Essays
Detroit Skyline To Change
General Motors and Bedrock have announced the conceptual changes they propose of the Renaissance Center in Detroit. The changes involve removing two of the four office towers along with the current ground floors at the base of the complex. The ground floors will be replaced with a similar design that has glass walls rather than concrete.
Earlier this year General Motors announced they were moving their world headquarters from the Renaissance Center, which they bought in 1996, to the New Hudsons site built by Bedrock. GM’s move brought speculation about the future of the Renaissance Center, whether it be completely torn down or repurposed in some way. The conceptual design is a middle solution between the two.
As stated , GM bought the Renaissance Center in 1996, and my speculation is one of the reasons why it could is that it gained extra money in that year when EDS was spun out of GM and was provided a multi-million dollar payment.
I worked at the Renaissance Center from 2004 to 2015. In 2004 EDS, which was the company I worked for, consolidated their Detroit office space into one of the two smaller towers on the east side of the complex. Through work force reductions and acquisition of EDS by Hewett Packard, the company slowly vacated floors and eventually entire tower it was in and by 2015 only occupied one floor in the north east tower (Tower 100).
While I disliked the morning and evening commutes, I very much enjoyed working at the Renaissance Center. It was the center of all of the major events in Detroit, including Super Bowl XL in 2006, Detroit Red Wings and Pistons championship parades, the Final Four, and Red Bull aerial races, not to mention the yearly Fireworks. I am happy that GM and Bedrock have found a way to keep a good portion of the original complex.
I am reading “How the Ivy League Broke America” by David Brooks, published in The Atlantic (gifted link), and agreeing almost entirely with the points that Brooks is making.
Looking back, I know that my grandmother’s (who raised me) strongest desire for me was a college degree that lead to achieving “the American Dream.” Her desire was influenced by the meritocracy Brooks describes, even if the arc of her life started before the meritocracy view of the world was instituted.
So, I fit in the college educated category, except that my grandmother was not wealthy and my education was paid for mostly by Pell Grants and student loans. The grants sufficiently covered my credits, so I only needed a relatively small amount of loans for things like books.
I feel as though if I were born just ten years later I probably would not have the life I have today, because I probably would not have afforded that college degree or I would have been hugely in debt.
Like most of her generation, my grandmother wanted me to partake in the American Dream and she believed that would only happen if I had a college degree. She wasn’t wrong, but the problem is that if you can boil down the achievement of a better life to one thing it becomes very easy to put a dollar value on that thing and when that happens a barrier is created.
What Brooks describes in this article is a cultural problem that government itself cannot fix. Yet, government made up of people who see the problem can make government an enabler of a fix rather than a barrier. Does eliminating the Department of Education help or hinder? Honestly, I am not entirely sure.
Android 15 Private Space
Ironic Indeed
I’ve been thinking about the contexts within which the United States was founded, specifically Holy Roman Empire and protestantism. The Holy Roman Empire produces the Doctrine of Discovery that authorizes the colonization of the Americas because white Christian men are superior to non-Christian indigenous men. Today the Tipsy Teetotaler shared a quote of Matthew Crawford that says the following about a consequence of protestantism.
But this brings with it a certain anxiety: if I have to stand on my own two feet, epistemically, this provokes me to wonder, how can I be sure that my knowledge really is knowledge? An intransigent stance against the testimony of tradition, and a fundamentally Protestant stance toward religious authority, leads to the problem of skepticism. Tocqueville��s great observation is that the way Americans resolve the anxiety that comes from a lack of settled authority is to look around to see what their contemporaries think. The individualist turns out to be a conformist.
The subhead that the Tipsy Teetotaler wrote for the above quote is, “Individualism, ironically, creates lemmings.” I think these contexts are important in understanding the current state of the United States of America.
The land upon which I as a citizen of the United States now live was stolen because of a belief in the supremacy of one group of people over another, which allows for slavery and the contempt of one human for another. The majority of the people who ultimately settled on that stolen land were raised in a theology that taught scripture alone and scripture apart from anyone other than oneself was authoritative. Consequently we have a pyramid of people who think they are naturally better than others and know more than others, and the “others” are beneath them.
