of apparent stagnation. Rather than a steady upward trajectory, advancements arrive in unpredictable bursts. This aversion to risk and the pursuit of guaranteed outcomes hinders the realization of algorithmic breakthroughs.

What is an algorithm?

An algorithm can be thought of as a recipe that instructs a computer to complete a task. Sorting a list is a classic algorithmic problem. Once a correct method is established, efficiency becomes the primary concern.

Algorithm efficiency is measured in terms of degrees of freedom, such as the length of a list. It is often expressed as a constant multiplied by the list length raised to a power (or its logarithm). This power significantly impacts efficiency,especially as the list grows. Consider the difference in effort for sorting a list of 100 items using linear, log-linear, and quadratic algorithms: 100, 460, and 10,000 operations, respectively. For a list of 1000 items, these numbers become 1000, 6900, and 1,000,000. We see differences in performance grow larger. As the list size increases, the impact of the constant factor before the scaling term diminishes. Note that generally, a linear algorithm has a larger constant than a quadratic one.

“An algorithm must be seen to be believed.”

— Donald Ervin Knuth

As this example illustrates, algorithms are fundamentally powerful tools. Their efficiency scaling can dramatically reduce computational costs and accelerate calculations. This is just one of the many remarkable capabilities of algorithms. A large impact is they can significantly contributes to overall computing speed. Historically, the speedup achieved through algorithmic improvements has either matched or exceeded Moore’s Law. Even in the worst case, algorithms enhance and amplify the power of computer advancements. Our leaders seem to have ignored this. Certain incremental gains prime for project management with low risk are prioritized.

Algorithms for Scientific Computing

In the realm of scientific computing, the success of algorithms is most evident in linear algebra. For a long time during the early days of computing, algorithms kept pace with increasing computing speeds. This demonstrates that algorithms amplify the speed of computers. They complement each other, resulting in equally improved performance over a 40-year span.

Originally, linear algebra relied on dense algorithms with cubic work scaling (Gaussian elimination). These were replaced by relaxation and sparse-banded methods with quadratic scaling. Subsequently, Krylov methods, scaling to the three-halves or logarithmically with spectral methods, took over. Finally, in the mid-1980s, multigrid achieved linear scaling. Since then,there have been no further breakthroughs. Still from the 1940s to the mid-1980s, algorithms kept pace with hardware advancements. In this era the advances in hardware, which were massive was complimented by equal advances. In today’s words algorithms are a force multiplier.

“… model solved using linear programming would have taken 82 years to solve in 1988… Fifteen years later… this same model could be solved in roughly 1 minute, an improvement by a factor of roughly 43 million… a factor of roughly 1,000 was due to increased processor speed, … a factor of roughly 43,000 was due to improvements in algorithms!”

– Designing a Digital Future: Federally Funded R&D in Networking and Information Technology

Examples of algorithmic impact are prevalent throughout scientific computing. In optimization, interior point methods dramatically accelerated calculations, outpacing hardware advancements for a period. More recently, the influence of algorithms has become apparent in private sector research. A prime example is Google’s PageRank algorithm. This revolutionized internet search. Once you used Google to search you never went back to Altavista or Yahoo. In the process it also laid the foundation for one of the world’s most influential and prosperous companies. Today Google has a market cap in excess of 2 trillion dollars.

“When people design web pages, they often cater to the taste of the Google search algorithm rather than to the taste of any human being.”

— Yuval Noah Harari

More recently, another algorithm has revolutionized the tech world: the transformer. This breakthrough was instrumental in the recent developments of large language models (LLMs). These have reshaped the technology landscape in the past couple years. The transformer’s impact is multifaceted. Most superficially, it excels at consuming and processing data in vector form, aligning perfectly with modern GPU hardware. This synergy has propelled NVIDIA to unprecedented heights of corporate success (lifting it to trillion dollar market cap).

Less obvious, but equally significant, is the transformer’s influence on LLM behavior. Unlike previous models that processed data sequentially, the transformer operates on vector data chunks, enabling the network to consider larger contexts. This represents a quantum leap in LLM capabilities and behavior.

A cautionary tale emerges from the transformer’s history. Google pioneered the algorithm, but others reaped the primary benefits. This highlights a common challenge with algorithmic advancements: those making the initial breakthrough may not see the principal benefits. Moreover, the vision to develop an algorithm often differs from the vision to optimize its use. This presents a persistent hurdle for project managers. Project manager are relentlessly myopic.

“Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes”

― Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

It is well known that the power of algorithms is on par with the impact of hardware improvements. However, a key distinction lies in the predictability of progress. Algorithmic advancements stem from discovery and inspiration. These are elements that defy the quarterly planning cycles prevalent in contemporary research. An intolerance for failure hinders algorithmic progress. As exemplified by the transformer, algorithms often benefit organizations beyond their originators. Success lies in adapting to the capabilities of these innovative tools.

Algorithms I really care about

My professional focus lies in developing methods to solve hyperbolic conservation laws. The nature of these equations offers significant potential for algorithmic improvements, a fact often overlooked in current research directions. This oversight stems from a lack of clarity about the true measures of success in numerical simulations. The fundamental objective is to produce highly accurate solutions while minimizing computational effort. This is to be achieved while maintaining robustness, flexibility, and physical correctness.

“The scientific method’s central motivation is the ubiquity of error – the awareness that mistakes and self-delusion can creep in absolutely anywhere and that the scientist’s effort is primarily expended in recognizing and rooting out error.”

– David Donoho et al. (2009)

Achieving an unambiguous measure of solution accuracy uses a process known as code verification. A common misconceptions about code verification is its focus on bug finding rather than precise error quantification. It is equally important to understand how computational effort reduces error. Mesh refinement is a standard approach adding more degrees of freedom. This increases the cost in a well defined way that depends on the dimensionality of the problem. For a one-dimensional explicit calculation, computational cost scales quadratically with decreasing mesh size due to the linear relationship between time step and mesh size. In two and three dimensions, this scaling becomes cubic and quartic, respectively.

Code verification reveals both precise error (given an exact solution) and convergence rate. For problems with discontinuities like shock waves, the convergence rate is inherently limited to first order, regardless of the method used. This rate often falls below one due to numerical behavior near linear discontinuities. For simplicity, we will focus on the implications of first-order convergence. Given a fixed convergence rate, error accuracy becomes paramount. Furthermore as the convergence rate diminishes the base algorithmic accuracy grows in impact.

While testing is standard practice in hyperbolic conservation law research, it is often inconsistent. Accuracy is typically reported for smooth problems where high-order accuracy can be achieved. However, once smoothness is lost and accuracy drops to first order or less, reporting error ceases. Notably the problems with shock waves are the reason we study these equations. The Sod shock tube is a common test case, but results are presented graphically without quantitative comparison. This reflects a common misconception that qualitative assessments suffice after shock formation, disregarding the significance of accuracy differences.

“What’s measured improves”

– Peter Drucker

Because the order of accuracy is limited to first order, even small differences in accuracy become more significant. For standard methods, these base accuracy differences can easily range from two to four times, dramatically impacting computational cost to achieve an error level. Minimizing the effort required to achieve a desired accuracy level is crucial. The reason is simple: accuracy matters more as the convergence rate decreases. The lower the convergence rate, the greater the impact of accuracy on overall performance.

The algorithmic payoff

Consider a method that halves the error for double the cost at a given mesh resolution. We break even with second-order accuracy, a mesh half the size of the original is required in one dimension. For third and fourth-order accuracy, the break-even points shift to two and three dimensions, respectively. These dynamics change entirely when considering the fixed first-order accuracy imposed by mathematical theory.

“The fundamental law of computer science: As machines become more powerful, the efficiency of algorithms grows more important, not less.“

– Nick Trefethen

In one dimension, the less accurate method is twice as costly for the same error. This factor escalates to four times in two dimensions and eight times in three dimensions. As accuracy disparities grow, the advantage of higher accuracy expands exponentially. A sixteen-fold error difference can lead to a staggering 65,000-fold cost advantage in 3D. Consequently, even significantly more expensive methods can offer substantial benefits. Essentially the error difference amortizes the algorithmic cost. Despite this potential, the field remains entrenched in decades-old,low-accuracy approaches. This stagnation is rooted in a fear of failure and short-term thinking, with long-term consequences.

If failure is not an option, then neither is success.

― Seth Godin

This entire dynamic is inextricably linked to a shift toward short-term focus and risk aversion. Long-term objectives are essential for algorithmic advancement, demanding vision and persistence. The capacity to withstand repeated failures while maintaining faith in eventual success is equally critical. Unfortunately, today’s obsession with short-term project management stifles progress at its inception. This myopic approach is profoundly detrimental to long-term advancement.

References

Lax, Peter D., and Robert D. Richtmyer. “Survey of the stability of linear finite difference equations.” Communications on pure and applied mathematics 9, no. 2 (1956): 267-293.

Majda, Andrew, and Stanley Osher. “Propagation of error into regions of smoothness for accurate difference approximations to hyperbolic equations.” Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 30, no. 6 (1977): 671-705.

Banks, Jeffrey W., T. Aslam, and William J. Rider. “On sub-linear convergence for linearly degenerate waves in capturing schemes.” Journal of Computational Physics 227, no. 14 (2008): 6985-7002.

Lax, Peter D. “Accuracy and resolution in the computation of solutions of linear and nonlinear equations.” In Recent advances in numerical analysis, pp. 107-117. Academic Press, 1978.

Page, Lawrence, Sergey Brin, Rajeev Motwani, and Terry Winograd. The pagerank citation ranking: Bring order to the web. Technical report, Stanford University, 1998.

Vaswani, Ashish, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. “Attention is all you need.” Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).

Sod, Gary A. “A survey of several finite difference methods for systems of nonlinear hyperbolic conservation laws.” Journal of computational physics 27, no. 1 (1978): 1-31.

Greenough, J. A., and W. J. Rider. “A quantitative comparison of numerical methods for the compressible Euler equations: fifth-order WENO and piecewise-linear Godunov.” Journal of Computational Physics 196, no. 1 (2004): 259-281.

Rider, William J., Jeffrey A. Greenough, and James R. Kamm. “Accurate monotonicity-and extrema-preserving methods through adaptive nonlinear hybridizations.” Journal of Computational Physics 225, no. 2 (2007): 1827-1848.

