Depopulation and childlessness

So, I'm listening to the Phillip Longman Long Now lecture on depopulation, and it has me buzzing a bit about childlessness.

For quick clarification, I don't believe he said anything that was remotely sexist. I do, however, have some feeling about the topic as being sexist. I hear and read all these (male) experts bemoaning that population isn't at replacement levels, and the subtext is the fact that all over the world, when women are given the opportunity to choose, they choose not to have children until later in life, which necessarily means that they have fewer children if they have any. I tend to feel an accusing finger pointed my way, as though I'm not doing my womanly duties, but maybe I'm just too sensitive.

Quick note: one of the major concerns in this conversation is the tremendous cost of caring for an elderly population. But it seems to me that isn't, in fact, long term thinking. It seems to me that forty or fifty years ago, a combination of industrialization (increase in food resources and wealth) and improvements in medical care created an unnatural population explosion that has traveled all over the globe. I think that we will be dealing with the consequences of that population explosion for the next forty or fifty years. I do, however, think that time will pass, and that world population will more or less settle out, and that fewer people on the planet means less competition for resources, as well as better educated children that can operate in a highly technical, mechanized workforce that has less need for raw labor. So this lecture seemed to me to be out-of-keeping with the spirit of the other Long Now talks in that sense- it was looking at a very narrow Now.

So let's come back to the touchier question, the one that seems to lie at the heart of this debate and pose a real problem for people. That issue is reproductive choice.

So why do women, given the choice, decide to delay childbearing, to have fewer children or none at all? The answers come pretty easily- having children is financially expensive, it takes a tremendous toll on a woman physically, it has negative consequences for her career... the short answer is that before a woman wants children, she generally seems to want to have established for herself a home, a career, and a stable relationship with a partner. Getting your life in order, in that sense, takes a long time- depending on how long she wants to spend on her education or starting her career, she may be in her late twenties to late thirties before she feels ready to enter that phase of her life.

Certainly that's a change from, say, an agricultural society, where one enters the work force in adolescence, and isn't looking ahead to build a career- she has, at 18, as much chance for financial stability as she ever will. She's also as sexy as she'll ever be- if she's going to get into a long-term stable relationship, she probably already knows all the likely partners in her community, and it's reasonable for her to make her choice and commit to it. Or to get knocked up and stick with it. But clearly many of us don't live in that world- women who want to be lawyers have as much reason to delay childbearing as women living in a war zone.

Phillip Longman suggests that society needs to offer financial incentives for people to have children, which makes sense. But I also don't think it speaks to the issue he perceives as a problem, because I don't believe that it's a problem at all. I think that children should be born deliberately, to people who really want them, at a time when the parents are prepared to undertake the physical, emotional, and financial responsibility. I think that often does mean that people will have children later in life, and have fewer of them overall.

The question for people thinking about the future, then, is what does that mean? How do we develop technology that can accommodate a shrinking workforce? How do we manage the almost prohibitive cost of a college education, if it acts as a barrier to financial stability for prospective parents, and a financial disincentive to having children? How do we make sure that people accumulate enough resources during their work lives to be able to afford a long post-retirement life and extensive health care? Can we develop a plan now that accommodates not just urban growth, but urban decay as populations contract? Just something to think about...

Calendar Widget

So, the google calendar widget I had on here doesn't work any more. I'm also not sure that anyone used it except me, to keep track of what was happening when.

I'm open to suggestions for a calendar widget if anyone can think of one. I'd like it to be super easy to update, and ideally collaborative- it would be cool if other people could post events to it, or if I found a site that had calendars of all the stuff I'm interested in.

On that note, there is an adult night at OMSI next week- cocktails and science. It sounds like fun. Also, Cyborg Camp on the 6th, and The Auteur premiers on the 5th. Next week looks busy... fun!

I can't remember phone numbers any more

Just miscellany:

Finding new fun podcasts to listen to. I like picking up and dropping them periodically- see the sidebar for what I'm on right now.

I just listened to the Wasteland Speech. Really good speech, but kind of depressing. He's calling broadcasters to a higher standard of behavior, to serve the public good rather than just making money. It's a shame that such calls, however inspiring, don't seem to really affect behavior.

One of the things I kept thinking as I was discussing the Constitution during the interview above was the following poem, which I just couldn't bring myself to include there, but have to cite now:

Let America Be America Again- Langston Hughes

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.

O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!

Great Portland Interview Experiment

Started here, I participated with Adron Hall. I'll publish the results of my interview with Liz Grover when that's done. This has been really fun to do- great idea!

