Hello loved ones,
This week has been like a breath of spring for us Midwesterners. After nine straight days without any sun, suddenly we had a whole weekend's worth of clear skies and 40/50-degree weather. I've never done so much sun-bathing in the winter. It was amazing. The nine sunless, foggy, muddy days kind of sucked, but that's par for the course up here.
Did you know that you can't get any vitamin D through a window? I didn't. I guess I just assumed the light carried magical powers or something. But no, because your average window glass blocks UVB rays, you've just got to get outside into that fresh air anyway.
I will say, though — foggy nights are the best nights for pipe-smoking. Something about the combined humidity and the lack of wind just makes that smoke seem like it's expanding all around you.
Out in the garden, our garlic is peeking up out of the ground in this false spring. From what I've read (not much yet) this is normal and I shouldn't worry yet that it will effect our yield. But do any of you garlic growers have any advice for us newbies on this one?
So I've been thinking recently about how we miss out on the "what now" of life by continually asking "what if."
The other day I read a few articles from IDEO, a leading global design company that aims "to design human solutions that people love." In one recent article, they shared a few product ideas for how we can use generative AI. Included in this list are AI-generated bedtime story books, transparent portals you can hold up between you and your friend to remind you they have a birthday, and a large-language model that gives you options for how to articulate your thoughts. The rest are similarly, well... I'm trying to think of a gentler way to say this, but since ArticulateGPT is not available yet I guess I'll just go with my own phrase: kind of dumb.
IDEO has been around since the 90s. They were responsible for the first Apple computer mouse, among other innovations. They've since focused more heavily in consulting on design for a variety of global companies, with everything from collaborative tools like OpenIDEO to their own online educational program called IDEO U. They focus on play in the design process and were early pioneers of "design thinking," a process whereby designers get into the heads of the people who will use their designs, brainstorm ideas, and then test solutions.
And in October, they laid off 32% of their workforce, shut down two global offices, and scaled back three other locations. All told, given that they have been leaking people since 2020, they've lost about half of their employees.
If you want it, there's significant discussion about what these layoffs really mean. Is it the end of an era of design thinking, or has design thinking just been assimilated so well into modern business that companies like IDEO are irrelevant? I have no clue. I'm a writer, not a designer.
But it's interesting to me that someone completely untrained in design thinking (me) might look at an industry-leading design company's ideas on how we might use AI in the real world and determine how objectively terrible they are within seconds.
IDEO has implemented a lot of great ideas that look like they are super-helpful — everything from streamlining food bank deliveries to creating more accessible chair designs for kids with cerebral palsy. These are good innovations that help people who need help. But when they start designing ways to incorporate AI practically, things seem to go off the rails. Why is this?
One of the issues could be their foundational understanding of humanity. Though I would agree with most innovation acolytes that technology is fundamentally amoral, I think humans are demonstrably immoral and limited. Most leaders in innovation and design thinking spheres seem to be pretty optimistic about humanity's motives and abilities, to a sometimes ludicrous degree.
I wonder if human flourishing is really at the center of some of these "advances" in technology, regardless of the terms they're couched in. The most likely culprit is profit, or perhaps a desire for newness, i.e. "we innovate because we should innovate." The former center is a corrupting motivation given mankind's greed. The latter is a self-defeating one, because it assumes that innovation is an inherent good when history has proven over and over that it really, really depends on who is doing the innovating and why.
But say someone wants to use AI not just for profit, and not just for the sake of innovation. Say they are a relatively altruistic individual who has found this tool and wants to help their fellow human beings with it. What might that look like?
If we are to believe internet consensus, the use of AI boils down to greater efficiency all around. What could possibly be wrong with making everyday tasks more efficient?
You want to comb everyone's bank records for possible fraud? Try AI. You want to lubricate your relationships by more easily accessing key information about people? AI can give you those details in real time. You want to make bedtime simpler for yourself and your kids? Have AI do the storytelling. The further along we get in this equation, the more tenuous connections become.
My guess is that the answer to this has more to do with what we're not using when we rely on AI.
I can use AI to map out the fastest route to and from places or I can use a map, a compass, and my brain.
I can use AI to give me instant answers to my questions or I can ask for help, research different viewpoints, and determine what answer is the most accurate for myself.
I can use AI to write an article because inspiration and energy are in short supply, or I can do the hard work of brainstorming and writing myself or I can recognize my limits and take a nap instead of writing something.
I can use AI to give me ideas or I can collaborate with other people and grow my non-linear thinking capacities.
(I will probably never use a map and compass instead of Google Maps. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't be good for me to try.)
In other words, I can build my sense of direction, my discernment, my creativity, and my thinking capacities, or I can use AI.
Here I think is where we get to the crux of the issue. Artificial Intelligence is so problematic to apply in our lives, not for what it makes easier, but for what ease does to the Actual Intelligence between our ears. Because like it or not (and some of us wish we could shut them off), we already have brains. We have memories. We have emotions. We have bodies. These are vital elements of our whole self that AI will never be able to replicate.
