Isn't It Obvious

In our last episode, K Sera discusses how our society's relationship to material/things are changing (not necessarily good nor bad).

Micah talks about the implications it has from our current market forces, and Phil discusses the generational differences.

 

Show notes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

We keep buying stuff. So much stuff! We buy all these trendy things, like nespresso makers, fidget spinners, Hydro Flasks and cube storage shelves. They’re stylish. They’re affordable. They’re easy to transport. They’re useful. But by year 2 or 3, they end up on Marketplace or in landfills, either because we’ve moved on to the next trendy thing, or the product is too worn, too old-news, or no longer functional. Why bother trying to repair something when the cost of a new replacement is cheaper? Looking at you, inkjet printers!

 

And let’s not even get into the time to develop the skills you need to fix the things that need repair. Ha.

 

The majority of people have stopped investing in quality because they can’t afford the up-front cost. The things we’ve been manufacturing for the last two decades and change have been designed to last less than five years. Is this a bad thing? Yeah, for the environment, definitely. But the convenience of not having a 200-year-old solid oak bedroom set to lug along with you when you have to move every five years because the rent is too high, or you have to change jobs because that’s the only way to effectively get raises these days… I mean, the individual trade off is certainly there.

 

Adjacent to this concept is “doom spending,” where people purchase themselves further into poverty because there is this anticipation of impending doom. Why invest in a doomed future? What retirement? What house? Can we even afford childcare? May as well spend money on what will bring immediate happiness, because there’s no point in saving. Or at least, that’s the mentality. 

 

Really, I guess, what I’m circling around is the fact that the quality and durability of our manufactured goods is a reflection of how we feel about our futures. … which might be five years from ending up in a landfill. :\

 

 

 

Phill's after thoughts:

At one point in this episode Micah says that the value of this podcast produced was the time (and beverages) shared together. After 127 episodes I can attest that I do miss our recording sessions (this episode was originally recorded towards the end of 2022). Due to starting graduate school I had to postpone (and inevitable stop) the podcast. In the end, I agree with both Micah and K Sera that the experiences from little moments (of simple and fun discussions) ultimately mean much more to me than some simple trinket or bauble.

I want to take some time to say thank you for listening to our podcast. Some of our topics and conversations may have been "non-value added" but they were enjoyable to us regardless! We hope you have enjoyed them too. Thank you for listening to us!

In this episode Micah proposes that all major releases of movies, games, books, and other forms of media should have a coordinate release. K Sera and Phil have questions.

 

Phil's after thoughts:

I find it way more amusing than I should that in this episode we are wondering why don't these multi-billion dollar companies actually coordinate their marketing plan better?! To me it's super obvious that they should, the fact that they could 'synergize' and sell movies, games, books, comics, and all of that franchise material and transmute it into gold should be a driving incentivizer for these massive companies. Of course the point that I am trying to make is that if it was easy, it would have already been done.   The issue is that products that require creative inputs (such as a great story, or fantastic artwork, or wonderful world building) is way more difficult compared to non-creative (but functional) products such as ball-bearings and industrial level grease (both which are fascinating, mind you, but again NOT CREATIVE). I make this comparison because with "industrial goods" there is a very well defined specific output with tolerances, dimensions to measure, and performances that are readily checked and ensured that they meet the "voice of the customer" (and in terms of industrial customers, it's pretty clear that it is either good enough or not).   Obviously this is not the case with creative works. We don't know if a book (or game, or movie) will sell well or not. I laugh when some non-gaming executive shouts out nonsense about "what the gamers want" while their 100 million dollar budget produces a mediocre and semi-passable game (while indie games that are much closer to the pulse of the customer understand that we don't want a "paint by numbers" experience, we want something that is fun, unique, challenging, thought provoking, exciting, adventurous, and of course in all different varying degrees of it as well!).   Why am I talking in circles? Because the fact is we don't know what makes something "a hit" yet. And until we know, we cannot coordinate a massive campaign only for it to turn into a flop. Disney's Starwars comes to mind, but there are so many other franchises that either spring up out of nowhere (many of which are Japanese) and some that are just a flash in a pan (I don't think anyone talks about that Fall Guys game anymore).   Plus, to me, the fact that a giant corporate machine would just pump out a massive coordinated effort to merchandize another soulless product reminds me of some sad slop (or gruel) that the industry insists for us to consume. Perhaps I am turning into a hipster when I want experiences that feel more independent and outside the firm grasps of shareholders and dollar signs. I think this (among the other complexities of Art and Finance) make it a losing proposition to have a Franchise Synergy to the level that is so obviously not done. Maybe in the future our mathematical models can predict with great certainty which next "hot" thing will pop up (and then for the devouring masses to demand more and more of it), but until then the entire premise is too risky. To put it simply, it is better to diversify and then back up winners then to "put all your eggs into one basket while also counting your chickens before they hatch."   Alright, that's it for today. I hope you enjoy the episode and I'll send another message for the next one (when I can review it).    

