Matt Johnston – ɔimoɈɒ

Wear and Tear

I’ve been using this Magic Keyboard for 3 years now. Around the same amount of time as this iPad Pro. And I have to say it’s served me well.

The Magic Keyboard mat be expensive but it provides one thing above and beyond a really nice backlit keyboard and nice trackpad, it provides the iPad Pro with an additional USB-C charging port, freeing the built-in port for external peripherals like hard drives.

Now, it’s not pretty. And if I met Tim Cook, I’d probably mention that these hardware peripherals in this soft plastic covering are not particularly durable or eco-friendly. I compare this to other materials which seem to be better with age.

But, other than that appearance, it’s functional. A better keyboard than the MacBook 12″. And the flexibility of the iPad with Magic Keyboard is hard to beat.

A quick Google sees that I’m not alone in this. I wonder if there’s a way to seal up these tatty edges or have it re-bound?

The Hardest Journey

A combination of age (sedentary work) and too much good food has left me heavier than I’d like plus acutely aware of the intra-abdominal fatty deposits so I’m back on the diet that worked well enough just under a decade ago.

My aim is to be lighter than I’ve been since, well, forever.

That’s a 30 kilogram loss. One quarter of my body weight.

I started on the 17th of September by just reducing my calorific intake and I’m getting good results. My issue has always been portion sizes and, for whatever reason, not having a reliable “I’m full now” response.

My previous weight apparently required a 2500 cal a day intake to maintain so I was definitely overeating. I’m now on an 1800 cal diet. Dropping my intake by a quarter will definitely make a difference.

Having a calorie limit does help. Sometimes I’m a couple of hundred cals over, sometimes I’m a hundred cals under.

I see the difference on the scales but I haven’t seen it on the clothes or in the mirror yet.

Since the 17th Sept I’ve dropped 6kg. That’s pretty good. I know it will plateau.

Did the EU force Apple to adopt USB-C?

In 2022, a law was passed by the European Parliament that required all manufacturers of certain types of consumer electronics to switch to the USB-C connector.

Apple, though not alone, was opposed to this. You don’t hear about who else was opposed because, well, no-one cares. Journalists love a good Apple story as it drives clicks.

So, let’s rewind. USB-C is a 24 pin reversible connector that was designed to replace all other USB connectors. Why? Because prior to USB-C the standard was a mess.

You had devices that used USB-A, USB-B, mini-USB, micro-USB, and others.

The diagram above shows the state of the market and that diagram isn’t even complete as it misses out the USB 3.0 micro-B connector and plug. Anyone who’s ever had to plug in a USB cord in the dark or behind a printer will understand. And for micro USB it’s trivial to damage the port.

The main advantages of USB-C are in the protocols, in power delivery and the fact it doesn’t matter which way you plug it in. (Which would only be improved by making it round).

USB-C is superior because it crams a lot in there but it’s really the quality of the cable and the protocols it uses which make the difference. Not all USB-C ports and connectors and cables are the same. Some mobiles have USB charging ports which don’t support DisplayPort or even USB Mass Storage. Some support Thunderbolt 2 or 3. Some won’t support USB 4.

So, in 2018, the EU did a study. They found around half of chargers sold with mobile phones had a micro USB port, 29% had the newish USB C port, and 21% used Lightning. The micro USB port and connector were terrible. They were fragile, had to be plugged in one way and alignment was very important.

In contrast the Lightning connector was small, could be plugged in either way and supported USB 2.0 (and USB 3.0). The plug itself was over engineered with a microprocessor inside each plug head. It supported displays, audio and mass storage formats. But it wasn’t a standard and it belonged to Apple so there were going to be haters.

In 2019, the EU decided to pick the USB-C standard for charging small devices. Apple argued against this and a lot of people think it was because they earned royalties on Lightning – which is certainly true under their MFI programme but it’s also certainly true that the vast majority of Lightning accessories never paid a cent having been produced by reverse engineering and available for a pound (or Euro or Dollar) in cheap shops.

By 2019, Apple had already transitioned more than half of their product line to USB-C, starting with Macs in 2015 and then starting with iPads (replacing Lightning) in 2018 with the release of the iPad Pro 3rd Gen. This was in spite of Lightning supporting the USB 3.0 protocol – Apple wanted to move to a new cable. Remember, when Lightning was introduced in 2012, it was replacing the 30-pin connector and this was two years before the USB-C specification had even been produced.

So, before the EU had even held their study, Apple had already started replacing Lightning with USB-C on their mobile devices. Remember if the iPad Pro went USB-C in 2018, the plan for that was probably even before that (if any consideration to supply chains is given).