Forced Social Justice Creates the Foundation for a Backlash

24 Wednesday Jul 2024

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

life, masculinity, mental-health, toxic-masculinity

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

– Martin Luther King Jr.

The Seeds of Failure

It’s been incredibly difficult to write this post. It feels like I’m grappling with live wires, but this is an essential topic to address. Over the past 70 years, the United States has witnessed a series of social movements that have expanded the rights of many oppressed groups. However, the tactics employed by these movements have undergone dramatic shifts. Each movement faced vehement opposition from conservatives, and their successes have been mixed. We now stand at a crossroads. While there’s a renewed push for progress with new strategies, some of these methods have inadvertently sown the seeds of a larger failure. I believe these approaches to be counterproductive and have generated a significant backlash. The reasons behind this are logical and rooted in basic human psychology.

A prime example can be found with attacks on masculinity from the left. The #MeToo movement has shed light on important excesses surrounding masculinity. We have seen masculinity attacked and broadly reviled for good reasons. It has also been a particularly difficult time for young men. The reasons are varied and mostly tangentially related to #MeToo. However, it’s important to remember that healthy masculinity exists. Modern masculinity should be built on respect,empathy, and consent. The use of power and strength should be responsible and used to help those who are weaker.

The #MeToo movement primarily highlighted the misuse of power by some men. There masculinity is a force against the weak leading to sexual violence. Unfortunately, the critique of masculinity has to led many men to embrace a more negative and spiteful form. This is what some might call “pathological masculinity” or toxic masculinity. This is exemplified by figures like Donald Trump (though Joe Rogan, Dana White, and MMA culture can also be seen as reflections of this too). The lack of a compelling alternative from progressives has further complicated the issue. There needs to be a compelling althernative. Without a positive vision of masculinity, many men are drawn to the more aggressive and dangerous traditional form.

“When all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free.”

— Barack Obama

Online Social Movements

Social movements today increasingly leverage online tactics to achieve equality. These tactics include online attacks, trolling, doxing, and social media campaigns. While these methods can diminish expressions of oppression, they are ultimately harmful. Cancellation, the complete removal of a person from public discourse for expressing a dissenting view, is particularly destructive. While it may feel like a victory for the movement, it sows the seeds of future problems.

Instead of fostering debate, these tactics shut down opposing ideas. This has several negative consequences.

First, it undermines the principle of free speech, a cornerstone of a healthy society.
Second, it casts violators as victims, garnering them sympathy.
Third, it avoids defeating ideas through logic and reason, relying on force instead.

This reliance on force is a tactic more commonly used by the political right. In many ways it defines the right. It creates enemies rather than allies, and silences those who might be open to progressive ideas. Fear, not persuasion, becomes the tool for change. This fear breeds resistance, leading to the very backlash we are witnessing today.

“Every single American — gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transgender — every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of our society. It’s a pretty simple proposition.”

— Barack Obama

This is not to say that conservatives do not use cancellation themselves. The whole book banning and “don’t say gay” approach is cancellation. Anything in the realm of sexuality and sex positivity is cancelled on the right. Just look at the ridiculous ways sex is “hidden” of social media (s3x, fugg, etc). It is outright censorship. They use force and institutions under their control to remove things they oppose. Their approach is terrible in all the same ways as described above. We would all be better off if this approach was abandoned whole cloth by both sides. The violation of free speech principles is an abdication of cherished American ideals. By the same token cancellation is the use of force where the battle should be for ideas and ideals. With the temporary victories of cancellation comes the foundation of backlash.

“The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”

– Audre Lorde

A Nuanced View

One area where leftist ideology loses ground to the right is its handling of historical figures. When we judge past figures by today’s progressive standards, it weakens the left’s position. Instead of honoring those who started the nation’s progress, the left inadvertently turns them into conservative symbols. This reinforces ideas that undermine progress. The Supreme Court’s use of originalism to restrict rights exemplifies this, treating the Founders’ ideas as eternally valid.

The real truth is that the Founding Fathers were considered extremely progressive in their own time. It’s ironic that their ideas are now used to hinder progress. While they certainly had flaws and made mistakes by modern standards, judging them solely through today’s lens paints an incomplete picture. We should view their nature in today’s terms as a testament to the progress we’ve made.

Essentially, yesterday’s radical progressives resemble today’s conservatives. This should be a source of optimism. It shows how far we’ve come. We should celebrate their contributions to our advancement rather than dismiss them. Additionally,this approach weakens the arguments of those on the left who seem overly critical of past figures. The left just looks like they are attacking and tearing down a hero. Instead any critique should be done with nuance and perspective.

The inability to consider nuance is a common thread across all forms of extremism, both left and right. Most issues surrounding personal rights involve a great deal of individual variation. There’s no one-size-fits-all solution for social problems, especially those related to gender, sexuality, or race. These topics are full of complexities and individual differences. Efforts to impose uniformity are doomed to fail. While the right is known for its one-size-fits-all solutions, it’s a failing strategy for the left as well. Nuance is key to truly accepting individuals as equals.

While I personally support most social movements, empathy and compassion are ultimately the drivers of progress.”Cancel culture” and online language policing are examples of force being used. Force is a tool of oppression, not progress. Progressive social justice cannot be achieved through coercion. Force and social justice are fundamentally incompatible. Empathy is fostered by shared experiences and the desire to understand and be understood by others.Simply forcing people to acknowledge another’s rights leads to a superficial adherence to equality, not lasting change.

True equality comes from believing everyone deserves basic rights. It arises from recognizing that everyone deserves the same rights you do, even if they seem different. The route to this is empathy and compassion growing within opponents of equality. Progressives should acknowledge the progress made while maintaining patience and perspective. There are still many areas needing improvement, and vulnerable populations remain. The right often demonizes specific groups for their own gain, as seen with the shift from targeting gay men as predators to attacking drag queens and transgender people. The gay population is largely accepted by society today, and new targets are needed to fuel the backlash.

A concerning trend in social movements today is the focus on amplifying negativity. Effective social change relies on empathy and compassion, not shame. Shame is a harmful tool, particularly when used to police women’s sexuality. Online shaming tactics, like cancellation and doxxing, are a form of bullying that can lead to real-world violence and destroy lives. A more constructive approach is needed. We must engage with those who hold opposing views, even those deemed problematic. Understanding their perspectives is crucial. Instead of simply dismissing opposing ideas, we should navigate the differences. This fosters growth and allows for the development of new perspectives that can garner wider support. The current strategy of online shaming only creates entrenched opposition and fuels backlash.

“Owning our story and loving ourselves through that process is the bravest thing we’ll ever do.”

— Brené Brown

A Personal Experience

I experienced the power of understanding firsthand during a virtual work meeting a few years ago. It was an icebreaker at the beginning of a meeting, and I was getting to know my new, younger manager. As a natural storyteller, I shared a Thanksgiving anecdote about serving a standing rib roast instead of a traditional turkey. This upset my son who I said felt “gypped.”

Immediately, I sensed a shift. My manager was visibly horrified. Shame washed over me. This was a term I’d used throughout my childhood, completely unaware of its offensive connotation towards the Romani people (often referred to as “gypsies”). I didn’t even know how to spell it correctly – I simply thought it meant “to be cheated.” I’ve come to realize that there was a lot of subtle racism in my upbringing casually offered by relatives.

In that moment, I felt unfairly judged as a racist or an ignorant person. Thankfully, my new manager listened openly. I explained my lack of awareness, and she, in turn, explained the term’s true meaning with compassion. We both approached the situation with empathy and a willingness to learn. We navigated the awkwardness gracefully, and it ultimately fostered a positive working relationship that later blossomed into friendship. This is the power of understanding, empathy, and compassion on both sides.

“Race, gender, religion, sexuality, we are all people and that’s it. We’re all people. We’re all equal.”

― Connor Franta

A crucial step towards sustainable progress is following the simple rule of “don’t be an asshole.” Especially online,encountering outrage should prompt you to question its effectiveness. Cancel culture often embodies this negativity and generates asshole behavior.

Understanding your own place in society, particularly if you come from a position of privilege, is essential. Intersectionality, the idea that we all have multiple social identities, is a valuable tool for this. These identities can be visible and obvious, or hidden and nuanced. For example, I am a white, middle-aged male. I have a high level of education and a great job in science. I identify as mostly straight, married, and polyamorous (although socially monogamous).

All these aspects contribute to who I am. Some provide advantages and conformity, while others challenge societal norms and even put me at a disadvantage. Recognizing these disadvantages fosters empathy for those who cannot hide their identities. This empathy is a powerful tool for progress, accessible to almost everyone. This accessibility comes from a place of authenticity, a desirable behavior for everyone to feel.

“We will not win our rights by staying quietly in our closets.”

— Harvey Milk

At its core, my view is that progress requires letting go of force and embracing empathy, understanding, and compassion.Social justice is achieved through better ideas and challenging traditional viewpoints. We need to change hearts and minds, not force compliance. Forceful tactics create a false sense of progress that quickly fades. Real social change is lasting and permanent.

Next week, I’ll return to a technical topic: the power of algorithms in advancing computational performance.

We don’t have leaders

13 Saturday Jul 2024

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

We don’t have leaders

“Leadership is solving problems. The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership.”

– Colin Powell.

Over the past few years, I’ve made a broad observation of “leaders” I encounter: they don’t lead. Instead, they seem to market the success of their role through positive messaging. This leadership style feels highly performative, offering little actual leadership. It’s like a reality TV show – they’re pretending to be leaders. Their communication is tinged with an almost uniformly positive message. If things were always going great, such positivity would be appropriate. However, the problem is that things are not going well. Therefore, the constant positivity in their messaging becomes toxic and inhibits any focus or attention on solving the numerous problems we face. Right now, the USA seems to be careening towards catastrophe.

The Elephant and Donkey in the Room

Over the past couple of weeks, we’ve been seeing this play out at the highest stakes possible: the US Presidential race. It’s replete with examples of deeply concerning leadership. Both political parties appear irresponsible. We have the recent example of Joe Biden’s continued candidacy. He’s clearly showing the effects of aging. In response, we see widespread gaslighting, with people telling us to ignore the obvious. Leaders are saying one thing in public and the opposite in private. Meanwhile, this allows Biden to maintain the status quo, protecting his ego. He’s acting just as selfishly as his opponent. He’s not doing what’s best for the nation and is failing to show leadership.