To grow stronger our brains require exertion; if we don't use them we will eventually lose them. The more we exercise our memories, the stronger our recall becomes, and vice versa. The same goes for spiritual disciplines, even if there is an app for that now. It goes for physical labor, even when certain robots or machinery could do the work faster.
And it goes for creative work too. Everything we create is a sub-creation, at best a copy or an amalgamation of the created stuff we've been given. This might be why when people try to use AI for creative work instead of their own creativity, the results are so frustrating and futile. We're using a sub-created facsimile of a brain to create what we could, with some effort, create ourselves. It's sub-sub-creation. The more automation we rely on, the less we use our God-given selves to interact with our world and our community.
My point has never been that we should stop using all technology. It's that our use of technology impacts us on a deeper level than we realize. And any design thinking that doesn't start with humanity and recognize the impact that technology can have on our sinful selves is destined for disaster. We can't get caught up in the "what if" until we face our "what now."
I make decisions every day about what I'm going to value, and unfortunately the decisions I'm most drawn to are usually those that take the path of least resistance. Down that path lies loneliness (because I've automated my relationships) and diminished capacity for thinking and acting (because I rely on my phone to do it for me). Down that path lies less humanity in me, when Lord knows how much I'll need it in the days to come.
What's striking about how IDEO approaches AI, besides the fact that it's kind of a window into how culture on a whole is approaching it, is that six months before they shared their asinine AI designs, they published a series on Gen Z and AI that should have raised some red flags.
In it, they provide a representative sample of Gen Zers with 6 potential AI products:
1. AI Venture Accelerator: A creative co-founder that helps you bring your idea to life
2. AI Passion Coach: A guide that identifies your skills and makes suggestions for how and where to apply them
3. AI Muse: An generator of inspirational ideas that accelerate your creative pursuits
4. Our AI Friend: A bot that helps your friend group interact and connect
5. New AI, New Me: An avatar trained on your preferences that has experiences for you
6. Build a FrAInd: Your ideal bestie come to life, based on celebs and influencers you love
You may be thinking, like I did: Yikes. Well, turns out Gen Zers — the generation who has grown up more immersed in the internet than any other — aren't too excited either.
“The insights we gleaned made us check our assumptions. The participants expressed a yearning for opportunities to learn through relationships, to try new things, and to embrace failure as part of their growth. They voiced concern about how AI companions might influence their expectations of genuine and complicated humans.
“You might start comparing your simulated friend with your real friends,” said one 20-year-old student. “And then start noticing all the flaws in your real friends, which might start damaging your relationships.”
Another participant pondered the consequences of a tool that eradicated mistakes or smoothed over challenges, as it would create an all-too-perfect reality. They viewed these experiences as essential components of life itself, stressing, “Let us figure out our challenges, let us work through things and have those emotions. Give us tools that could aid us along the way, or work on it, but let us have that experience because I think we need it.”
In a subsequent article respondents "voiced a resounding “no” to the idea of AI infringing upon their relationships. Rather than forming attachments to the programmed responses of AI, they are interested in cultivating genuine bonds with others that don’t require an algorithmic intermediary."
So what are IDEO's conclusions given these results?
"The next generation has opinions about what we build, and their message is clear: AI is welcome to augment, enhance, and support, but when it comes to forging meaningful relationships, humans must remain at the helm. It’s a potent reminder that while technology shapes our world in novel ways and companies vie to be first to market, the essence of humanity—the value of mutual understanding, the beauty of our imperfection, and the need for companionship without a whiff of profit motive—should never be sidelined.
As we step into a future where AI is integrated into every experience, let’s remember that the best guides are our own instincts, not a bot trained on reading the internet. The collective wisdom of Gen Z might just be the compass we need."
I'm encouraged by Gen Z's response. I'd give IDEO's a 3-out-of-5-star rating, because at least they acknowledge humanity. Some part of our human instinct may be raising the alarm about what unmitigated use of AI could do to us, but it's also the voice in the back of our head urging us to integrate AI into every experience.
I have a sincere question: why even integrate AI into every experience at all? Why not take a really hard look at the potential pros and cons and determine a different path entirely, maybe one that leads us back toward effort and humanity instead of away? This could be why Gen Z is skeptical: because we didn't do this like we should have with social media and they're reaping the devastating consequences of it.
Also, I'm not down with a constant phrase bandied around these conversations: "unintended consequences." We know too much now to really believe that.
Just a closing thought for the creators reading this now.
As a high schooler, I once interviewed a writer in my church about their writing process (it was a homeschool assignment, you know the sort). He compared his process to that of J. K. Rowling, in that it was nothing at all like what she did. He described the giant, finely-tuned stories she put together as beautiful pieces of china, the type of dinnerware you pass down through generations. And then he said something I've never forgotten: "I'm paper plate. It feeds you for a day, and then you chuck it."
