Journal

A perfectly-suitable broad overview of Facebook, focused more on the near history than the distant. Well-written.

The book brought some interesting information to the foreground and did a good job organizing it. Regardless any given source or story within the the book was novel, the challenge with my perception of this book was that it all feels like it has been told before, whether or not that is true.

The revenue graph at the beginning of each chapter was especially cute.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.

Eloquent, dense with purpose, a must-read.

As a primary source for the state of race equality and freedom in the 1960s, this book is excellent.

Dr. King is an eloquent writer—almost every line in the book is above average in its presentation and stands on its own as a powerful quote. You can find some of my favorites on Goodreads.

Clunky, a missed opportunity.

The book had some neat ideas about first contact with aliens, but the execution was lacking. Characters were plot-driven and their motivations unconvincing. Various parts of the book read like a fan-fiction celebrating various parts of the science world (name dropping famous scientists, fundamentals of how computers work, components of physics)—but in ways that were distracting and took away from the plot of the novel.

I bought the entire trilogy on kindle—but I’m not sure I even care to read the rest.

Like most Murakami books, could be best described as an odd, incongruous, dream. It also is filled to the brim with all of the classic Murakami tropes including—but not limited to—cats, divorce, classical music, and cooking.

I wouldn’t recommend it as someone’s first Murakami book, but worth reading for those who have read many of his novels.

I did something recently that I’ve wanted to do for a long time: delete the mountain of emails in my archive that I’ll never revisit.

In total I reduced my Gmail archive from ~48k emails to a number I’ll pretend rounds to five hundred.

But why?

I’m sure many would think this is a bit odd, so here’s some background on the motivation.

I’ve long recognized my personal desire to minimize and only own what is necessary. This is easy to justify in the physical realm: more stuff means more to move, more to keep track of, more to lose.

In this physical space, I’ve long kept relatively few pieces of physical mail that come my way. Often it goes straight from my mailbox to bin or shredder. Sometimes important things are kept temporarily, very few permanently.

But with email? My default was to archive everything forever. Not seeing the huge piles I had created, I became a digital hoarder.

I began to wonder: why treat these differently? These digital piles were not providing me much value, nor joy. Just like piles of physical mail would provide me no value, nor joy.

Broadly I thought might need some of these emails later, but for many I could safely know that was not true. I was collecting junk. I was collecting emails that were once important but no longer.

It was time to dispose of the junk, the irrelevant, the old. And to me that is the primary driver here: to only keep what I need and truly want. No more. No less.

Any regrets yet?

There is one con in all of this. What is gone is gone forever. I’m sure there’s at least one email I’ll miss. I haven’t encountered this yet, but I’m sure there’ll be some at one point or another! Until then.