On the other side, we have an even greater demonstration of cowardice and failure. The entire Republican party has surrendered to Donald Trump. Their candidate can be most charitably described as a grifter. More accurately, he’s a habitual liar and convicted criminal. He’s engaged in numerous acts that would disqualify him from any position of authority. His first term as President was demonstrably incompetent. Were he not the President, he could never obtain a security clearance. Yet, the entire leadership of the GOP caved in the face of him. Everyone remaining in the GOP was too cowardly to stand up to Trump. They all prioritized their personal success and power over the good of the nation. They all essentially said, “Let’s support the crazy guy.”

“Being responsible sometimes means pissing people off.”

― Colin Powell,

In both cases, all the leaders have chosen their own success over the good of the nation. We see a systematic failure to confront objective reality because it is too difficult and risky. Obvious problems are ignored and minimized. The personal goals of the individuals in power overwhelm any sense of duty. Those in power turn out to be selfish narcissists. None of them are fit for leadership as a result. This behavior is not limited to the top of the power chain.

The Connection to the Covid-19 Pandemic

“One of the tests of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency.”

—Arnold Glasow

All of this started to come to a head with Covid-19. However, to be honest, the trend had been building for a long time, even before that. President Trump’s constant dismissal of reality, claiming the virus would just disappear, exemplified this behavior. This pattern repeated itself down the chain of command and across organizations. While Covid-19 was the peak of this toxic positivity, many smaller issues are communicated in the same way.

This cognitive dissonance, the disconnect between what leaders say and reality, resulted in deaths during the pandemic. A national crisis was exacerbated by inaction. Even worse, the pattern of ignoring problems and inaction seems to be escalating. The success of leaders who practice this approach almost guarantees we’ll see more of it, until it ultimately leads to their downfall.

While the pandemic was the most high-profile example of abysmal leadership, it’s hardly unique. The inability to speak truth and focus on problems appears to be an epidemic itself. I see this constantly within the institutions I interact with. Another prominent example is Boeing, where deadly consequences arose from two crashes and recent near misses. We’re witnessing a once-great company in freefall, destroying its reputation with each calamity.

If we delve deeper into the reasons for this lack of focus on reality in leadership, money emerges as a central issue. In the case of the pandemic, there was a fear of spooking the economy. With Boeing, the focus was on protecting shareholder value by keeping stock prices from dropping. Time and again, the threat of bad news impacting finances seems to be a top priority for leaders. It would be naive to believe that Boeing is an isolated case. Boeing is a canary in the coal mine, a warning sign of danger ahead.

One key takeaway is that leadership positions often lead to wealth. Even lower-level managers are well-compensated compared to those they manage. Furthermore, the potential for promotion is highly attractive. Preserving these personal benefits by avoiding waves and keeping the status quo intact allows this entire dysfunctional system to persist. In essence, our leaders are incentivized not to lead and expose the incompetence that surrounds and surpasses them.

“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”

– Abraham Lincoln.

Money is the Only Thing We Care About

“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.” ― Peter Drucker

A key element is the rise of money as power. In today’s world, money is the heart of personal power. Leaders hold significantly more wealth and power than those they lead. This can lead many to cling to these positions far longer than is beneficial, neglecting important concerns. We’ve become a society where money is the sole measure of worth, overshadowing other values like quality, ethics, and humanity (e.g., Boeing). Financial gain is seen as the only measure of success and grants immense power. In the corporate world, shareholder value becomes the excuse for prioritizing profits over all else. This trend is a product of the neoliberal era.

This, in turn, fuels vast societal inequality, creating a leadership class with an existence entirely divorced from those they claim to lead. Leaders, naturally, are unwilling to relinquish their privilege. We also see the corrosive and dangerous aspects of concentrated wealth and power. Those in power view losing their leadership roles as a personal threat, and they actively work to maintain the status quo for their own benefit. Falling out of the leadership class translates to a significant decline in both economic standing and societal influence.

Preserving the status quo is paramount. One way to enact change is to begin addressing problems. Ignoring and perpetuating problems simply affirms the status quo. This, in many ways, explains the rightward shift. Conservatives generally favor the status quo and upholding tradition, which benefits those in power. Since power in the US is heavily tied to money, we see an alliance emerge: moneyed interests and conservatives working together to preserve the existing order.

Leading the charge for the GOP is the Supreme Court. They have transformed from a legal oracle into a partisan entity. The recent immunity ruling is arguably one of the worst decisions in history, destined to stand alongside Dred Scott in infamy. The outcome could very well lead to the dismantling of the Court and the nation itself. It’s a recipe for dictatorship. The Court relies on the Executive Branch to enforce its rulings. If the executive branch disagrees, they can now break the law with impunity. Essentially, power now resides with the President, not the law. While the Court seized significant power over the executive branch, they ultimately relinquished it all back to the President. The nation’s future hangs in the balance. We could very well descend into a de facto dictatorship, effectively losing any semblance of a functioning democracy.

Toxic Positivity

“The supreme quality of leadership is integrity.”

–Dwight Eisenhower

A significant portion of the problem stems from the overuse of toxic positivity in communication. Effective leadership hinges on clear communication and directing human effort towards shared goals. Leaders who filter out problems to create a narrative of perfect circumstances erode trust. When a leader assures you everything is great while you know it’s not, it raises a red flag. This destroys trust not only in that specific situation but also makes you question their honesty in general. This continuous erosion of trust contributes to the decline in societal trust as a whole. Each selective edit of reality feels like another betrayal, leading us to view leaders as habitual liars and fostering cynicism. While acknowledging problems can be difficult, it’s a crucial aspect of leadership. Bullshitting people with positivity is cowardly and destroys trust.

The issue of toxic positivity has profoundly impacted my life. In 2020, I had a close friend who demanded nothing but positivity during interactions. As a therapist, she dealt with people’s problems all day, so it’s understandable that she craved positivity outside of work. However, 2020 was a year of significant challenges, and the inability to share these burdens within our friendship caused me distress. Despite being part of my social circle, I eventually distanced myself due to the one-sided nature of the relationship. Her insistence on positivity came at the expense of balance, ultimately undermining the friendship.

Toxic positivity is a telltale sign of a leadership problem. Instead of honesty, we’re offered the soothing but meaningless platitudes of positivity. Problems are denied, and everything is portrayed as being under perfect control. When reality contradicts this narrative, problems fester or become hidden secrets that divide people. Leaders who resort to toxic positivity simply aren’t leading. They have no intention of tackling complex or time-consuming issues. Their strategy is to manipulate communication to maintain their leadership position and hope that problems remain hidden. This approach is infectious, and upper leaders often establish a “shoot the messenger” culture that discourages reporting bad news. This, in turn, perpetuates the cycle of toxic positivity throughout the organization.

One cannot simply dictate positivity. Life is inherently complex. The same principle applies to leaders; they cannot be effective without balance. True leadership requires a blend of acknowledging the good and the bad. Leaders who lack the ability to admit problems or recognize failures cannot lead effectively. They should celebrate successes and use them as springboards for growth. Identifying problems allows them to rally their followers to address them. It is through solving problems that leaders achieve greatness. Ultimately, the greatest success comes from transforming problems into opportunities. Unfortunately, this virtuous cycle seems to have been lost. Today, some leaders believe they can manipulate their way to success through messaging and pronounce problems solved simply by declaration.

“The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between, the leader is a servant.”

—Max DePree

Given the high stakes involved, what can be done? The philosophy of Victor Frankl, a Holocaust survivor, offers an answer. His concept of “tragic optimism” acknowledges that problems are inevitable. Death, for example, is a universal experience. We will all face tragedy repeatedly. However, tragic optimism encourages us to approach these inevitable challenges with the belief that they can be overcome. We can not only survive but also thrive in the face of tragedy. This requires acknowledging problems head-on. This is the foundation of great leadership. This philosophy can guide us towards a brighter future. However, we can only achieve this by rejecting the current generation of “leaders.” We should demand honest problem-solvers who act in the best interests of the institutions they lead. Only when we stop rewarding cowardice with power and riches can we truly turn the corner.

“My own definition of leadership is this: The capacity and the will to rally men and women to a common purpose and the character which inspires confidence.”

—General Montgomery

Next week, I will discuss the societal reckoning we are approaching in relation to social justice movements. While the causes may be just, I believe the current methods employed to achieve social justice are counterproductive. We need to re-evaluate our strategic approach to building a better society.

Assholes are having a moment

05 Friday Jul 2024

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

life, mental-health, psychology, relationships, writing

As I started to write and research this piece one thing is clear; I am not alone in seeing this. There seems to be a wide recognition that assholes are having a moment. We have the obvious example of the asshole-in-chief, Donald Trump. For him being an asshole is a badge of distinction and earns him a cult like following. The fact that our seemingly likely next President is a complete asshole is troubling. It probably should be a red flag for the Nation. We are in deep danger. Perhaps we should understand why?

A couple instances come to mind that crystalized this issue in my mind. The first happened in an odd location. I was on vacation in Cancun at an all inclusive resort. We were eating lunch and a guy came in with a t-shirt saying “Assholes Live Forever”. He was definitely projecting right wing coded energy. The thing that made the t-shirt notable was a general intent at the resort to be attractive to the opposite sex. This asshole thought being an asshole was attractive to women. Now in my experience women try to avoid assholes like the plague. Assholes are terrrible lovers, terrible about consent and terrible to people. They are dangerous. Apparently being an asshole is attractive to right wing ladies? What the fuck?

“I will canoodle with a dumb man, but I won’t snuggle with an asshole.” ― Rachel Howzell Hall

More recently I was chatting with a good friend at a conference. My friend had just led a fantastic session-discussion of the nature of masculinity in today’s world. The session touched on a wide range of issues including a full spectrum of intersectionality. A common thread is that I had met this friend on a previous trip to Cancun.. We are seemingly quite different, but immediately vibed and connected personally. He’s black, gay, Brooklynite, and works in music while I’m a white straight scientist from the Western USA. The topic of assholes came up within intersectionality. My point was that we need to recognize assholes. Assholes are present in all identities black, white, male, female, non-binary or trans. Gay, lesbian or bisexual people can be assholes too. Assholes need to be called out and identified as being toxic to whatever spaces they occupy.