First, I stand corrected. One Piece isn't the longest manga. That apparently is Golgo 13, with over 200 published volumes. Wow! Who has that kinda time?? Also, bless the creators who share their stories with the world for our entertainment. 

Now, I have opinions about marketing sorcery, and I have a lot of respect for how hard that job is. I also have no actual interest in it - as a job or a subject, really… I'm with you, Concerned Ape. You could make a franchise out of Stardew Valley (cozy farming sims are super in right now) but… meh… 

Marketing campaigns are often insanely detail-oriented, long-term projects that require a huge team with high-level communication and project management skills - make that several huge teams all working on different pieces of the leviathan that is any hypothetical franchise. Plus, any contracted companies need to be big enough to handle the quantity and consistent quality of manufacturing and/or advertising. There’s distribution logistics, too. And before ANY of that can happen, the creative story/script needs to be submitted, edited, and vetted. These stories can take years to plan, more to produce, and the incredible investment cost for all of this really means, in the end, that only companies like Disney with its ridiculously massive capital and a diverse portfolio of creative works under their ownership can hire the sheer number of people with the high-level skills to make any marketing magic for a franchise happen.

Even then, there will be mistakes. Small inconsistencies. 

So, I don’t know, I think it’s pretty obvious to me that most successful franchises do have stellar marketing teams already? And if a team gets a new director or something gets messed up… I mean… oh well? They’ll learn and grow? Or get fired? Idk. I don’t really care. Not my circus.

I mostly ignore the “soulless gruel” on offer for entertainment these days. Maybe you’re right, Phil, and AI will be able to predict the next big thing, and the soulless gruel will at least have a flavor packet of msg tossed in? 

 

K Sera's after thoughts:  

In this episode Phil suggests that we are all bloopers (and that is OK). Micah and K Sera discuss this and other things.

Show notes:

Bloopers!

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

So, I’m disappointed that we spent so much time talking about appearance, and that bloopers were conflated as being ‘flaws’. It just kills me a little that appearance ranks so high when assigning value to people and consumables. It does factor in, of course, but I wish it wasn’t so heavy of an influence in our lives.

I find value in bloopers. Actual blooper reels at the end of a story or episode of something are often entertaining. I love them. Keep them and share them. They are technically mistakes, but someone found them funny or novel and decided to share that with consumers. They aren’t actually flaws, but curated failures with value stemming from experience.

Life creates bloopers all the time. DNA mutations pop up within species giving useful and highly adaptive traits a chance of being passed down to the next generation. DNA bloopers facilitate evolution. We all come from bloopers.

Also, Micah, let people finish their thoughts. ಠ_ಠ

Micah discusses the Supreme Court and the need to reform it. Phil will agree to anything. K Sera discusses the finer points.

 

Show notes: N/A

 

K Sera's afterthoughts: My pun at the top of the episode was excellent. Best part of the show imho.   [Insert energetic and passionate thoughts about the main topic here] Oh no. Where did those go?   I did enjoy our later chit chat about the lies Phil tells his children, and Micah simping for
Bill Watterson.   The "Genie" I was referring to near the end was this Genie (not her actual name). I took an Anthropology class in college and her tragic story was required reading. She experienced extreme neglect, abuse and isolation. Reader's discretion is advised.

K Sera discusses that some portion of exams should be open. Micah and Phil discuss the corner cases. 

 

Note: Phil is in charge of the release dates of the podcast, and he messed up the order! This is episode 122, it should have released before the Pizza one!

 

Show notes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

My opinions haven’t changed. I think memory retention is a skill, of course, but so is researching and organizing data. I think most people in most situations don’t need to know a fact or statistic off the cuff. Why can’t we have at least some exams that reflect that? 