As mentioned, Apple and other manufacturers oppose the law but it wasn’t to get those tasty licensing fees from Lightning connectors. Anyone who thinks Apple built a trillion dollar company on Lightning licensing fees is a buffoon. It was about what comes after USB-C.

After USB-C? Sure. You think the USB-C connector is the optimum? Oh no. There will be other superior connectors, there are other superior connectors.

One thing is for certain, the EU is like any other political organisation and they get lobbied. There’s a heap of people who think that politics should stay out of business (mostly Americans who don’t know what they’re talking about) and a few more who think politics should stay out of technology development (mostly technologists who do know what they’re talking about). One thing is certain, politicians generally don’t know what they’re talking about.

Don’t get me wrong – I am a fan of the EU. I applaud when they intervene on public health issues or poverty issues or workers rights issues. Bravo. I’m not so sure they should weigh in on charging cords. (And the Digital Markets Act is a mess).

I mean, it seems a little hypocritical that there are multiple types of wall plug in the EU, right? And the EU is utterly silent on this.

So, the EU passes the law in 2022 with a deadline of late 2024 for compliance. That’s to let companies make new plans, sell down stock, change supply chains, transition technology. Apple, as we have seen, is well on the way to transitioning their entire product line. They have the behemoth of the iPhone to consider but they successfully transition it in 2023, a full year before the deadline.

The problem is that the law is prescriptive and affects what happens in … say 2035 when we need a better port for charging or data transfer or whatever. The EU will have to ruminate on repealing the USB-C law or updating it. They’re not great at that – other priorities.

So when the USB consortium comes out with USB-X (for example), everyone can start charging to it, except for the EU market. They have to wait for the law to be changed to allow USB-X. It took 8 years after the introduction of the USB-C standard for the EU to create the USB-C law. So the argument is that this will artificially delay the development and introduction of new technology in the EU. And they’re right.

We elect politicians on their how much we like them – sure their policies can matter (though certainly less at the EU level) but it’s heavily based on whether we like them or who or what they are. (Just look at the narratives emerging around U.S. Democratic nominee Kamala Harris from people who really don’t like the idea of a woman, particularly a woman of colour, as President. Meanwhile in the U.K., they had a blow up doll, a pompom, a weasel and a thief as Prime Minister before the recent election of the new Centrist Labour Guy).

We don’t elect politicians based on what they know. We trust they will find smart advisors, listen to lobbies on good stuff and resist lobbies on bad stuff. It is frankly amazing we have survived so long.

That’s why I don’t think that the European Parliament was qualified to dictate USB-C and maybe a more delicately worded law could have been drafted which wouldn’t stifle the future market. Remember it isn’t all about standards, look at the diagrams here. These are, for the most part, standards. And there are a lot of them. And if you really want to curl your toes, check out the standards for the USB protocols. Then query whether your USB-C cable meets all of them. (I doubt it will).

Anyway. I’m tired of the narrative that Apple was forced into adopting USB-C. If this was the case why did they start transitioning across their product line 3 years before the EU even performed the study and 7 years before the law was ratified. Because it was on their roadmap.

The question is what happens when the new standards arise.

Timeline below of when Apple went USB-C

USB-C spec published Aug 2014 12” MacBook: Apr 2015 Touch Bar MB Pro: Oct 2016 iMac in 2017 Mac mini 2018 MacBook Air in 2018 EU study on phone connectors 2018 iPad Pro in Nov 2018 Mac Pro in 2019 EU study results released 2019 iPad Air 4: Oct 2020 iPad mini 6: Sept 2021 EU law passes 2022 iPhone 15 in 2023 EU deadline: late 2024

Digging out the Pi again.

This morning as I was running early for meetings, I dug out my old Raspberry Pi devices that I have sitting in a drawer. I’m not entirely sure if I have a 2 and a 3 or a 3 and a 4, but I think I’ll boot them later and check.

I was thinking about a Pi 5 because, well, it’s been a whole lifetime since I even booted them. So, with the money burning in my pocket I decided to check them out. Same hardware design (yes, I know it’s slightly different – heavy use of USB-A ports and only one USB-C used for Power.

What about performance. Oh. Dear God.

Yeah, that can wait.

It might be twice as fast as a Pi 4, but honestly I’ve got much more performant hardware lying around. So what would I be using the Pi for?
It’s for the one thing that is kinda missing on the iPad – terminal commands. I can get away with SSH to my server using one of the many ssh programs I’ve got on the iPad but it seems wasteful sending commands to a data centre thousands of kilometres away when I really want to mess with files that are sitting on a disk right beside me.