A great deal of discussion around masculinity focused on the standard view. This is the “alpha” male who defines masculinity through power, aggression, and lack of emotion. No compassion or empathy is allowed. That would show weakness. Never apologize for being wrong because that is weakness. This is a great recipe for being an asshole. The discussion at the conference talked about vulnerability, openness, empathy and compassion. All of these ideas are strongly coded with political valence. In other words, assholes are accepted and promoted on the right. Assholes exist on the left, but are generally reviled (they exist specifically associated with social causes).

Assholes seem to be a defining feature of the right wing. As noted the leading figure on the right, Trump is just a pure asshole. He is a piece of shit of a man and proud of it. His supporters adore him for it. Every bit of that alpha male attitude is projected (although he’s not very alpha). No empathy or compassion, and definitely never apologize because you’re never wrong. I’ve seen how right wing ladies are looking for an asshole to date or fuck. They see being an asshole as being tantamount to being a man’s man. They like men who are bigots and hateful because that is strength. Men who bring out that kind of middle school locker room energy toward anything feminine or non traditional. Any space for LBGTQ is simply unacceptable. The right wing governance is full of assholes and they are rewarded for it.

“The problem with the world today is that there are too many assholes and not enough saints.” ― R.M. Engelhardt

Why do they like assholes? I think this is an essential issue to answer. Part of this is the general issue of masculinity today. The cultural reckoning around men (#MeToo) has resulted in a reaction on the right. There is little doubt that men are having trouble today and especially young men. The answer on the right is traditional roles. Traditional masculinity does not work any more. The right’s reaction is to double down on the status quo. Much like the BLM movement produced a reaction on the right.

What we get is performative masculinity that most commonly creates the asshole vibe. Trump is a perfect example. He is hardly masculine or manly. His toupee and makeup alone challenge this view. He isn’t really athletic. He lies about his physique, height and weight. He likely lies about his health and intellect. Golf is barely a sport, being more of an activity for businessmen and white guys. Even there he is an asshole with compulsive lying and cheating at golf. Yet his supporters love him because he is such a massive asshole. One might think all this lying and cheating would undermine the performative masculinity. Instead the desire for “owning the libs” gets them to look the other way. It is quite pathetic, but effective.

I believe a big part of the appeal of the asshole is authenticity. Trump is an authentic asshole. Being an asshole is Trump’s true and natural self. This is appealing to many people and a sign of huge problems. He is not authentic as a leader. The leader part of Trump is pure performance. The problem is that almost all the other leadership is performative too. So without leadership we are left with assholery as the alternative. This does not work for a good future for anyone. The lack of genuine authentic leadership is a future topic. A punchline of that condition is assholery as the alternative.

What makes someone an asshole? I got a pretty good answer from Google’s LLM Gemini (describes Donald Trump accurately!).

Asshole behavior can come in many flavors, but some common traits include:

Disrespectful: This is a big one. Assholes put themselves above others and don’t consider other people’s feelings or needs. They might interrupt constantly, talk down to people, or make rude jokes at someone’s expense.
Selfish: Assholes are all about themselves. They take more than their fair share, don’t reciprocate favors, and only care about what benefits them.
Unaccountable: They never take responsibility for their mistakes and are always quick to blame others.
Aggressive: They might be verbally or even physically aggressive, but they also might use aggression in a more subtle way, like constantly putting others down.
Unreliable: You can’t count on them to follow through on commitments or be there for you when you need them.

Here are some other behaviors that can be signs of an asshole:

Cheating
Lying constantly
Being condescending or arrogant
Not listening to others
Taking advantage of people
Publicly criticizing or humiliating others

It’s important to remember that context matters. Sometimes people might act in a way that seems like an asshole behavior,but there could be a good explanation. But if these behaviors are a pattern, then it’s a good sign you’re dealing with an asshole. Virtually all of us have been assholes at some time or another. A question is whether you can stop being an asshole or regret it. At the core is a general lack of empathy or compassion for others. Often this comes at using one’s power to abuse or take advantage of others without a feeling of conscience.

As I noted above the left has assholes. Most of them exist in the general area of “cancel culture”. The whole aspect of cancelling people is an absolute gift for the right. Time and time again the right weaponizes the left’s overreach to terrifying effect. The social movements driving the attacks are ultimately undone. This is a common thread today where many social movements are being attacked. Women, blacks and LBGTQ are all under attack. Rights and equality is being lost, not gained.

“Ninety percent of all problems are caused by people being assholes.” “What causes the other ten percent?” asked Kizzy. “Natural disasters,” said Nib.”

― Becky Chambers

A good example of assholery is found in the space of pronouns. The right is full of performative assholery around pronoun use. Not using someone’s chosen name after it is requested is awful. Its like someone says “please call me Bill” and the asshole will keep saying “Billy”. It is the definition of being an asshole. On the other hand, it can be difficult if the pronoun isn’t typical or obvious. Yet people on the left can be unforgiving about these difficulties. The question is whether someone is trying to honor the request. If someone is trying to honor it, but having difficulty, give them grace. Lashing out makes you the asshole if the desire to comply is earnest.

Am I the Asshole? This is an increasingly popular place on Reddit. The positive aspect is that the thread actually asks the question with the implied message that being an asshole is bad. Simply asking the question already makes you likely not an asshole. Real assholes just do their thing without caring. A real asshole is proud of how they act. They treat people with disregard and do awful things without the slightest bit of regard for others. Assholes are careless in the truest sense of the word; they do not care about their acts. They simply act as they want and usually thinking only of themselves. An asshole looks decisive and powerful. In reality they are simply thoughtless and self-centered.

A piece of the dynamic is the internet and its defining attention culture. Attention is sought by any means available. Authenticity is seemingly going extinct today. Everything is image. Meta is ground zero for this. Instagram and Facebook drive the society to influencer’s being the apex of endeavor. The influencer is all about projecting quality through appearance rather than through substance. Substance is about fundamentals. Fundamentals often are invisible and subtle.

“Why do shitty people always brag about being good at trolling? Troll is just another word for asshole. What kind of antisocial sociopath is proud of being an asshole?”

― Oliver Markus Malloy

Authenticity is about fundamentals. It is reality. Nothing about today’s world favors these things. Thus fundamentals are lost. They are not a priority. They are not sexy or photogenic. We don’t really know this, but we hunger for authenticity. Online we get trolls who are assholes by definition. Elon Musk now occupies a role mostly as an online troll and ally of assholes. The end result is a hollowing out of all things. Assholes get attention and clicks without adding any substance. Assholes seem like reality and substance. It is the path to destruction.

Next week, I need to address to complete lack of leadership in the United States at any level.

We All Need to Look at 2020 Again

29 Saturday Jun 2024

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

“I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.”– Abraham Lincoln

If I’d still been writing the blog in 2020, it would have been a banner year. I’d likely written 30-40 posts about the events that year. At my normal rate of writing, this would have been 60-80,000 words. How am I going to condense that into a single (approximately 2000 word) post? Hindsight and perspective will allow for a lot of compression. If I’m right about the perspective, this won’t be the last time I touch on what 2020 can teach us. More importantly, we didn’t learn much from the year.

SAO PAULO, 12.mai.2020 – Equipe de médico, enfermeiros e fisioterapeutas cuidam de pacientes críticos da Covid-19 na UTI do hospital Vila Nova Cachoeirinha, na zona norte de São Paulo

It is not much of a leap to say 2020 was the worst year of our lives, although 2024 still has time! The centerpiece for this disaster was the Covid-19 pandemic’s effects. We had a horrible election too. A brutal murder and reaction generated more racism in response. All of this was amplified by incompetent leadership. The USA performed horribly during the pandemic by any objective measure. The reasons for this are both specific and structural. The broad response to the pandemic has also had lasting influences on our lives today. Whether we like it or not, today’s world was shaped in 2020.

We sit here in 2024 with a monumental decision in front of the American public. We have the worst choice of Presidents in history. Either decision is bad. On the one hand, you have a declining feeble elderly man whose best days are well behind him. He’s not terribly likable or charismatic. He is decent, but absolutely uninspiring. On the other hand, we have a complete and total asshole. We have a crisis of leadership and either man will deepen it.

As I will discuss, Trump has demonstrated incompetence and horrible judgment. He constantly lies and seems to have no comprehension of truth. He botched the response to a crisis and actively made things worse. He is racist, sexist, misogynist, incurious, and ignorant. He is a convicted felon and legally judged to have committed rape. He is impulsively and habitually criminally minded. It is an awful choice and we are likely to make the worst of it. What it really confirms is that we didn’t learn a fucking thing from the mistakes of 2020. That is unforgivable.

The central drama of the year was the Covid-19 pandemic. Starting off in China, it spread across the globe and the United States. It wreaked havoc everywhere in the world, bringing death, fear, and chaos. Initially, the worst of the pandemic attacked Western Europe, with Italy getting the worst of it. Soon the massive death toll came to the USA, centering on New York City. As the virus was new, uncertainty reigned. Public health and medical officials knew little, and mistakes from caution abounded. The vulnerable died at a dizzying rate without any immunity to the illness. The medical systems strained and broke under the weight of the severely ill.

A couple of themes can already be seen at the outset of the pandemic. The controversy of the origin of the crisis shows a lack of trust and faith in institutions. We saw the chaos our federal decentralized system of government produced. Rather than local and better adaptation, the response was almost uniformly worse. Everything was made political. Liberal leaders tended to overreact and chose safety and caution. Conservative leaders chose business and minimized human life. Both sides were wrong and went too far. Liberals ended up hurting the future of children and their education. Conservatives took actions that led to more death, especially the poor, minorities, and the vulnerable.

Under this stress, we got to see the mettle of our leaders. In the USA, our leaders did horrendously. The most awful was our President. He seemed to first wish the pandemic away and then provided divisive and unvetted advice. He undermined those trying to provide expertise and guidance. As a result of inaction, Trump made the pandemic worse. The actions he took made it worse. The vaccine was the only saving grace. More true to form, Trump sowed dissent and chaos politically. This included attacking the vaccine when it became available. A crisis that should have brought people together divided them. Instead of making the country stronger, he made the country weaker and less united.