A: How goes the efforts for the animation festival?

R: Firstly, I'd like to have coffee with Steve Gehlen, because he has more experience putting such a thing together than I do, and I'll need some guidance. I really need a fiscal agent, and he's got one. Secondly, I'd like to put together a brainstorming meeting with people who are interested and see what we'd like the event to look like and what it should include. From there, Marten and I can create a tentative plan, and start working on logistics.


A: So Twitter, the speed at which news is relayed and information spread, how or do you ever feel a bit overwhelmed?

R: This is probably a bad week to ask me that question- I usually try to balance my life so that there is plenty of time for activity, but then also plenty of time for introspection/reflection. I've got a lot going on lately, and haven't had much time for mental processing, which can lead me to feel overwhelmed. I've also just crossed the line in Twitter where I follow so many people that I can't read all their tweets.

I am trying to have a relationship with information/communication where I consume it mindfully and with attention. Unlike, say, the TV, which once it's on just stays on for hours in the background, or a radio station. Video watched on-demand gets watched deliberately and with my attention. I do the same thing with social media- I only participate in a few sites, and try to do it well. And subscribe to podcasts, and then listen to them mindfully. So as I mentioned, I feel like I have all these things- books, movies, shows, podcasts, clamoring for my attention, and I don't have enough time to mindfully consume all this stuff. I feel like I should only follow enough people on Twitter as I can read and correspond with and give attention to- I don't like feeling like I'm "behind" all the time.

I think there is a tipping point- as I mentioned, I love how fast things happen on Twitter, and it is really fun for news and events. However, I'm bordering on either having to use it very differently than I have been, or trimming back the number of people I follow.


A: The value of Twitter, at least in my humble opinion, is the people that tweet & twit all day long. Have you ever thought about how the connections are made, and what draws people to follow each other on Twitter?

R: This dovetails nicely into the above question, because the issue really is the paradigm of using Twitter. I like following people who tweet real content- good blog posts or news articles, tweetups, events, knowledge. And I try to respond with thanks or commentary on that content, and not clog up the bandwidth with my own chatter.

I do think that Twitter is evolving into a whole unique thing- people tweet as themselves (rather than creating handles and the personalities that go with them). People who interact on Twitter also generally interact in real life- again, this isn't some persona that is being created, and that prevents some common online drama, where, say, "WizardKing_027" is the most powerful poster on a game forum, which has it's own private set of memes and social hierarchy, etc. If I can't make a good impression on real people, I can't make a good impression on Twitter. What's also weird is that people go around at events with their Twitter IDs on their nametags, and the two are sort of interchangeable. Anyway, Twitter for me bridges the online social experience and the real world social experience in a totally unique way, and I think everyone is still figuring out how that's going to develop over time. Very soon, the community will be overrun with spammers and scammers and people's usage habits will change accordingly, and they'll either migrate to a different thing (like Shizzow, maybe), or the technology will evolve to somehow exclude those users/that type of content. It’s still changing, we’re still changing it.


A: Steampunk Fan? What's characteristics do you like about these story themes? What do you like about the ideology?

R: The easy answer is that in Steampunk, technology is beautiful and valuable, unique, and invented by the person who uses it. Currently, technology has really streamlined visuals, is mass-produced in plastic and aluminum, and is developed by someone else- you have to learn how to use it. Victorian technology belonged to everyone (of a certain social class); anyone could get a chemistry set or a telescope and proceed to make discoveries or do experiments- it wasn't the realm of specialists. Today, knowledge belongs to specialists who study something extensively, and they are viewed as being the only people who can make meaningful contributions to the body of knowledge on that subject.

Incidentally, I do think that's changing, and it's one thing I just freakin' love about open source software, and other... let's call it the democratization of the sciences.

Also, I generally like alternate histories. It isn't always done well, but that's true of every genre of literature. :-)


A: You appear per your blog to have read the Declaration of Independence. What is your opinion of the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitution? Any particular thoughts that stand out?

R: I'm going to be elitist here and say that I think the Constitution is the crowning achievement of the Enlightenment. It's an absolutely amazing document, written by brilliant men, emerging from an untested, unstructured, collaborative process. I could go on and on about the tremendous challenges of inventing a system of government that is cogent enough to work logically, and yet flexible enough to evolve over time, to meet the needs of the people over the course of centuries. It’s so difficult to think long-term, and the founding fathers could have just been reactionary- could have just invented something that redressed their grievances with the monarchy, but instead they invented something that went far beyond that.