 

How likely is it that the average person will ever need to recall the exact date Simone Biles won her first gold medal? How many people would need to know the exact chemical structure of olive oil? Sure, some people might need to know these facts, but do they need to have them memorized for a sudden pop quiz from their boss or the public? Probably not. I think it is more likely that they will research and compile the information and then report or use that information as needed.

 

Micah’s example of needing to know history by rote is kind of ridiculous. “You know it or you don’t,” he says. Really? History is history. It’s a record of things that happened. Unless you are a professor giving a lecture or you are on a trivia game show, it’s pretty unlikely you will need to know hyper specific historical facts in the moment. And if you don’t know it, go look it up! Cross check with various sources!

 

Other subjects have higher consequences for mistakes and hard deadlines. It is actually vital for a surgeon to both understand and effectively communicate accurate information in the moment. Memorizing equipment names and knowing human anatomy can be a matter of life and death.

 

There also might be instances where you will want to have certain information memorized for emergency situations. What to do in an earthquake. Where to take shelter during a tornado vs. a hurricane. Basic survival information might be worth memorizing if you ever find yourself stranded without your phone or an internet connection.

So, I stand by my initial premise. It is obvious to me that some exams should be open book/open notes.

 

Phill's after thoughts:

I took my Midterm last week that had "2 pages of printed/handwritten notes" for the exam. I did achieve my minimum target grade (I only need C's to get reimbursed for the schooling from work). Honestly, it was nice not having to remember every single little formula, but I think that it also (for me) served as a crutch, because the exam is timed so it really does "slow things down" if you can't do things by heart. Basically, it's a balance between "how much can you learn things by heart" and "how much can you save time from needless studying/drilling" and I think that cheat sheets serve a good balance, but if there wasn't a cheat sheet available, I'd have devoted way more time in really mastering the problem sets. Basically I got a C (worth 20% of my grade) and I am not too happy but also not too unhappy about it.   I think that the homework, labs, and projects are meant to be the "open-book and cooperative" portion of the learnings. The exam has more of a "performance" flavor to it, where it quizzes on an individual level if they are understanding the fundamental concepts. When we first recorded this episode, I hadn't started my return to college classes yet, and so my hot take on the subject was from almost 20 years ago. Now, after revisiting the academic exams in a more recent timescale, I think exams are meant to be the "bare minimum a person should know on an individual basis per the fundamentals of this subject" and that may require a closed book and timed (with cheat sheets) test. That is assuming that the other parts of the class are really about the "learning of the subject" and not just busy-work/fluff material.   In corporate land, it would be crazy to not look at references, speak with other coworkers, and review the case with readily available data and up-to-date literature. We really do not have anything resembling "closed book exam" at all in a business setting. And I suppose in retrospect that makes sense: businesses are about making money, and if training their workers make them more money, then closed book (and timed) exams may not be a good use of their budget. Then again, some "trainings" are a complete waste of time (mainly just to satisfy some legal requirement, like "do not harass others" sort of thing), and clearly even then management are guilty of not learning from it either.   If anything, I think this shows the great divide between academia, industry, and personal learning. If I wanted to learn how to cook, I would not ever have "closed book exams" as part of my self-learning curriculum. But if I wanted to "work" for others I would have to endure someone else's exam (or silly hoop to jump through).   To me it is obvious that some exams should be "open book/open notes open references" but I think this underscores the weird part about exams in the first place. How much of this stuff is actually going to be retained ten years from now? Is the stuff on the exam even useful to know (or "truly fundamental knowledge of this class") and if the point of the exam is to "test one's knowledge" of the subject, it isn't going to be useful compared to just learning on the job (and working like social beings with others via teamwork) to help the company earn more revenue.   Exams don't really seem to "test" the passion, creativity, drive, motivation, and cooperation elements that are so important to industry. It also doesn't test the ability to "research, make reasonable assumptions on limited data, create defensible positions (or create challenging arguments for others)" that corporations need when shaping strategy and tactics.   The only thing I think exams do (in aggregate) is to simply act as a filter. It separates the candidates from "can complete the rigor of college" versus those that "cannot" as an efficient way of narrowing down the potential interviewees. In that case, to the employer looking for a good potential work force, I do not know if they care about open exams at all, since honestly most of the stuff we learn in college isn't directly applicable to the niche needs of that particular business anyway (this is where on the job training kicks in).   To me, it's obvious that strict exams and pop quizzes are uniquely academic, whereas in the real world these things matter very little. I think this is why people with "C-average" grades often end up doing much better in life (career wise) because the real world doesn't actually care about "how good your memory is" at all. C students know they must work with others to increase their chance of success, and so they work hard in relationships, building coalitions, communicating clearly, and assembling teams to survive. Somehow, this translates to poorer grades in school but these skills (that C students develop through survival) end up being very useful somewhere else that really benefits from "networking, leveraging other's abilities, schmoozing, and working well with humans" but I sarcastically can't quite summon where that place could possibly be.   In conclusion: Examining Exams is Exhausting. Also our politicians are not lizards, they are snakes (obviously)!