“In a time of domestic crisis, men of goodwill and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics.”– John F. Kennedy

Personally, the year was a mixed bag. As the pandemic broke in the USA and the country closed down, I was with my family with my mother in hospice. It was from entirely different issues than Covid that she died. The backdrop to her passing was the world closing down. When I looked up from this, I found the nation closed down. Suddenly my wife and I were working from home. We adapted, as did everyone.

Working from home was rocky at first, but improved with better software and better habits. The whole arrangement had distinct advantages, removing the commute. Meals could be prepared during the day and dinner was served early. Exercise was a challenge, but equipment was purchased and walking became central too. I went 4-7 miles a day. In spite of the health challenges and the viral threat, I felt like the whole experience improved my physical health. This wasn’t my only benefit.

All in all, we did well personally. We both appreciated working from home and put ourselves to work on major home projects. We formed our own pod of friends to retain a social life. We and our friends made conscious choices based on our risk profiles. It was greatly enabled by working from home. We balanced our safety with our sanity. I fully recognize that all this good is firmly grounded in a lot of privilege and luck. For many people, the situation was terrible. One of these was my son. He was at the end of his Bachelor’s degree and working from home didn’t work for him. It was a microcosm of the damage done to millions of young people’s lives.

I also need to acknowledge that many people could not work from home. With schools out and day cares closed this was an exceptionally difficult time. Our children are grown and we didn’t have to try to work while managing day care and school. Anyone with children had a difficult time.

We also saw an online community spring up for Zoom-based cocktail parties. These mixers were amazing, well run, and satisfying. Not as good as doing this in person, but set the standard for online meetings. Frankly, my work meetings have never equaled the quality and intent of these Zoom meetings. Granted, the online meeting software and basic approach have improved leaps and bounds. It shows what motivated people and good leadership can do for meetings, even remote. Of course, all this was true with in-person meetings too. Work meetings have had problems forever.

“I wish it need not have happened in my time,” said Frodo. “So do I,” said Gandalf, “and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”― J.R.R. Tolkien

In the midst of the pandemic, as the first stage of it drew to a close, something else terrible happened. A black man (George Floyd) was brutally and callously murdered by a police officer. This happened while other officers looked on without stopping it. Essentially, the murder was filmed, and the film went viral. It went out into a nation that was relentlessly online. People were properly outraged. People went to the streets to protest in massive numbers. This became the Black Lives Matter movement. It spawned some of the largest public protests in recent history.

It was born out of the over-militarized American police and a virtual acceptance of police abuse and violence by many. Police and their thin blue line attitude allow abuse to persist. Rather than demand legal and proper behavior in their ranks, police protect lawbreaking in their ranks. The left also overreacted with some well-intentioned and genuinely stupid ideas. Key was the defund the police stance. It was still incredibly counter-productive and just the start. It appeared to be a genuine racial reckoning. The overreach on the left was the undoing of something needed.

“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.”― Martin Luther King Jr.

It also produced a huge backlash from the right. With the defund movement as cover, the right attacked the reaction to police abuse and murder. Much of this was supported and encouraged by the President. He is horribly racist after all. It also drove more insidious efforts like the label of “critical race theory” for racially sensitive education. CRT is absolute bullshit as actual CRT is a graduate-level legal theory (learned about Chris Rufo a brilliant, but horrible person). Nonetheless, it energized the right to remove any material that encouraged racial sensitivity. The right also engaged in violence at the protests. Most prominently, the coward Kyle Rittenhouse killed two people at a protest. In the end, it is arguable that the right won the day. Rather than a reckoning, we ended with a setback.

This gets to why we need to look back at 2020. There were numerous lessons we should have learned. We have not. We fucked up our response to things over and over. We made non-political things controversial. We attacked and undermined institutions and expertise. The result was objectively bad performance and lots of unnecessary dead people. We harmed the future of our children unnecessarily. We had painfully incompetent leadership. Rather than punish this incompetence and division, we may reward it. We are inviting disaster. An important question is why aren’t we learning? Why are we about to make some of the same mistakes again?

A big aspect of the pandemic year was how it affected one’s personal life in virtually every respect. One’s social life is an obvious thing, which takes a major hit removing the usual locales for getting together with people. We managed this by forming a small risk-informed pod of friends we continued to see. Our choices had a big impact on preserving our sanity. All things considered, we remained happy throughout the year.

Health is another obvious impact. For me, Covid-19 got in the way of health care. Covid-19 itself did not pose a problem personally. On the other hand, it got in the way of treating several problems. I have glaucoma and during the first half of 2020 I had a permanent minor loss of vision. I was also suffering from AFib during 2020. The pandemic modestly slowed my treatment. I ultimately had two ablation surgeries that appear to have fixed the problem (in 2022). Still, these medical issues were impacted by the overburdened medical system. Compared to many, I got off easy, but not unscathed.

A big part of improving my happiness and sanity was working from home. For both my wife and me, this was a welcome change. Firstly, I had a manager who I could not stand. He couldn’t stand me either. I welcomed not having to see him regularly. In addition, it was a welcome relief from having to put on “a mask” and walk on eggshells around coworkers. I don’t mean a physical mask, but the masking of my authentic self in order to be acceptable. It led to the realization of how little I wanted to spend time with most of these people. Now I could choose who I graced with my physical presence explicitly. I’ve come to realize that authenticity in the workplace is a joke. At least if you are me. The real me is not fit for the modern workplace. I’m too outspoken, profane, and sharp-tongued. I suppose people who are quiet, reserved, and dull as dirt can be authentic. The pandemic gave me time to realize all this from living differently.

While all this positivity surrounded my personal situation, the same can’t be said for the USA. The USA has a rather extreme problem with leadership. This is not all about Trump either. Trump is a real indicator of the problem. We don’t demand competence from our leaders. It is all image and bullshit. The result is our institutions failing at every level. We are incredibly low on trust. No one trusts anyone else.

“Trust is the glue of life. It’s the most essential ingredient in effective communication. It’s the foundational principle that holds all relationships.”― Stephen R. Covey

Public health and medicine took the brunt of this, and this lack of trust made the pandemic worse. It cost many lives. Worse yet, the pandemic made it all even worse. Conspiracy theories abounded. The vaccines that should have been a triumph drove division. A national crisis that should have brought people together did the opposite. By the end of the year, we were more divided and cynical.

I cannot pass through 2020 without talking about the election. In many ways, it was the shitty icing on the shit sandwich of a year. On the one hand, it was a repudiation of the incompetence of the Trump administration. Yet about half the populace accepted the lie that the election was a fraud. There was no peaceful transition of power for the first time in nearly 250 years. The beaten and bruised reputation of the USA took another hit. The former beacon of democracy is a basket case. We left the year with dramatically less trust than we started; we started the year with very little trust.

“The heaviest penalty for declining to rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself.”― Plato

Here we stand four years on with decisions in front of us. The hard lessons of 2020 have been forgotten. We never learned from them. We could very well reward the worst President in the history of the nation with that office again. It would be a self-inflicted wound of unparalleled magnitude. We would be taking a risk on a leader that we know is incompetent. We would be choosing a habitual liar to lead a nation without trust. We would be choosing a leader who will destroy our institutions rather than repair and fix them. We will be courting disaster when we need healing. It may be national suicide.

It is all because we want to forget what happened in 2020.

Next week, we need to talk about people who are assholes and why they are awful.

Inside Out 2: Anxiety Reigns; Chaos Without Balance

21 Friday Jun 2024

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

animation, disney, inside-out, pixar

tl;dr: Inside Out 2 explores emotions in adolescence, with Anxiety causing trouble. The movie argues against using toxic positivity, showing the importance of embracing all emotions for a balanced life. It is a highly recommended movie like the first one. I also reflect on own experiences during the blogging hiatus. I promise to write about broader themes in the future, with a greater focus on my life outside of work.

It is when we lose control that we repress the emotions, not when we are in control.

– Don Miguel Ruiz

I’m Back!

This marks my return to blogging after six years. The appearance of the Pixar movie Inside Out 2 is the perfect reason. I wrote about its predecessor with glee. It’s difficult not to want to speak to the excellent sequel; so I will. At the end of this post, I will address the “elephant in the room” about this return. I will map out what the future will and will not include. This is the first post in over six years, and that alone makes it consequential.

Movie Night with a Sequel

I settled into the theater to see the movie full of anticipation and excitement. The occasion was the opening night for Inside Out 2 (my second most-looked-forward-to movie of the summer, Deadpool is in July!). I attended with three people dear to me, anticipating their own reactions. I knew my wife reacted powerfully to the first movie, as did I. I wondered how our movie-loving girlfriend would react too. My son completed the group. Our anticipation was driven by the deeply moving Inside Out (https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2015/07/18/inside-out-lessons-from-a-kids-movie/). I was not disappointed one iota by the sequel; it is great and as good as the first movie.

The first movie touched on the life of Riley, a preteen moving from Minnesota to San Francisco. The move invoked profound sadness in her that caused her to make very bad decisions. The other main characters in the movie were the elements of Riley’s emotions: Joy, Anger, Fear, Disgust, and Sadness. Riley was full of joy, and Joy was in charge of her emotions. The role of Sadness was pushed to the back, diminished and ignored. The result was an imbalance that nearly led to disaster. The theme of the movie was the need to allow all emotions to play a role in your life. It touched on the broadly seen use of toxic positivity as a false route to happiness.

Emotional Balance Is Key Again

I’ll stop to note that the idea of emotions as characters is a gentle introduction to “parts work.” This is a psychological/therapy technique that looks at the different aspects of emotion, behavior, and reactions. The results of parts work are to integrate and balance the internal workings of a patient. This narrative mirrors the dramatic arc of Inside Out. The movie itself is a balance of a kid’s movie with deep themes that will provoke thought in adults. We found the movie to be moving and thought-provoking. It added a dialogue to our lives that we needed and benefitted from.

“We cannot selectively numb emotions, when we numb the painful emotions, we also numb the positive emotions.”

