"We need to value the consequences of our actions more than the cleverness of our ideas." (Ruined by Design)

While this statement is written for designers, I think this is something that can—and should—be applied more broadly. Our economy runs on ideas. Business ideas that are tidied up just enough to find venture backing, seen to be a path profit for those doing the investing. Advertising ideas crafted to chase awards and notoriety. Marketing ideas that are praised on their ability to stand out amidst a rising tide of excessive content. The better the idea, the faster we move with it. Monteiro's point is a call to slow down and consider the potential consequences of these ideas before we put them into action.

Unfortunately, slow and deliberate thinking is rarely rewarded in our economy.

"Where we put our labour is a choice; a choice that we should be willing and able to make with our eyes wide open, fully aware of its repercussions. Who we work for and how we do that work are the only things that matter right now." (Ruined by Design)

I've often felt that where I worked mattered more to me than things like how much I make or even what it is I am doing. Of course those things are important, but the balance for me has always tilted slightly in favour of wanting to work somewhere that I feel aligned. That's not always an easy thing to find and I'm grateful for the times in my life when I have had it.

At the end of my life, I want my kids to know that I did what I could to not screw the planet up too bad and to make things better for other people. Even if that maybe cost them a few luxuries that their friends had.

Picked up the 'sh*tty pulp edition' of Ruined by Design recently. This was one of my favourite books I read a few years ago and so it's a good excuse for a reread. A lot has happened since I first read it—both in my personal life and in the world—so I'm interested to see what resonates now.

In the intro, Monteiro describes the goal of the book as wanting to "help you do the right thing in environments designed to make it easier to do the wrong thing." I think this is a perfect description of the tension of trying to work for a better world under capitalism. It's something that time and time again I have grown frustrated by how much the system, those environments he speaks of, are resistant to change. The question of whether or not capitalism is capable of producing a common good, one I have reflected on previously, seems to keep coming up as a no.

Capitalism relies on the myth that profit and the common good can coexist. It's what has fuelled Silicon Valley's techno-futuristic promises up to this point. Sure, you have to ignore all the missteps along the way. Selling people's data, massive efficiency layoffs, union-busting, those are all necessary evils on the road to a better tomorrow. But the truth is these aren't in the pursuit of good, these are done in the pursuit of profit. As Monteiro puts it,

“When the people at the top tell you they want to change the world, it’s generally because they’ve figured out how to profit even more from those below them.”

Came across this research paper making the rounds on LinkedIn last week. It's a study looking at the impact of AI usage on our critical thinking and other cognitive functions. The authors note:

"While cognitive offloading can free up cognitive resources, there is concern that it may lead to a reduction in cognitive effort, fostering what some researchers refer to as ‘cognitive laziness’. This condition might diminish the inclination to engage in deep, reflective thinking. The use of AI tools for tasks like memory and decision-making could lead to a decline in individuals’ abilities to perform these tasks independently, potentially reducing cognitive resilience and flexibility over time."

Though I am sure that this is a nuanced topic and a need for some healthy debate around this remains, I am thankful that this is getting attention. Technology, like any tool can be beneficial in the ways it helps us achieve efficiency in tasks we do repeatedly. Yet, there is always a risk that if we become too reliant on that tool we might forget how to do the task without it. Skills can be diminished and lost entirely if not used.

My growing concern with AI has been a fear that it might erode our abilities to learn and think critically about things; and this study certainly lends itself to that theory. Yes, an AI tool might be able to summarize a book, an article, or meeting notes and save me the time of doing it myself; but efficiency should not be our only goal. Being able to critically evaluate something we read or hear and know how to pull out the useful or quality parts is crucial—especially as information online becomes less and less trustworthy.

What I'm Reading:

• Lifehouse: Taking Care of Ourselves in a World on Fire (Adam Greenfield)

• Faithful Place (Tana French)

• Great Small Towns of Ontario (Richard Peddie)

What I'm Listening To:

• Triple Seven (Wishy)

• Mahashmashana (Father John Misty)

• Perceive Its Beauty, Acknowledge Its Grace (Shabaka)

What I'm Watching:

• What We Do In The Shadows (TV)

• Red Rooms (movie)