In retrospect, it would have been more interesting to me at the time if he hadn't led the statement with the most shocking thing I'd ever heard as a conservative Christian homeschooled teenager: that Harry Potter was actually good. This guy! Bit of a maverick.
I never forgot that paper plate thing, though. It made an impression on me: you mean, you can create stuff that's designed to be one-use and then chucked? Up to this point, I thought I had to make a priceless masterpiece every time, and that might be the most discouraging way for a teenager to view creating art of any kind. What his off-handed statement did (besides making me wonder if I should try out Harry Potter) was give me permission to fail. It also gave me permission to write consistently, and to keep trying even if a meal or two wasn't as tasty as I'd hoped.
This difference between these two outlooks determines whether a writer like me continues writing or packs it in.
Think of it like a teenager for a second. You've made something you think is good, and you're proud of it. You show it to the world. A few people (notably your mom) might nod and smile and then move on to other things, and you're left sitting there thinking... why don't more people like it? Is there something wrong with it? Is there something wrong with me? Maybe it doesn't matter... maybe I don't matter...
This doesn't stop when you become an "adult writer" or whatever you call all of us weirdos running around scribbling on the orange walls of Substack. My basic premise of almost everyone I meet over the age of 18 is that some version of their teenage self still lurks somewhere inside of them, making him or herself known at the most inopportune moments. Maybe they hide it well. Maybe they stifle it. But somewhere inside them is a scared, gawky 13-year-old suddenly gaining self-awareness and hating every second of it.
But here's the thing: if I give my inner teenager permission for this writing thing to not matter quite so much, he's going to write more freely, about the things he likes and cares about, and care less about how a single post does or whether 5 or 500 or 5000 people read it. He's going to think: paper plate. It fed me and a few other people for a day. Then, he's going to think: what's the next thing I want to write about?
That's why I have to remind myself before and after everything I write: this doesn't matter all that much, especially by comparison to how I treat the people around me in real life.
And then I have to remind myself just how much it really does matter. The only way I know to stay sane(ish) as a writer is to carry around this deadly seriousness hand-in-hand with a studied carelessness. Like Bluey's dad Bandit, you've got to commit to the bit.
Daily bread is vital for survival, after all. The words I have written over the years may not endure, but they nourished me, and I hope they nourished the people who read them. And sure, you'll delete this email when you're done. The point is that the words hopefully filled you up when you needed them. The point is that I, a human being, did the hard work of communicating my thoughts the best way I could.
Because the reason this layer-cake of a letter you're reading right now matters is not because it's great or important or once-in-a-generation art, but because a beloved human made it, and because a beloved human is reading it. It matters because you and I matter.
As that wise old sage, Danny from Brassed Off, once said (and has been since immortalized by Chumbawumba):
"Truth is, I thought it mattered. I thought that music mattered. But does it? Bollocks! Not compared to how people matter."
January Favorites:
Russell Moore's Losing Our Religion was exactly what I needed to start off 2024. I enjoyed the audiobook immensely because he’s just a good speaker, and because he doesn’t pull any punches. I’ve been grateful for his stabilizing voice through the last four years, and this just solidified my gratitude.
The latest episode of the Mockingcast is a microcosm of everything I love about this podcast. If you want an intro to one of the funniest, most encouraging Christian podcasts I've ever encountered, this is the one. Their conversation about parents trying to give their kids core memories is worth the price of admission.
Recently enjoyed Ben Rector's The Joy of Music at a record party with two old friends. It's a concentrated capsule of fun, and I recommend it. Coincidentally, I've also been loving Paul Zach's new album JOY JOY JOY JOY JOY, which is a slightly less poppy but excellently boppy option for family dance nights.
Taskmaster. This game show hits all the marks. It's British, it's hilarious, and it's free on Youtube. Start with series 5.
Linnea and I were going to watch the next season of Endeavor, I promise. But then we popped in Detectorists instead and just watched that. Because we love all those zany weirdos with their metal detectors so much, and we needed something cozy.
We've had a few unexpected lazy weekends recently, so we finally pulled out Wingspan, taught ourselves and Nadia how to play, and have been loving it so much. It's a gorgeous game about birds that's perfect for a cozy afternoon indoors.
I've been making a lot of lavender faux-lattes with James Hoffman's Moka pot technique, hot milk, and some excellent lavender syrup we got for Christmas. Also, I am now firmly on the Dot's Pretzels bandwagon.
Best brew for January is unquestionably 3 Floyd's Backmasking Oatmeal Stout.
thanks for the recos!
Gonna come back and read this again because there’s so much there. But I do love that upon review of these cringey AI business ideas (frAInds? Ugh) the response was pretty much “lol no.” I love Gen Z haha