– Brené Brown

Toxic positivity shows up again in the sequel. Joy didn’t learn the lesson of how to embrace all emotions and experiences in shaping the future. Sadness is there and embraced, but Joy still squashes bad things from experience. This comes from one of the vehicles in the movie where Riley’s sense of self is being formed. This sense of self is one’s self-image. The second big element is the start of puberty and a host of new emotions, most notably anxiety. This forms the central tension in how the movie unfolds as a drama. With all this in place, we need a catalyst for things to develop.

Like any good drama, there needs to be something at stake for the main character. Here, Riley has the twin stressors of puberty and an elite hockey camp to push her buttons. She is 13 and ending middle school. She is going to a high school with an elite women’s hockey program. She and her best friends are invited to the camp by the coach. This coach is a local legend, and this serves as a huge opportunity to begin high school. She also learns some disturbing news about her friends that raises the stakes even higher.

Meanwhile, puberty is wreaking havoc with Riley’s emotions. The physical changes (like body odor) are coupled with new emotions that complicate everything. The balance created during the first movie is suddenly thrown off. These new emotions also give someone the “operating system” needed for adult life. With them come new perils that the maturing mind allows. The focus of this peril is anxiety with its planning and danger identification. Anxiety includes the ability to plan and work to mitigate dangers. It is a foundation of adult thinking. I can also lose control. Planning is great, but it can also take one out of the moment. Anxiety can falsely identify dangers or see ones that are not present.

Other emotions are part of the mature mind. Things like Envy (Jealousy) provide us comparison and objectives. Embarassment is there to provide limits and feedback on bold behavior. Finally, we have Ennui, which is best described as “don’t give a fuck”. All of these emotions have a dominantly negative valence. They also have a positive constructive role if balanced by other motivations and emotions. Anxiety brings planning and attention needed for complex challenges. Embarassment monitors adherence to norms and behavior. Envy looks critically at the success of others and their positive qualities. Ennui keeps one from taking too much seriously.

“Our anxiety does not come from thinking about the future, but from wanting to control it.”

— Kahlil Gibran

While I won’t give too much away about the plot of the movie; events lead to a crisis. In the crisis the anxiety gets out of control and precipitates a panic attack. It is shown vividly and effectively on film. It is so powerful that my wife broke down crying. I’ve experienced panic attacks several times. It was 25 years ago and I still remember the terror of it. It still stands as one of the most seminal moments of my adult life. It pushed me to make serious changes in how I lived and what my priorities were.

A panic attack is a major crisis and it can produce big impacts. A similar result follows in the movie. This gets to the common theme across the two movies, balance. The lack of balance leads to disaster in both movies. In the new one the anxiety takes over and it spirals into disaster and a panic attack. The first movie it comes from the adherence to joy and positivity. This adherence results in the wrong response to events. There embracing real sadness as a valid response cures the problem.

“Anxiety is a thin stream of fear trickling through the mind. If encouraged, it cuts a channel into which all other thoughts are drained.”

— Arthur Somers Roche

In the sequel this is a more complicated team effort. As adult life is more complex, the way to combat Anxiety’s dangerous hold is a phalanx of emotions. The key is some balance and acceptance of all the nuance of experience. Joy can be embraced and lead, but other emotions play essential roles. The reality is that experiences are rarely simple and fall into a clear narrative. We need our full range of emotions to navigate the real world. In the approach to resolution of the conflict we see another theme, which could be labeled as toxic positivity. Joy had fallen into old habits and was trying to craft Riley’s identity in only positive terms. Bad experiences were thrown to the back of the mind to be forgotten. Her sense of self was to be driven solely by positive expereinces.

In the movie Anxiety overthrows this project for another project based on anxious reactions. As this sense of self comes to life, the result is catastrophic. An identity based on doubt and catastrophizing is even worse. One could imagine identities based on any single emotion to be awful (anger, sadness, envy,…). The cure to this brings in a more complex sense of self that serves a future teenage then adult life. The key is to embrace all the joy, sadness, fear, anxiety, disgust, envy and other emotions in being yourself. A full and broad reaction to reality is robust and adaptive.

The Big Takeaway

The underlying message is the rejection of forced positivity. In this lesson we see the dangers of only seeing the positive in things and rejecting nuance. Life is too complex for a “positive vibes only” approach. Events and challenges are rarely if ever completely positive or negative. We need more nuance to succeed. As such they should be processed with a mixture of emotions for proper context and response. More importantly balance allows the full lessons to be learned from experience. It maximizes potential personal growth. In today’s world this is a lesson worth emphasizing when too many just urge us to “look on the bright side”. This is a shallow and dangerous approach leading to more misery. Instead we should see the World in an unbiased manner and react to things without prejudice.

What the Return of the Blog Means

It would be false to say that this post isn’t creating some anxiety for me. I have thought about doing this for a long time. I have carefully considered what I am doing. In this case the anxiety has alerted me to the danger and helped me navigate through it. I am tempering it with a dose of healthy fear, and allowing myself to embrace the joy in writing. I hope this step is grasping a healthy and balanced approach to this project. It has kept me away from danger while taking the opportunity to feel the pride I should for this personal project. I am seeing the lessons of Inside Out (2) in how I am doing this.

As promised I will close with touching on my return to blogging. I do so with joy, fear, excitement and anxiety. I have missed writing here greatly. It was something that brought me great joy. I did not stop doing this freely; I was forced to. Some day I will write about the specifics of those circumstances, but. I cannot do this now. It must wait until I am done working professionally and retired, but I will. I can say that was the single most painful experience of my adult life.

That said, I won’t be writing about work-related topics. This gives me the freedom to explore other themes that matter to me. So, my posts will focus less on technical topics than before, although they won’t be entirely absent. This is simply a consequence of the ground rules I must operate under. Frankly, it’s a loss for everyone as I still believe my work benefited from writing. Writing is thinking, and thinking and problem-solving are what I do at work. This truth wasn’t enough to allow the former project to continue. As a result, this is a new project with a different shape.

My experiences, life events, and influences over these past six years have reshaped me. As I’ve been reshaped, the writing will follow suit. The events of the past six years are too numerous to count and too painful to ignore. However, my own experiences have largely been positive over these years. This has been true whether weathering the pandemic or exploring innovative relationship dynamics. I’ve traded my source for information in TV news for podcasts. The onslaught of the Trump administration and the constant drama of COVID drove this. My wife has retired too, and I’m considering it for myself in the wake of this. Her experience has tempered my desire to do it too soon. Additionally, many of my contemporaries are retiring. Work is also increasingly devoid of joy and meaning. Age and health are becoming more prominent in my awareness. Time is finite and precious. Thus, the message of balance in these movies truly resonates with me at this moment.

The last six years have been consequential for me. I’m a different person now. My interests and views have been altered by the events I’ve experienced. I’m older now and see the world differently. Age has brought a handful of health concerns and crises. We all went through the COVID pandemic, which changed society in ways that are still unfolding. The future is uncertain and potentially dangerous, with disasters looming on the horizon. It’s necessary to think carefully about how to navigate this uncertain future. I will touch on work-adjacent topics, but only where they significantly impact life outside of work. I will take this as a freedom rather than a restriction.

I’m probably a little rusty, but it’s good to be back. Next week I will revisit 2020 probably the most consequential year of our lives.

“Some days I’m not okay and I’m not trying to fix that. No, I don’t need advice on how not to feel this way. I just need time to feel it.”

– Allyson Dinneen

The Best of the Regularized Singularity

18 Friday May 2018

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

This will be the final post on this blog.

There is no real ending. It’s just the place where you stop the story.

― Frank Herbert

It is time to move on. The choice is entirely mine although I’ve been influenced by the events of the last month. I have enjoyed writing this blog immensely. The topics and posts reflected the passion I had for my work. Sometimes that passion was directed toward technical matters and sometimes the passion was directed toward how technical matters are managed. I’m fairly sure that my views about how science is managed today led to the events that resulted in terminating the blog.

This blog was solely a vehicle for writing as a habit. This habit of writing was serious because I published the writing regularly and could expect others to read it. It was an aggressive and innovative form of professional development. It has been enriching and educational. I am grateful for the support I had during the period of time that I wrote regularly. Now that the support has been withdrawn, it’s time to stop. I will continue to write, but in another venue and probably focused on life’s other passions. I am passionate about many things in life and now it’s time to write about other things. I may drift back to things scientific, but not like I did here.

To bring things to a close I’m going to list my favorite blog posts from the past four and half years:

Lessons from the History of CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2014/05/30/lessons-from-the-history-of-cfd-computational-fluid-dynamics/
Weak and Strong Forms for Boundary Conditions https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/weak-and-strong-forms-for-boundary-conditions/
We have already lost to the Chinese in Supercomputing; Good thing it doesn’t matter https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/06/27/we-have-already-lost-to-the-chinese-in-supercomputing-good-thing-it-doesnt-matter/
11 Things in Computational Science that Sound Awesome, but are Actually Terrible https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2017/11/24/11-things-in-computational-science-that-sound-awesome-but-are-actually-terrible/
The benefits of using “primitive variables”The benefits of using “primitive variables” https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/the-benefits-of-using-primitive-variables/
Hyperviscosity is a Useful and Important Computational Tool https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/hyperviscosity-is-a-useful-and-important-computational-tool/
Play is essential to happiness, creativity and productivity https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/02/26/play-is-essential-to-happiness-creativity-and-productivity/
The Unfortunate Myth of the Hero Calculation https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2015/12/25/the-unfortunate-myth-of-the-hero-calculation/
The Clay Prize and The Reality of the Navier-Stokes Equations https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/the-clay-prize-and-the-reality-of-the-navier-stokes-equations/
Verification and Numerical Analysis are Inseparable https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2017/10/27/verification-and-numerical-analysis-are-inseparable/
What we still don’t get about numerical error https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2017/05/05/hat-we-still-dont-get-about-numerical-error/
The Marvelous Magical Median https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/06/07/the-marvelous-magical-median/
HPC is just a tool; Modeling & Simulation is what is Important https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/hpc-is-just-a-tool-modeling-simulation-is-what-is-important/
A Single Massive Calculation Isn’t Science; it is a tech demo https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/a-single-massive-calculation-isnt-science-its-a-tech-demo/
Verification and Validation with Uncertainty Quantification is the Scientific Method https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/12/22/verification-and-validation-with-uncertainty-quantification-is-the-scientific-method/
I’m Better When I Don’t Care https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2016/09/12/im-better-when-i-dont-care/
Why algorithms and modeling Beat Moore’s Law https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/why-algorithms-and-modeling-beat-moores-law/
Colorful Fluid Dynamics https://williamjrider.wordpress.com/2014/10/03/colorful-fluid-dynamics/

I’m sad to see the Regularized Singularity end; it’s been a magnificent chapter in my life, but it’s time to start writing a new one.