It can all wait. Maybe the Pi 7….

Today I launch my writing Patreon

I realise it’s been a while since I updated this.

Moneys gained will be for the production of art and promotion of the roleplaying game and novel I plan to write. I will be posting snippets of both over there,

Cherry B: Onto New Horizons

I’ve come to the realisation that it’s time to sell Cherry B.

She’s a 2000-era Bavaria 34 sailboat (a sloop!) (10.8 long, 3.5m wide, 1.8m draft, 15m mast) with the double aft cabin which I’ve found super useful for storage and living space. She has a wheel rather than a tiller. I bought her in 2019 from a Training Company in Plymouth where she had never really gone very far. I sailed her to Bangor, Northern Ireland where I lived board through much of Covid. In September 2021, I sailed her to France, then to Spain and Portugal and into the Med where she now lies in a super-cheap berth about 10 minutes from Barcelona (which we have found to be super useful as Barcelona flights are pretty cheap). She’s on the UK Small Ships Register and EU-VAT-Paid.

I added a diesel heating system and 240V shore power system, replaced the batteries and put 12V ports into the bedrooms (so people could charge their phones). She has a new Chartplotter/AIS/GPS (ONWA) as well as the normal nav gear and VHF and the engine was recently given a full service. Her liferaft is brand new as well – god forbid it would ever be needed. She doesn’t have autopilot and I’ve not needed one – always having crew and plenty of cabins to keep them in!

With her age, there’s obviously some things that need fixed and maintained but she has sailed me through storms and winters with ease. Her sails are definitely a little old (though there’s a spare under the V berth) but she’s wholly serviceable for someone that wants to liveaboard as well as do a little travelling.
She has two SUP boards, two folding Kayaks, an eBike, an eScooter and a folding pedal bike which could be part of the deal.

Why am I selling? While she’s great for me, my partner wants more room especially above deck so it’s time to move to a bigger boat, most likely a catamaran. Cherry B remains as a super solid boat, maybe a little rough around the edges, looking for one more new lover to keep her travelling.

I’d like €25,000 for her. That’s a decent discount on her original price but I’m happy to haggle more.

Transitioning to a Green Economy saves more than just lives

A Fossil Fuel Economy Requires 535x More Mining Than a Clean Energy Economy

While it may seem unbelievable, the concept is simple.

Fossil fuel economies need constant investment in raw materials for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure (everything from the drill bits to the engines that burn the fuel). The wear and tear on the equipment throughout the FF economy means regular replacement. The fuel itself is also mined. We also use oil products to try and reduce the wear and tear on the equipment. Think about your oil change in your car. Now magnify that by a billion and you won’t even be close to the cars on the road across the world.

Clean energy economies invest all of the mining in resilient infrastructure. Solar panels have no moving parts. Solar panels last years. The energy they produce is not mined, we are literally collecting free energy that’s landing all around us. If we move away from EVs, the wear and tear decreases further (an EV is a sop to car manufacturers- they’re overweight ICE car analogues).

So while clean energy skeptics may point at the mining needed to produce solar panels, they’re being disingenuous at best.

Remember: we cannot reason with the unreasonable. We cannot use evidence to debate with those who do not respect evidence. We will fail if we use logic to challenge those who have abandoned logic for greed.

The Darwinistic Approach (and why everything worthwhile boils down to Natural Selection)

In my youth, I was lucky enough to study science, specifically Genetics. My thesis was about the change in populations due to natural drift – assuming a small rate of random mutation and some selection pressure. Selection pressure is what we would probably describe as “something going wrong” but it can also be a simple filter. Using a Darwinistic approach allows us to evaluate and iterate on a problem. What we are trying to achieve is “whatever can happen, will happen”. That’s the basis of Evolution and has led to a dizzying array of biodiversity in the natural world.

Mathematician Augustus De Morgan wrote on June 23, 1866: “The first experiment already illustrates a truth of the theory, well confirmed by practice, what-ever can happen will happen if we make trials enough.” In later publications “whatever can happen will happen” occasionally is termed “Murphy’s law”, which raises the possibility — if something went wrong—that “Murphy” is simply “De Morgan” misremembered.

The thing to remember about Evolution (and by extension Darwinistic Natural Selection) is that the possibilities generated must come before the selection pressure or nothing survives the selection filter. If the organism doesn’t survive to reproduce, then the line ends. The bank of possibilities must be there already.

