Lifestyle Work

The work is not enough

Liked The Work is Not Enough by Anne Helen Petersen (Culture Study)

When your life is this precariously balanced, weekends aren’t for rest or reflection, not really. They’re for cramming in the things you had no time for during the week…then catching up or setting up or meal planning or doing enough laundry in preparation for the week to come.

I mention all of these piling-up tasks and distractions and annoyances not because they’re particularly unique or spectacular but because the essence of them might be relatable: each task, on its own, feels imminently solvable and completable.

For most of us, the thing that’s easiest to jettison is the thing that’s most precious to you — because letting it go ostensibly affects you and you alone. A hobby, a personal goal, a book club, a walk, a nap, all so readily sacrificed. But those are the things that allow us to stand up straight as we carry the weight of everyday annoyances and tasks.

See also: Rest is Resistance and How to Keep House While Drowning

But achieving control is not the same as achieving happiness.

Emphasis mine.

This is totally a mindset I have to be careful about.

Activism Comics Environment

Conservation after collapse


Romance Society Writing

Romance and Apocalypse

Watched Kit Rocha Dance with the Devil Virtual Event from

Tune in to our Live Stream Virtual Event with Kit Rocha to celebrate their third Mercenary Librarians novel, Dance with the Devil. They will be in conversation with Alyssa Cole and Courtney Milan to chat about all things romance!

  • Community after the apocalypse — tool libraries, community gardens
  • It’s about not waiting for permission, but seeing what is needed and doing something that will help — like these authors organized Romancing the Vote to raise money for Fair Fight in like 12 hours
  • Hope isn’t lame — why are we all so scared we’ll be made fun of for thinking something good might happen?
  • Preppers have no long-term plan — need community, can’t just stay in your commune
  • Historical fiction actually isn’t that much more research than other genres
  • A lot of dystopias never actually consider food production and logistics — food (especially tasty food) becomes leverage / power
  • Our current food systems and supply lines are not resilient — need to grow a variety of crops as a community because no one has room to grow enough of everything
  • Interesting when writing mirrors real life — writing dystopia during dystopia sucks 😂 — Alyssa was getting dx’d with ADHD at the same time (unintentionally) she was writing A Duke by Default with an ADHD lead
  • Themes arise organically during writing… maybe before you’re ready to process a problem but getting started will work their way into the book
Future Building Society

UBI is a society-level failsafe for its people

Bookmarked An Engineering Argument for Basic Income by Scott Santens (

Utilizing fault-tolerant design in critical life support systems

Because we know things will fail, we should design them in a way such that when they fail, lives are protected first and foremost, wherever lives are at risk

We know that our primary income distribution system fails. It fails all the time. It’s called losing your job. We have a “safety net” designed to catch people when it fails, but that system is really poorly designed, and it also fails all the time, at which point, people can and do die as a result.

We have engineered a life support system without fault tolerance.

I’m realizing that this argument for the need for universal basic income mirrors the argument for universal healthcare, which has not succeeded. (Sigh, why is it the group that wants to “make America great again” fights everything that would actually make America great again, like catching up to the rest of the world on basic human rights? God, they’re good at branding.)

Because UBI would mean incomes never fall to zero, anyone who ever loses their job would fall to the level of the UBI instead of the severe poverty of having $0. We can think of this as what engineers call “graceful failure.”

Graceful failure means that a failure does not result in catastrophic failure (e.g. sickness or death), and instead fails in a way that protects people or property from injury or damage.

This is kind of funny to think of engineers developing a more compassionate solution to our fiscal policies since in our society’s stereotypes engineers design for maximum efficiency and not cultural needs — but engineers design for outcomes, not based on politics, which is how most of our policies have come to be — through compromise that isn’t necessarily based on outcomes, but often rooted in judgments and moralism (as he points out).

Preventing people in our society from falling into poverty is good (society ignores that because we jump to moral judgments about why people don’t deserve help). It’s much harder (and more expensive) to get people out of poverty then to prevent them from falling into it.

Right now, our safety net uses bang-bang design. If you lose your job, bang, the safety net turns on, that is if you satisfy the necessary conditions, and you may or may not still fall to your death because of the holes in the net. If you do get help, it’s temporary and then, bang, no more help, or if you don’t satisfy the conditions, bang, no more help.

However, UBI would be proportional control design. Everyone receives UBI, but everyone also pays for it in varying amounts depending on income and/or consumption. So if your income goes down for any reason, or to any degree, you pay less for your UBI, meaning your disposable income boost is increased.

Bang-bang design, what a name!

Unconditional basic income is how to engineer resilience into our social and economic systems.

I’m hoping we come out of this pandemic in agreement that resilience is a useful and worthwhile thing to build into our society??? Especially when it comes to protecting lives??? Even though resilience costs money, since what we have going now only works for rich people???