Adios Friends, I hope you find me elsewhere.

Ends are not bad things, they just mean that something else is about to begin. And there are many things that don’t really end, anyway, they just begin again in a new way. Ends are not bad and many ends aren’t really an ending; some things are never-ending.

― C. JoyBell C.

The End of the Regularized Singularity

19 Thursday Apr 2018

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ 6 Comments

Whatever is my right as a man is also the right of another; and it becomes my duty to guarantee as well as to possess.

― Thomas Paine

With this posting, I am putting an end to this blog. I do not want to do this, but I feel I am being forced to. In addition, I do not feel that I am at liberty to go into the nature of the pressure being placed on me to stop. Nonetheless, I am being clearly pressured, if not threatened. When you call your wife to talk to her about an event and her response is fear bordering on terror, it gets your attention. I don’t want to hear that ever again. That is enough to get you to say, “fuck this shit”.

At a minimum this is a hiatus, but it is likely the terminal point of this part of my journey. For those of you who enjoyed reading, thank you, your views and comments helped make this more worthwhile. Frankly having readers was not the reason I did this. The reasons are varied and largely personal. First and foremost, the blog was a way to practice writing as a habit. Writing is a core professional and personal activity. A focus on writing is key area of personal and professional development. It is difficult and often exposes one to intense and personal criticism. A blog meant that the work would be published and read by others. That has a way of focusing the mind, and you take things more seriously. When you write only for yourself, the level of care and attention is not nearly so acute. Occasionally a blog post would resonate and get a lot of viewers, which is a nice feeling. More often I would get a handful of viewers, but the post had already achieved its intended purpose.

The topics of the blog posts were varied as well. Many blog posts were simply highly technical discussions of the many topics I’m interested in. In other cases, I am giving a talk and it helps to write about the narrative arc of the presentation in advance just to get my thoughts in order. Other blog posts were commentary on our scientific programsat a National level. The level of intellectual discourse around our programs is dismal, I’m lending my thoughts to the vacuum of ideas. Other blog pasts were pointed at dealing with the management of science. To say that science is managed poorly today is an understatement of some magnitude. It is getting worse. Finally, a handful of posts were completely out of character, and simply existed to maintain the writing habit and speak to something I really believe in. This won’t be the end of my writing, but it will happen in a different forum probably anonymously. I may experiment with different forms of writing too, fiction, poetry, …

I can easily guess what type of blog post generated the pressure to stop. Let’s just say that it’s not likely the technical blog posts. In addition, the blog was a wonderful relief valve for frustrations that my workplace has low tolerance for. Apparently, they also have a low tolerance for freedom of speech too, or any intellectual discourse for that matter. It is amazing that a place that talks about defending the Nation has such low regard for its core principles!

I’ve noted the parallels between the modern work environment and our increasingly toxic and appalling societal culture. I believe that the treatment here is utterly consistently with today’s prevailing culture. To put it plainly, Donald Trump is the most obvious symptom of the disease and his rise was enabled by the sort of toxic behavior I see here. He did not happen in a vacuum; he has a legion of enablers even among those who didn’t vote for him. Whoever set the gears in motion to end this blog is absolutely 100% a Trump-enabler. They might be a supporter of the President, or more ironically an opponent.

I can say that there was a very clear and unambiguous message to “shut the fuck up”. I heard it and I’m making a reluctant, but rational choice. So, I am shutting the fuck up.

Goodbye. It has been a wonderful experience. Thank you for coming with me.

Dangerous Ideas About Uncertainty

19 Thursday Apr 2018

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all.

― Oscar Wilde

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is a truly dangerous activity for modeling and simulation. This might seem to be a rather odd thing to say with all the focus and interest on research in UQ. The problem with uncertainty is its seeming contradistinction with precision. Computers are seen as a tool to provide precise well-determined solutions with some degree of repeatability. Examining the uncertainty of the solutions and the models run counter to the seeming spirit of the field. More deeply the computer-based solution of the models is treated with a degree of suspicion by many. The purveyors of these solutions seek to blunt these suspicions with a degree of confidence about their legitimacy. The notion of uncertainty runs counter to the intent of providing confidence in solutions. As such uncertainty is frequently downplayed and poorly executed to buoy confidence. This mentality is a genuine threat to the scientific credibility of modeling and simulation.

One of the prevailing uncomfortable aspects of computed solutions to models is their intrinsically approximate nature. We don’t have the sense of security that analytical solutions provide someone (even if this is largely an illusion). Numerical practitioners are both arrogant and slipshod in their approach. They show too much arrogance in providing solutions without necessary caveats and appropriate care for the correctness of solutions. The slipshod and scientifically careless approach of proof by overwhelming power and colorful graphics is easy to fall back on. Moreover, these terrible practices are effective. The approximate solution of the models of nature is an intricate and highly technical nature of the expertise. There are numerous ways to completely screw it up. Too many users of numerical model solution are either oblivious to the intricacies or willfully ignore concerns.

One of the major issues with modeling and simulation is the lack of negative feedback for egregious practices. Either willfully or implicitly major sources of uncertainty are ignored usually to the benefit or modeling and simulation. If modelers were truthful and accurate about uncertainty there is a perception that the results might be treated with less confidence. This might indeed be true, but the lack of disclosure and honestly in this practice is genuinely dangerous. By failing to address the uncertainty of computational models directly we are harming progress in distinct ways. We are failing to use the knowledge of what we don’t know to guide our research. Uncertainty is the study of how well know or don’t know something. In other cases, there is a limit to how much we can know, in some cases there is a core uncertainty that is irreducible. We need to know this and act accordingly.

All of this discussion is a subtext to the observation that we allow ourselves to default to uncertainty estimates of zero. In other words when we know nothing at all we chose a default uncertainty estimate of zero, which is the smallest value possible. In other words, we demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge with an estimate that implies exact and complete knowledge. This is patently and utterly absurd. We only get away with this utterly untenable situation because of the exotic and esoteric nature of computational modeling. It is viewed as the purview of experts and deeply technical and complex.

When the depth of a technical field is used to shield the associated work from scrutiny, it is deplorable. For UQ this is the standard way of operating. The modeling associated with typical simulations is quite complex on a number of different levels. The most esoteric and technical aspects of the entire field are the models themselves usually based on differential equations, which must be solved by complicated mathematically complex numerical methods. Physical reality is then represented by a mesh along with modeling choices to make the overall simulation tractable. Each of these areas is only well understood by highly specialized scientists invariably having PhD’s who are actively working on research. The complexity only diminishes slightly in the voyage down to the computing hardware. In each of these areas there are incredibly detailed technical fields that are inaccessible to all but the most educated and specialized scientists. The result is an intricate interlinked set of activities that all must be executed at a high level to produce competent modeling and simulation. Looking into UQ is then another complex specialty added into an immensely complex system.

One of the most difficult issues about UQ is its focus on the most technical part of the simulation pipeline. UQ is heavily focused on physics, engineering and mathematics often blended together intricately. UQ is demanding in terms of computation, but far more demanding in terms of intellectual labor and the overall flow of work. The hardest aspect of the field is dealing with all the things unknown or barely known. There are swaths of knowledge and information we have no grasp on. With UQ we combine the deeply esoteric along with the unknown into a stew of impenetrable complexity. It can also produce the effect of being a great place of people to obfuscate. Being part of a generally esoteric activity, poor and shoddy work can easily pass as high quality, especially with gee-whiz graphics and movies to provide panache to information. Somebody who is engaged in this sort of marketing-based approach to work will likely want to under-estimate the uncertainty to provide a false sense of better precision than is justifiable.

Here we get to the crux of the problem with uncertainty. Large uncertainty is almost invariably judged as a problem. With a complex and esoteric subject like modeling and simulation the ability to either pass poor work off as good, or outright lie and bullshit about quality is great. Increasingly the management and customers for the work are incompetent at judging its quality. As such they are prone to reward work that provides low uncertainty even if the nature of the work is poor. What we have is the perfect storm for promulgating bad work, complex multi-disciplinary work judged by technically inferior management and customers. It is the perfect storm for skipping large portions of the quality work needed for excellent work. In addition, high quality work is expensive, time consuming and difficult. Why do this when the customer will accept a shoddy cheap product? Why do it when the customer cannot tell the difference?

In this view the failure to address conduct UQ rather completely reduces our ability to determine where progress can most impactfully be made. Uncertainty can be used to guide investments in the wide array of disciplines needed to conduct modeling and simulation. It shows the source of lack of knowledge in clear terms, which should dictate effort toward progress. In places where the uncertainty cannot be removed because it is intrinsic, we can accommodate the uncertainty and look to progress elsewhere. In either case, the UQ is needed to provide meaningful direction. For example, our current emphasis on providing and using massive computers is not grounded on any necessity based in uncertainty. If you look at the program only the barest lip service is paid to UQ or its parent activities of verification and validation. For the most part the justification in focus on computing hardware is based entirely on superficial and naïve arguments divorced from evidence.

We can use the knowledge for bad or good. If we are good we can push ourselves to demand excellence by identifying and either computing, estimating or bounding all the uncertainty. On the other hand, knowing that good work is not rewarded and often not payed for, we can promote bad work. We have managers and customers who don’t know the difference anyway, so why do the extra work? This would seem to be the spirit of today, why do good work when bad work is just as acceptable?

Everything you’ve learned in school as “obvious” becomes less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe. For example, there are no solids in the universe. There’s not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute continuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines.

― R. Buckminster Fuller

We can’t do big things; We are swamped by small things

13 Friday Apr 2018

Posted by Bill Rider in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Suddenly summoned to witness something great and horrendous, we keep fighting not to reduce it to our own smallness.