This translates into “innovation” easily. An organisation must populate itself with a wide heterogeneity of minds in order to generate the ideas (the fundament of innovation) with sufficient diversity that can survive the selection pressure filter. The ideas should not initially be fettered by the selection pressure criteria (otherwise every problem that looks like a nail results in a solution that resembles a hammer).

After the ideation is complete (though, in truth, ideation and iteration should never stop – just like cell mutation), the selection filter can be applied. Ideas which don’t at first make the grade should be subjected to further iteration before they can be discarded. Only this way can you have a truly Darwinistic natural selection.

Natural selection in this way resulted in modern humans – but also resulted in pilot whales, baboons, golden eagles and bumblebees. Each of them adapted to the niche they occupy. If you apply your selection pressure with the single-minded aim of producing something that looks like a human, you’ll miss out on the entirely practical solutions that resemble bees, monkeys, birds and dolphins. In business terms, this means discarding every solution that doesn’t resemble “we have always done it this way”. What happens to organisms that discard new things? They die out.

We are in an unprecedented era with worldwide biodiversity loss. Organisms are simply unable to adapt to the new way of the world quickly enough. Evolution is simply too slow. Unfortunately for us, we are part of that. Humans are tremendously adaptable – mostly due to our brains and the technologies we develop – but it would be arrogant to assume that we are not under selection pressure right now. Humans continue to evolve but, like our counterparts in nature, we will not evolve quickly enough and, due to the way natural selection works, many of us won’t make it. The Selection Pressures of a changing climate (whether you think it is man-made or not is somewhat irrelevant) are presenting new challenges that we need new ideas to resolve.

Our technology may save us, but we are only fielding ideas that look like old ideas, under the same selection pressures. Great ideas (the baboons, bumblebees, eagles and whales) are discarded because the selection criteria are not fit for purpose. The Legacy pressures from “we have always done it this way” obstruct the effective solutions by discarding innovative ideas.

for example

Statement: We need food to survive
Selection Pressure: Food is not distributed equally
Legacy Pressure: We must grow food for profit not to resolve hunger
Result: A lot of people starve to death but we generate some value for shareholders

Statement: We need food to survive
Selection Pressure: Food is not distributed equally
Legacy Pressure: Only solutions resembling beef steaks will be considered
Result: A lot of people starve to death, but some people get steak

As you can see, Legacy pressures are artificial selection pressures. They limit innovation, they hinder success. They leave us without workable solutions and instead present us with short term distractions that bring us no closer to the result we need (avoiding mass extinction).

We have the opportunity to generate all of the ideas we need before the real selection pressure starts. But we have to rid ourselves of Legacy pressures.

A.I.

First they came for the writers, but I was not a writer.
Then they came for the artists, but I was not an artist.
Then they came for the customer success agents, but I did nothing as I was not a customer success agent.
Then they came for the developers and support, but as that was not my function, I did nothing.
Then they came for the sales team and I did nothing. Maximising efficiency sometimes means sacrifice.
Finally they came for the C-team, but as I had invested everything in the shareholding portfolio, I did nothing.
Finally I am a major shareholder in this company that no-one works at, where no-one can afford our products because we replaced all of the jobs with AI. Why won’t someone do something to help us poor shareholders?

Longing. A not quite poem.

Longing. That’s an odd word. I’ve been chewing it for a couple of days now like a dog worries a piece of cured hide. At this point, like the hide, the word is gnarled beyond recognition and, truth be told, a little soggy.

The problem is what it implies versus what it means. Chew some more. Longing. Longing. Lengthening.

That’s it, isn’t it.

Longing means to wish for something to come sooner but the implication is that the wait is lengthened. Just one more example of how human feelings just make the human condition worse. We want for something so much that it makes the wait even longer. Longing. Lengthened.

And when received, where does this feeling go? It flies unbidden into oblivion. We don’t notice its passing and we certainly don’t mourn it.

Longing becomes a state of being. Or maybe a stateless being. When you’re longing for something, it’s enveloping, all-encompassing. Like an infant screaming for care, ignorant of time, you cannot remember a time before the longing and all you know is how to end it. Longing has no tempo and pace. It is as inexorable as grief and maybe that’s it? Is Longing grief for lost moments, for shared experiences never birthed? Is it the silent loss of these unborn joys that makes longing feel so god-damned terrible?

So, I grieve for these missed delights. And as I grieve I cannot understand how long I have grieved or how long it will be until the grief is replaced. I just know with every cell of my being that at some point the inarticulate shrieking in my soul will cease moments before I touch you.

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts: