This article is from 2021. I remember reading it back when it first came out and being angry. I'm reading it again this morning and even angrier.
This morning I laid the groundwork to convert all my posts over from HTML in the source code to Markdown. While I don't expect HTML to go anywhere as far as languages go, I think the simplicity and portability of Markdown has a lot of advantages. It will also lay the groundwork for me to more easily upload posts to this blog when I write them on my mobile devices if offline, or just as part of different workflows.
The tennis-shoe wearing hairy red monster #Gossamer made his first appearance in the #BugsBunny animated short "Hair-Raising Hare", first seen by theater audiences 76 years ago today on May 25, 1946. pic.twitter.com/CsdAefhMvp— Silver Age Television ???? (@SilverAgeTV) May 25, 2022
The 9 new names for Army bases honoring Confederates
Embracing the content queue
I consume a lot of content. Articles, tweets, videos, podcasts, books, etc. As you might have noticed, I have recently dove back into queuing of content, that is utilizing systems designed to allow me to capture interested content for consumption at a later point. Specifically, this is in regards to podcasts, articles and YouTube. The value here is to be better able to capture interesting content as they come across my feed, but also that it improves the quality of what I consume by basically giving me a two pass approach at filtering the content.
The first filter is a measure of immediacy and my mental prioritization of the content. If I don't consume some content immediately upon seeing it, then that says the content failed it's initial test. This content is either not interesting enough for me to prioritize it over whatever I'm doing, or it might be that the content's specifications (length, medium, etc.) are not convenient.
The second test is, if I am not going to consume this content now, am I going to consume it later? And if I think the answer is yes then it gets added to my queues. For articles, that's my Wallabag. For YouTube, that's my "Watch Later." For podcasts, that's my, well, queue.
The third test is if, when I see the content later in my queue, does it get consumed? In many cases, the answer is no. In some cases this is simply due to the interest in that topic being gone. Or perhaps I've already learned about the topic of the content through other means. Or it might be that the immediacy of that content has passed.
Sometimes I'll leave things in my queues for weeks. But I have found that in general, if an item languishes in my queue for three weeks, the odds are very high that that item isn't going to get consumed.
You know that scene when Ron Swanson goes to the hardware store and an employee asks if he can help him? Ron answers with "I know more than you."
Sometimes, I want to do that to tech support people.
I don't do this. They are people and they are doing their job. But sometimes... sometimes one of them says something dumb enough that I just want to tell them off.
This post brought to you from dealing with my web hosting tech support.
One of my projects today was downloading the entirety of Tim Ferriss's podcast transcripts for my own reading and reference. Interestingly I didn't go for his show's entire archive. Of his nearly 600 episodes, my archive ended up at around 335. This is because I was only really interested in the episodes where he interviews someone else and so I left the other variety of episodes and didn't download the transcript.
I did this thanks to Tim having posted the transcripts on his blog. So I was able to make use of a Firefox plugin which downloads the page as a Markdown text file. Next will come a long process of reviewing the transcripts, making notes, tagging and flagging things, etc.
[Auto Generated Summary]:
In the six-page letter sent to the select committee and obtained by the Guardian, Jordan demanded House investigators share with him all materials they intended to rely upon in questioning, materials in which he is referenced, and legal analyses about subpoenaing members of Congress. "Because your subpoena is an unprecedented use of a committee's compulsory authority against another member," Jordan said in his letter, "I respectfully ask for the following material so that I may adequately further respond to your subpoena."The response puts the ball in the select committee's court, forcing House investigators to decide whether they will acquiesce to Jordan's demands in the hope that it convinces him to give some testimony, or refuse and potentially close off any chance of cooperation. The response from Jordan - finalized on Tuesday and sent to the panel on Wednesday - also included complaints that House investigators had not acted in good faith by issuing a subpoena around four months after Jordan apparently declined to give voluntary assistance. The select committee's subpoena to Jordan - which came alongside four other subpoenas to House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, Scott Perry, Andy Biggs and Mo Brooks - demanded testimony about his December 2020 meetings with Trump in the White House and other communications.
📧 Daily Newsletter
Get an email with the day's links and posts delivered to your inbox! Sign up here.