― John Updike

Much of my thinking goes into figuring out what the hell is going on these days. I’m distinctly unhappy with how work has evolved over the course of my career. On the one hand I feel like I’ve become that guy who pines for the “good ole days”. At the same time, I crave progress and a better world. I don’t want tomorrow to be like yesterday at all. The progress and World I desire didn’t exist in the past, but we were moving far faster toward it then. The good times of the past were defined by progress and purpose of work. It is the sense of progress, the meaning of work and sense of purpose that has been drained from my day. I realize that my expectations of work resolve around the spirit of progress toward something with importance and meaning. Work should have a clear purpose beyond simply delivering a paycheck. Work should be life affirming beyond its mere conduct.

I feel I’m living in parentheses

― Steven Wilson

I sat down recently with one of my managers to make an admission that felt rather profound. My expectations of work are rather far beyond anything my employer can deliver on. This conclusion is rather intensely sad. Rather than lift me up and encourage me to greater heights, the demands of my job are smaller than me. I will have to lower myself to meet them. I don’t think this is uncommon, but rather a sad testament to today. I think this sentiment is broadly applicable and the strain between survival and a life of meaning has grown acute society-wide. More and more we aren’t dreaming or grasping for something bigger than ourselves. Day in and day out life is merely about survival and a host of petty concerns. The lack of meaning and purpose is a reflection of society as a whole. Most people are struggling even if the economy is humming. Our Nation is about reacting to fear, distrust and hatreds than aspiring to progress, hope and betterment. Work sadly reflects this time with cruel parallels. \

Smallness is subversive, because smallness can creep into smaller places and wreak transformation at the most vulnerable, cellular level. In a time when largeness is threatening to topple us, I wish to remember and praise the beauty of smallness, in order to banish the Goliath of loneliness.

― Sarah Ruhl

I told my manager, “I think you’re all basically good people, you can’t meet my needs in the current system.” I continued, “the system isn’t going to change to meet my expectations, so my expectations need to change.” It was an earnest and deep realization about the nature of work today. It is easier said than done. To make this happen, I need to let go of my deepest principles, hopes and dreams about work. I never wanted to be that guy who just went to work for a paycheck and spent time daydreaming about living a different life. I never wanted to be that guy who couldn’t wait to leave each day to really live, and found the weekends were never long enough to make up for the time lost. Yet here I am, being all those things because work has become so entirely empty of importance, meaning and value. It does not have to be like this, and ultimately this state serves no one, not even those who seemingly benefit.

In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure no one listens.

― Judith Lewis Herman

It is instructional to examine some of the concrete aspects of work that could step into this abyss and form some purpose and meaning. For example, we have a national program to reclaim the supercomputing throne again. It is an exemplar of what is wrong with today’s World in many ways. It is what masquerades as a big idea today. Instead, it is a very small idea. Supercomputing has ridden the coattails of Moore’s law for fifty years and that time is coming to an end. For a while we could advance in computing without any strategy or effort, just an expenditure of money. Those days are over, but the tiny thoughts surrounding it are still present. Rather than react to this reality we are simply repackaging the same old stale ideas we have used for the past 25 years. The use of modeling and simulation is an essential modern scientific tool. Among the things that need to be done to enable effective modeling and simulation the supercomputing hardware is the least important thing. It is the furthest away from reality and its impact is diluted by a host of steps that all must be done correctly for the hardware to have meaning. This current program is shorn of effort in all of the most important things in modeling and simulation. The greatest gap is the sense of meaning that this program has in the real world is simply a marketing ploy. It has no reality or substance at all.

Beyond scientific progress, we need social and societal progress in many fronts. Science has often been at the vanguard of change either providing new truths to confront or energizing change through technology. We should all be trying to make a better World for all our citizens. Today’s world is trying to resist the truth and changes at every turn. We have huge swaths of society resisting the clearly defined risk of climate change through desperate ignorance. Technological change with information technology has become incredibly destabilizing both socially and politically. It is driving subtle social changes with how we form community, how we communicate and inform each other. It is having also been harnessed by the forces against progress to energize fear, and anger. This has emboldened hatred, bigotry and conflict that acts to solidify the hold of the powerful over society. We are headed for a massive conflict that will shape our future. The current situation is not sustainable in any way.

At the core of the conflict is the clash between the old and the new, the forces of progress against stagnation. In the United States this looks like a poorly educated shrinking white majority joined with a hyper-wealthy ruling class pitted against an array of minorities along with the highly educated. The status quo forces on the right want two things: putting these minorities back in their ghettos and closets, and a continuation of the pillaging of the Nation and stockpiling of wealth. They are using fear and authoritarian tendencies along with anti-democratic means to fight against progress. Right now, they are winning. Many of the people most harmed by the hyper-wealthy ruling class are supporting their political agenda. This support comes directly from the agenda of hate, violence and bigotry arising from their misplaced blame for their woes.

Part of the problem is that the forces of progress are not unified about anything, and this lack of solidarity as a movement is exploited by the right. If the forces on the left cannot find common ground all of them will be ground up under the jack boot of the right. Progress is preyed upon by fear and mistrust at every corner. The forces on the right behave with utter contempt of history, science and decency at every turn. They are hypocrites in every act, yet they still win. Their actions produce an increasingly desperate economic situation for their poorly educated, but hateful supporters without consequence. Without this critical feedback loop, we are in a dangerous spiral toward fascism, which the authoritarian rabble would welcome.

Perhaps one of the greatest issues we have is a deep and pervasive lack of trust. We don’t trust anyone with anything today. The cost of this lack of trust is massive and paralyzing. It is very clear that my employer doesn’t trust me at all. It is clear that the government doesn’t trust my employer either. People don’t trust the government, and everything is getting worse. We now have a President who pours gasoline on the lack trust by attacking our most trusted institutions. He is in the midst of turning the conservative movement against our most hallowed law enforcement agencies. The very rule of law is being challenged. All of this will drive wedges into our social order that will end up killing people. Long before people die the social chaos and damage will unfold. We will see problems already present due to low trust to magnify. The challenges already existed, and the current situation is only amplifying an already dangerous situation. A host of difficult economic concerns that already limit any benefit that normal people receive from economic growth will only get more strained.

Micromanagement is the destroyer of momentum.

― Miles Anthony Smith

I can see the lack of trust daily at work. We are micromanaged in everything we do and watched like hawks. Everything we do is treated with suspicion. The micromanagement at attitude toward the work we do is a leading cause of smallness of thinking. With little trust in evidence in the work place we cut our work into tiny increments that are devoid of risk taking. The overwhelming lack of trust leads to the definition of work that takes minuscule risks since failure is unacceptable. Increasingly, our expertise is unwelcome either in informing the government, or even internally. There used to be a time where the experts, the institutions and the government worked together to solve big problems and craft solutions to vexing issues. Now everything is so small that nothing big can even be attempted.

Authority—when abused through micromanagement, intimidation, or verbal or nonverbal threats—makes people shut down & productivity ceases.

― John Stoker

Vexing problems require risky solutions as well, and with risk off the table we simply avoid hard problems. Today that chain is broken at every level with our leadership being increasingly devoid of intellectual depth. Our experts are ignored, the institutions just want money and the government controls the money. Expertise is unwelcome because it only complicates the process and gets in the way of the money. This problem is one of the core issues with any strive for excellence and utility of peer review. Our institutions increasingly don’t care what they do as long as its paid for. The government has no interest in the work or its quality. All of this is a horrible downward spiral. In its wake value, meaning and quality are sacrificed. At the core of this maelstrom is an awful lack of trust and honesty that sprawls across society. If we can’t trust each other, we can’t work together and doing anything great is completely out of reach.

We are incredibly fear driven as a society. This fear makes us small, timid and undermines any chance for greatness. The lack of progress, fear driven beliefs and trust deficit only benefits the powerful and rich at the top of society. It only benefits these people in the short term. in the long term their power and wealth are diminished by the lack of growth overall. They only gain a relative degree of power, wealth and standing in comparison to the common man. We are living in a period where overwhelming fear is being used as a tool of the powerful. In the wake of 9/11 we saw irrational fears used to justify vast authoritarian overreach that continues to this day. We see huge defense budgets to be pillaged by the wealthy. The post 9/11 World has taken the United States directly toward a being a police state. People don’t even bat an eyelash at our massive level of imprisonment. It is a deeply unhealthy characteristic of our Nation, and most people are oblivious. At the same time the fear produces a compliant populace hungering for the safety of strong man rule. We see this playing out across the West as Democracy recedes in response. As Democracy recedes war will surely follow.

People care much more for how things look than how things are.

― Donna Lynn Hope

Today, work just seems small, a tidal wave of the small and insignificant drowns purpose and meaning. The tide of micromanagement underlies a lack of trust combined with a broad core of structural dishonesty. Almost everyone is drowning in this sea of minutia that cripples our ability to focus on anything big. All of us are simply buried in mountains of useless bullshit too deep to allow us to concentrate on anything important. Meanwhile we are being taken over by authoritarian forces pushing us headlong into a police state. Many Americans are welcoming the imposition of rule by a strong man ruler. The loss of fundamental principles of our democracy are accepted and even welcomed. We are headed headlong toward some sort of modern version of civil war. Conflict is almost inevitable, it is just a matter of time until society fractures. Maybe work is small because more important things are happening. It is time to pay attention.

Distrust is like a vicious fire that keeps going and going, even put out, it will reignite itself, devouring the good with the bad, and still feeding on empty.

― Anthony Liccione

The Regularized Singularity

~ The Eyes of a citizen; the voice of the silent

Category Archives: Uncategorized

Algorithms are the best way to improve computing power

A return to what I do best

Algorithmic Impact and Moore’s Law

What is an algorithm?

Algorithms for Scientific Computing

Algorithms I really care about

The algorithmic payoff

References

Forced Social Justice Creates the Foundation for a Backlash

The Seeds of Failure

Online Social Movements

A Nuanced View

A Personal Experience

We don’t have leaders

We don’t have leaders

The Elephant and Donkey in the Room

The Connection to the Covid-19 Pandemic

Money is the Only Thing We Care About

Toxic Positivity

Assholes are having a moment

We All Need to Look at 2020 Again

Inside Out 2: Anxiety Reigns; Chaos Without Balance

The Best of the Regularized Singularity

The End of the Regularized Singularity

Dangerous Ideas About Uncertainty

We can’t do big things; We are swamped by small things