In this episode, Micah and K Sera and Phil go off the rails.

 

Shownotes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

On this week’s episode, we all wish we were as cool as that one guy Phil witnessed at a parade. 

  We then proceed to go off the rails. I don’t even know where the train is going. Topic? What topic? Who's she? Never heard of her.   Here, Phil, let me Google that 'how to blanket stitch' for you. I hope you finish your blanket. Please show it off when it's done!    

In this episode we discuss foreign justice and the obvious precautions a traveller must take. Or is it obvious?

Show notes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

My feelings about this haven't really changed much. I still think in general, if you are visiting someone else's home, you do your best to abide by their rules. It gets complicated, however, when moral philosophies conflict. I suppose, for more complicated incidents, it comes down to negotiations. Or a fight. I don't know.

 

And maybe… maybe there are places I just won't plan to visit. Ever.

Phil talks way too much on his multiple stages of a business proposal. Micah and K Sera asks what the end game is all about.

 

Show Notes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

Once again, I am fascinated (and mildly horrified?) by the different ways we think.

I like this real/fake company idea. It is interesting to think we could set up this elaborate scheme to move people out into corporate-land with real experience, postgrad. All with the goal of getting everyone a good job so we can all get on with living a comfortable life. I really don’t think this is a new idea, however. In fact, I’m pretty sure this is a very old idea, but it’s wearing a mustache and carrying an official “llc” status instead of, say, wearing a mitre and carrying a rosary; or wearing a badge and carrying a government sanctioned weapon; or wearing an American flag lapel pin and voting on government bills. They’re really all just weird fraternity-hybrids. They all exist with the idea that forming an in-group will allow its members to collect power in one form or another so their members can more easily achieve their end goal - usually more power/influence.

I still like it, though. It’s better than letting people continue to flounder in the dumb cycle of: I want a job. But I need experience to get the job. But I need the job to get the experience. So how do I get the experience without the job?? Debt?

 

The answer is debt. Or just giving up on getting the job. 

 

OR. Sign up with PGE, llc and we’ll set you up with everything you need to gain experience to qualify for the job you want. We only ask that you remember us when you are making six figures and help our other members find their dream jobs as well.

 

… we could make a religion out of this!

K Sera discusses how homes are a fascinating mental reflection of its inhabitants. Micah and Phil proceed to make it into a gameshow.

 

Show notes: N/A

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

“Cue doots” lmao

And, ok, but I also secretly like “psychouse” because it sounds like “psychos” - but that probably wouldn’t go over well. It also feels like a different show, like a deep dive into the homes of notorious serial killers?

I don’t have much else to add except that I would still watch the heck out of this reality game show, and this was a fun episode.

 

 

Micah asks if we should reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. The conversation evolves into creating an entire town to rehab those that have been addicted to extreme partisan news and social media.

 

Show notes:

Fairness Doctrine

 

K Sera's after thoughts:

This was an interesting thought experiment. Unrealistic, but kind of fun to consider how it might work (or not work).