The dream of America (all men are created equally, life liberty pursuit of happiness, government of the people by the people for the people) is never, of course, the reality of America. The reality of America is, just like everyone everywhere, the wealthy have tremendous political advantages, and a small number of people have control over the actual living conditions of everyone else... but the dream of America is real and tangible and worth living and fighting for. It’s such a compelling dream that we keep dreaming it, that we keep on striving, generation after generation, to make it true, to make it true for all of us, and then to make it true not just for us, but for everyone all over the world. It keeps speaking to us, calling to us, forcing us to take action.

And, of course, it makes me sick that we have political leaders who don’t believe in this dream, who undermine it and sabotage it, or say that this is a dream that only citizens get to have, who don’t GET it, what we’re doing here, what the experiment actually is that the Constitution set in motion and then entrusted to us.


A: You wrote "I've spent a lot of my life trying to get to this moment, to reach these goals, to be sitting here. And the past year or so I've been asking myself what comes next, what's the next goal?" Have you come up with some new goals, plans, or ideas of accomplishments you'd like to achieve?

R: Actually, I haven't. And I'm getting busy with Drinking and Drawing and all the various camps and this potential animation festival... I get mentally stimulated by these things, and that stimulation is part of what I am looking for. I need a certain level of challenge in my life, and so I like to feel like I'm working toward something. But I'm not sure right now what that "something" is.


A: You also wrote "Instead, I keep finding that when I'm ready, I become the master." What are your thoughts when you reach this level; alone, accomplished, scared, brave, brash?

R: Now I'm embarrassed to read that post- it sounds really narcissistic. What I meant is that when I go out there somewhere and struggle along, I'm fearful and unsure of myself. I wish there was support or guidance, and there never is- I just have to stumble along alone, feeling my way as I go. And invariably, after the fact, people ask me how I did that or learned that. That's what I mean by "becoming the master"- now people look to me for guidance and support.

I guess what I first feel after I've accomplished something major is relief- I was bluffing along the whole time, and can't believe that it actually came true/worked out. I kept expecting someone to come along and stop me, and I'm always surprised when no one has. So I gather my breath for a while and take in the new view, and in that period there is a sense of being proud of myself. Then, of course, I get bored and set myself the next challenge.


A: So what are your ideas for a reorganization for a new superstruct?

R: Well, the superstruct was a device that the people running the game thought would be the thing that saves the world- collections of people with the same goals who bring their disparate experience to the table and work together. I suppose it's a legitimate theory- how else are we going to save the world? But I myself didn't start a superstruct, and barely participated in any. I wanted, like I always want, to bridge them together. I saw so many superstructs that were similar in goals or processes, and wanted them to connect and work together. I know that was part of the intent of the game, but I didn't see it happening much while I was playing.


A: I find you are one of the few people in the country who understands short selling, naked short selling, and even credit default swaps. Does it leave you ok with the idea of these moves in the market or do you believe they should be banned? If they are banned, how could they do so effectively? If they aren't banned, what would the reason be?

R: That's an interesting question. I think that if bankers remembered what their actual business was, then none of this would have happened. Bankers are supposed to make prudent, low risk investments, and protect their solvency at all costs. What happens, bizarrely enough, is that people look at a stock portfolio and think "I'm a millionaire!" rather than thinking "I own stocks that are worth a million dollars today, but might be valued differently tomorrow". Then, the next level of bizarre behavior, they don't start selling stocks to buy things, they start borrowing against the value of their stocks. I mean, they don't sell some stocks and buy a new car- they finance a new car against the value of the portfolio. Eventually they are sleeping in the car.

Do I think there's a legislative solution? Yes and no- firstly, there is a reason we have anti-monopoly laws designed to prevent a given company from dominating a market. People think that legislation is designed to protect the consumer from collusion and price fixing, and that's part of it. but the other reason (and the more important reason) is that in a free market economy, there is no such thing as a company that is "too big to fail". To have too much capital concentrated in too few companies means, literally, that if those companies fail, our economy fails. So, yes, we should much more stringently enforce anti-monopoly laws and encourage a business environment with a lot more real competition. Good lord, if people don't want to finance the auto companies by buying their products, we shouldn't have to finance them with taxpayer money. That's ridiculous. And there are a ton of tiny car companies out there, making alternative vehicles, that would gladly step in and sell cars in a competitive marketplace, and, given the opportunity, would probably be able to absorb a number of employees laid off by the Big 3.

