Ahead of my time - again

The curse of creative thinkers is that the world is not always ready for their ideas. Technology skill standards for teachers and administrators, online behavioral and safe use standards, even the educational use of web itself, all appeared in my writings long before these topics were recognized by professional organizations and educational journals. What's the expression? - a prophet is without honor in his own land.

In retirement I no longer try to make predictions about libraries, technology, or education. I mostly muse on personal experiences. But even now it seems I can't help but be a bit ahead of my time. Check this "invention" that was the topic of a recent Wall Street Journal article: 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-will-replace-the-desk-11610553481

It consists of a dentist’s-office-style reclining seat, with an attached computer monitor stand, laptop stand and magnetic desk surface, all of which adjust with the push of a button as the user stands, sits or lies down. 

This looked strangely familiar to me: a recliner that also doubled as a home office. Here is why:

http://doug-johnson.squarespace.com/blue-skunk-blog/2020/5/3/the-secret-to-in-home-productivity.html

I do 90% of my work from my faithful lazyboy. (A mass shudder from chiropractors just went up worldwide - could you feel it?) I spend usually three to four hours each day in my comfortable old friend writing and reading with a laptop computer. The chair's padded back support, adjustable positions, elevated leg rest, and leather-like covering allow me to focus on my work rather than aching shoulders, wrist twisting, or leg cramps from sitting bolt upright, slouching, or excessive standing at a desk. I do get up to get coffee now and again.

 No, I won't sue the manufacturer for stealing my idea that I shared on this blog last May. (Plenty of time to bring the new chair design into production!) I can only hope revealing my productivity secrets makes the world a better place.

P.S. - On a second reading of the WSJ article, I see these chairs have actually been shipping since 2016. I must have let my productivity advice slip earlier than I thought.

BFTP: What humor is appropriate?

Why do we laugh at such terrible things? Because comedy is often the sarcastic realization of inescapable tragedy. Bryant H. McGill

The above graphic is made the rounds a couple years ago - one of the more "sarcastic" responses to the proposition that armed teachers would make for safer schools in the wake of the Florida shooting.

I am embarrassed to say it, but I found it very funny. I am embarrassed because I am well aware of the grief and terror mass shootings have caused in this country and that the parent of a child murdered in them would find nothing amusing in the chart above.

Most if not all humor has an element of pain or discomfort at its heart. From a person slipping on a banana peel to the ribaldry of Lysistrata to latest grotesque of Trump in current editorial cartoons, harm or embarrassment or discomfort are essential components to finding something funny.

The question for me is where do we draw the line? I do not believe we should encourage or create or distribute humor that is racist or homophobic. But how about jokes that emphasize the difference between men and women (75% of all humor?) Can this be labeled sexist? Are we denigrating religion if Jesus or Mohammed or Buddha is in a comedic sketch? Can I poke fun of my own Scandinavian heritage by telling an Ole and Lena joke?

I am not trying to make any point here except to say that knowing what is appropriately funny seems to be getting more difficult each day. That I suspect there is no comedic effort that does not offend someone, somewhere. 

What yardstick do you, dear readers, use when determining whether to share a joke, a story, a cartoon? Or is humor simply something too risky anymore?

******************

The latest "funny" making the rounds after the attack on the US Capitol last week:

Original post 3/13/18

BFTP: Solutions that are neat, plausible and wrong

A great deal of attention has been (rightfully) paid to the role of social media  in the political turbulence over the past four years. From use by an oft-tweeting president to conspiracy theory spreading to incitements to violence, Twitter and Facebook are being scrutinized for their role in what many see as the destruction of democratic norms. Very serious charges, indeed. This has led to the president being blocked on some sites and major companies like Apple, Google, and Amazon blocking access to alternative social media tools like Parler.

I wrote the post below about 3 years ago. It argues that the solution to the misuse of a technology is not banning it, but educating people how to use it thoughtfully and on focusing on its benefits.

After the violence of last week, I am reconsidering my perhaps too naive and optimistic stance. Are humans capable of using their tools responsibly?

_____________________________________________________________________

Caution: geezer rant follows...

From sexting to cyberbullying to FOMO, social media sure has its share of negatives. But, if it's all bad, how did 2,000 students protest their school system's budget cuts? How are teens leading the charge against cyberbullying? How did they organize a national school walkout day to protest gun laws? Easy: savvy use of social media. Caroline Knorr 5 Reasons You Don't Need to Worry About Kids and Social Media, Common Sense Media, 3/14/18

The most tiresome solution I hear to "technology-caused" problems is a simple one: take the technology away. No smartphones, Chomebooks, iPads, etc., no problem. Games causing a distraction? Block games. Kids abusing the chat window in apps. Close it down. Social media - ban its use.

The removal of an abused thing is often the first reaction we have when we don't really want to think too hard about the problem or use creative approaches to solving it. While I am not a fan of assault rifles, to think that outlawing them will prevent school shootings is wishful thinking. To tax soft drinks or reduce the size of the Big Gulp cup will end the obesity epidemic is naive. Delaying the construction of oil pipelines will not stop the environmental damage caused by fossil fuels. Hate to say this, but there were distracted drivers and automobile accidents before there were smartphones. 

Personal computing devices, guns, Pepsi, fossil fuels, and smartphones are not going away. And sadly, by taking a one-right-solution approach to the problems, disagreements that degrade into either-or thinking block collaborative, innovative problem-solving efforts.

Personally, I am a little tired of proposals that are designed simply to create outrage. Any proposal to ban a thing that I would listen to needs two elements:

• Acknowledgement of there may be positives to the thing being banned (social media in schools can be used by students to create positive change)
• Acknowledgement that a more nuanced, thoughtful, comprehensive approach to the problem is necessary - that banning a thing may be part of a solution to a problem, but only a part. (Teaching time management skills and raising awareness of technology addiction are part of good technology management plans in schools.)

For those outrage-fueled adrenaline junkies, this is probably too much work. But remember the words of H.L. Menken "there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.”

Original post 3/27/18