    It was also interesting to listen to our different assumptions about what would happen in this experimental rehab town. (Which sounds more like a concentration camp the more I reflect on this episode, but let’s pretend we are able to provide truly comfortable if modest dwellings for these fictional people who are definitely volunteering for this experience.)    Our perspectives and judgements about humanity as a whole was a brief look into our own psychology. For example, in this experimental town, I suggested that no music or books from the world outside be allowed. The folks in the town could create their own works, potentially, but no influences from outside the bubble, and nothing written down on paper or in permanence. This reflects how I view present and past media and pop-culture, and how strongly I believe these things are reflected in human behavior, including my own. It also reflects that I value creativity and believe that creative pursuits can heal a mind. Lastly, it reflects my views on permanence. I am not someone that highly values legacy or immortality in the memory of human existence.   This was fairly divergent from both Phil’s and Micah’s contributions on how this town could exist. I think both Phil and Micah value legacy and historical precedents more than I do. Not to say I think these things are unimportant. I do believe history is important and we should absolutely remember and learn from our mistakes. But in a town designed as an isolated rehab from political media radicalization, I think the absence of these pop-culture reminders of the world outside would do better to heal and separate a radicalized mind from triggering thoughts.   While I believe it is sometimes good to reflect on the past, clinging desperately to past hurts and refusing to let go will only stand in the way of healing.   All that said, I think listening to this thought experiment was more enlightening about the three of us as people rather than anything meaningful about how to correct radical indoctrination.     Phil's after thoughts (in response to K Sera's): I would like to elaborate my point a little bit more (and by the way, i did the majority of the talking in this episode and the fact that I need EVEN MORE TIME to discuss is a bit "extra" of me (facepalm)).   First, I love your take on the thought-exercise. I didn't realize that by removing existing books and music that the volunteers will have to develop and create their own culture. I like this viewpoint because (in my belief) the reason why we have so many problems is because the philosophy that is inserted (via social media and traditional news) is toxic AND ingrained in their past mindset. For the residents of this fictional town, the incentive to create their own works of culture may be the effort needed to break from the old mentality.   As for Micah's view, I think he is drawing from his collegiate education and his experiences from living in a very small town. To him, I can see how the culture will start to become tribal very quickly (and perhaps suffocatingly so). The future in this simulation would be very dark if his predictions were to come true, and I do believe that he has more of a balance in this thinking (both academically and personally) to reach this conclusion. The authoritarianism makes me very uncomfortable, even in the premise of a town-size premise of a rehab center.   My thinking: I realize just how flawed my thinking is now after reading your afterthoughts and understanding the premise of this question. For example, originally I was thinking how cool would it be to spend all this time doing arts and crafts and hobbies. Now, in order to do those things, I expect that a fully functioning library (with an interloan system) will be required. There will need to be a limit on "no new entries" for books (during Test Town) but in order to make new things, we need to look at the current wealth of knowledge. And, in pursuit of creation, note-taking is needed for me. I would love to make a crude calculator, for example (by using and-not-or gates) but without the ability to document and write things down, this would be incredibly hard. My desire to introduce books/music/technology is because without these, it severely hampers the future of learning new hobbies (and in some ways, the potential for innovating on those new hobbies). I want these things not just because of a desire to respect old traditions, but to gain the collective technical knowledge of generations before us.    And so here is my flawed thinking: I realized that it is near impossible to have both. Where does one draw the line between "learning and growth" and "banned books" for example? Florida and Texas are currently leading in book banning for supposedly "keeping our children safe" (much like our premise of detoxification; just obviously completely and transparently wrong as the politicians are using it to suppress the public's knowledge of the US history sordid past). Having a government CENSOR knowledge (or inflammatory points of view) is an age old question. I have not reached the widom level to unravel this at the current moment in my life. I may never will.   Finally, I like to think all of our assumptions are correct. It is very possible that running this experiment will yield very different results every time due to the nature of the chaotic systems involved. Originally I kept saying that people will mellow out once they are removed from the stresses of late bills and struggling to pay their rents and debts. The people of Test Town would still have employment and a basic economy (perhaps producing a chief superior good that is needed for the U.S Government); but that their new found free time would be used to pursue arts, crafts, education, and hobbies.   I think after some time of reflection (and a year later after we recorded this episode) that the results will be greatly varied every time the Test is run because people are not rational. I like to think that all our assumptions would be fairly true given how many times the experiment is run. I also (crudely) think that this experiment has been run since the beginning of the first humans; and that this explains how different originally isolated cultures and traditions have spawned to this day.   One other thing before I sign off: while wealth creation is a net-positive game; the same cannot be said about status and power. If humans are a bunch of jerks, the problem with rehab isn't that the toxins are from social media (or hyperbolic news in general), but because the problem is us. We are the problem. Humans are the problem. Humans are the toxins! I think deep down inside our monkey brains know this. And that is why we flock to lizards to save us all.