As for banning credit default swaps, I don't think it's necessary. Bankers are learning that if they want insurance, they should buy insurance, not spread their bad debt around. They'll forget in another 50 or 70 years and need to be reminded, but... you know, it's like Enron (another company the government allowed to get too big, with a paper value that could evaporate overnight). If someone is out to find a sneaky loophole that allows them to rip off people, the rules and laws are convoluted enough that they will find a way. Making something illegal after the fact doesn't really solve anything, and just adds more complex legislation to an already insane business. Banning naked shortselling (which they did a few weeks ago) doesn't get rid of the people who want to make money unethically.

Events!

So, the date for Drinking and Drawing is set and I've just sent a message to everyone via everything. I'll spam it again next month when I have cool graphics and a press release. I have to admit I want it to be huge, so I'm open to suggestions of where to promote it.

In case you're wondering, the next steps are: design the fliers (Kalina will do that for me), write the announcement/press release (next week), borrow light tables (apparently Brian Larson will help with this), and then start recruiting volunteers to work the event itself. Next month I'll meet with the guys at the Someday Lounge and go over the details, and it will all be cool as long as a ton of people come and draw.

Ignite was really fun- a great crowd, great presentations, great all around. It was funny to see everyone going by their Twitter handles. Here's my favorite presentation:


Aaand tomorrow is cre8 camp- I'm really looking forward to it.

Comfortable with Uncertainty

A really good book, actually. I wish I had more time with it.

Everything in our lives has the power to wake us up or put us to sleep. Allowing it to awaken is up to us.

Marten is really serious about putting together an animation festival. I'm on board, but frankly intimidated by the idea. Help!

blah blah Blog

So much has happened this week, but not the kind of thing I blog about. What can I say about the election that hasn't been said already? What can I share about people I meet, people I know, possibility all around, imminent...

I'm flattered that Todd from the Legion of Tech just asked me to do a video bit for Ignite. There's not enough time to do something really cool, though. I'll see what I can wrangle up.

In preparation for an exciting week, then, let's have a poem.

Portrait of a Woman, by Wislawa Szymborska

She should be willing to please.
To change, so that nothing should change.
It's easy, impossible, hard, worth trying.
Her eyes are if need be now deep blue, now gray,
dark, playful, filled for no reason with tears.
She sleeps with him like some change acquaintance, like his one and only.
She will bear him four children, no children, one.
Naive yet giving the best advice.
Weak yet lifting the weightiest burdens.
Has no head on her shoulders but will have.
Reads Jaspers and ladies' magazines.
Doesn't know what this screw is for and will build a bridge.
Young, as usual young, as always still young.
Holds in her hands a sparrow with a broken wing,
her own money for a journey long and distant,
a meat-cleaver, poultice, and a shot of vodka.
Where is she running so, isn't she tired?
Not at all, just a bit, very much, doesn't matter.
Either she loves him or has made up her mind to.
For better, for worse, and for heaven's sake.

His Monkey Wife

This is Jonathan Collier's first book, and it's not as good as his short stories. But he does have a way with words.

For the heart is, in a sense, like the Prince of Wales; we would not have it cut in stone, yet how pathetic it is when, as at Wembley, we see it modeled in butter.

For the rest, though the reflections of the untutored chimp are scarcely worth the setting down, she was mostly struck by the appearance of abject misery which was apparent in all the passersby, especially in their sickly complexions, their peevish or anxious looks, their slave's gait, and, most of all, in their rare and rickety smiles.
Do not think, however, that she jumped at once to the conclusion, as some more superficially observant stranger might have done, that the great city is on the whole a nasty mistake, and that it would have been better, all things considered, if Highgate Hill were to turn Vesuvius, so to speak, and obliterate, to put it bluntly, all the ugly antheap at its feet. No: she had experiences of her own enough to know that happiness is like some of the lower forms of life, of which, if one of them is cut into pieces, some inconsiderable fragment or other is sure to survive. Thus she had little doubt that, among these hurrying millions, most of whom looked to her (though she knew little of homes and offices) as if they had been both crossed in love and condemned to penal servitude for life, many had compensations, which, however small they might seem to the indifferent spectator, must in logic be so great to each individual concerned that they compensated for the toil, the illness, the worry, and the emotional starvation marked clearly on his face, for they demonstrably withheld him from cutting his throat. "What a wonderful thing a stamp collection must be," thought Emily, "or the construction with one's own hands of a home radio set!"

When a young man, almost alone in London, and, possessed of a modicum of intelligence and a small deposit account, is afflicted with pain greater than he can bear, he is likely to find himself, in obedience to an inexplicable law, in the company of artists.