Process & Processability

Sort of back to work. Went to my noon meeting at least, and did email – even signed into IM – so it looks like I worked. I still need to check the release notes before Monday but those are usually pretty easy – after all, it’s officially my job to write lies if I can’t think of anything good to say.

Off to robots to do boring calibration work. It’s useful for making programs easier to write and modify but it’s boring accounting work in terms of making it happen. But maybe it’s a good match for my low key day; boring but productive isn’t a terrible time, and will let us do cool things in the future. I’m also excited to see how work on the new collector is going.

Didn’t actually do calibration; 0 functional drive bases available. Helped R get setup with our Android project but had trouble engaging him in any actual work. I would guess they have sufficient programming skill to jump in fairly quickly but I think they’re afraid of being watched learning something – not already being perfect at it. I think I can work with that.

Learned some new SJ facts tonight, which might give me an opportunity to talk about an SJ feeling I pinged at the open house a few weeks ago. Not precisely aligned points but close enough that I might be able to encode a very specific message, as the first step in communicating a quantum of safety and shared understanding. There might be some performance enhanced writing prep time tomorrow to find the shape of the thing.

Shanda had lots of laughing yesterday. Sad sometimes but not hopeless, and finally relaxed enough to have real-time plaintext feels much of the time. Today was busier and less laid back, so communication was more work, but still not hard. Rev was also feeling better today, which I think reflects well on household stress levels.

I turned my speculator on at DerbyK pretty hard yesterday and you* were brave enough to understand it as admiration and not criticism. Which is useful because pointing it at others often helps me understand the output more compassionately when I turn it toward myself. I was worried about your reaction – or how to understand the no reaction I always expect – but I shouldn’t have been. Failing to imagine that you would try to respond compassionately is not only inaccurate but also unkind toward you. Thanks for doing it enough to help prove that I was wrong.

M found time to talk to me today, which was an aid in staving off my panic about your eminent death. For a time. You should keep that up if you can – the not dying. Thanks for helping me find some ways to directly support you. It makes it easier for me to believe that someday I could be safe.

ZiB

*I have been degendering my writing, but I am switching** to the second person for in-group contexts. I intend to intentionally conflate not just gender but plurality, while simplifying my usage. Exploiting everyone’s narcissism, locking eyes with individual while giving a speech, giving everyone the same words but not always the same message. Not a new trick, not even to me, but I’m feeling very two birds about it.

**I’m also explicitly commenting on changes in my process, because you voted for process videos. And because I’m reluctant to allow anyone to see me want things; to have anyone know my (clearly terrible) motivations. I want to learn to be comfortable with social regulation of narcissism. I’m afraid that there isn’t any – I can name a number of obvious examples – and I’m positive that I’ll become a monster and no one will tell me, or that I won’t hear them. But the threshold can’t be zero, so I’ll just have to trust other people to help me. Or at least to stop me.

— 
Sent from a phone.