What may be truly ironic, no actually traumatically sad, is that these two forks of Western Christianity claim to follow Jesus, who taught a very different theology of relationship, a view that sees the world as a circle rather than the pyramid of hierarchy. On the other hand, how is this not the result of a religion founded by an emperor? Jesus did not start a religion, he started something more like yeast and weeds.
Looking To Next Season
The Cubs did not meet their expectation to win the NL Central division this year and they will not be in the playoffs this year. Last year I wrote that during the off-season the Cubs needed to sign two reliable starting pitchers and retain Merryweather in the bullpen; they only signed one reliable pitcher and Merryweather was injured all season.
Assad has earned the right to be in the starting rotation next year along with Imanaga, Steele and Taillon, but Hendricks should be gone so they will need one more starter and it is uncertain whether that starter is currently in the Cubs system.
Before deciding whether the Cubs need to sign a starter, there needs to be consideration that the bullpen in today’s game may be more important than starting pitching. Working with a slate of new bullpen pitchers is not a good strategy for how pitchers are now used, so I would focus more on keeping the bullpen pitchers you can count on and replacing those you cannot with people who you expect to be on the team for several years. I don’t think enough consideration has been made on the consequence of the three hitter minimum on relief pitchers.
Finally, it should be clear by now that the Cubs batting line up is too easy to shut down. It looks to me like every hitter has the same profile such that if a pitcher has success against one person they likely will succeed against all. Because nobody gets one or more hits in every game, there needs to be diversity such that when one player gets 0 hits another gets 2 or more hits.
The Cubs line up is a result of a system of evaluating hitters and that system, for which the Cubs front office is responsible, is clearly flawed. Exhibit A of this is the mid-season signing of Paredes this year and Candelario last year, both were no different than the other Cubs hitters and did not much help once inserted in to the lineup. The 2024 Cubs had the same results of the prior team and every team since 2017. If we want a different result then the system needs to change.
It’s time for a turnover in the front office, a new approach is needed in evaluating hitters. I am convinced that despite the new, cool metrics, team batting average still matters. A high team average exists with a good ratio of good, consistent hitters who have a high individual average, to unreliable low average hitters. Home runs might win games, but it doesn’t look like an entire line up of 20 home run hitters will win championships. The 2024 Cubs hitters excelled against poor pitching, but was not competitive against good pitching.
My Point Of View On Voting
I understand people’s reasons for why they do not like either Trump or Harris, in fact those reasons are obvious, either vote to put a person in office who only thinks of himself or vote for the person who is part of an administration supporting ongoing war and killing in Gaza and Ukraine. The Biden administration that Harris is part of is not doing all of what I want it to do, but in making my decision for whom to vote I also ask myself, of these two candidates which one is more likely to be influenced by public outcry or activism after being elected? Which party in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches is more likely to produce change that I want?
I see a better chance for what I want happening if Harris is President rather than Donald Trump because my values align better to Harris than Trump. Further, I do not see either not voting or voting for a third party or write-in candidate as furthering my cause and I feel no satisfaction in declaring that I did not support either as if that washes my hands of any responsibility.
These are my views on this election and they do not matter except in the possibility that they are a point of view you are open to considering. Perhaps you disagree and that is ok, that is the purpose of non-compulsive elections, private and split-ticket voting.
Gruber On Apple Past And Present
I think John Gruber’s description of the differences between Apple led by Steve Jobs and Tim Cook is right on. Just today I was in a meeting in which the presenter used Apple an example of a lack of innovation, but even if that is true Apple is doing very well. I also like this idea, even if I don’t think the differences between the two are as stark as Gruber is suggesting:
Jobs was driven to improve the way computers work. Cook is driven to improve the way humans live.
Techsploder Pixel 9 Overview
Today I watched Jason Howell’s video overview of the new Pixel 9 phone. Rather than being an opinionated review, this overview does a good job of showing the features of the new phone, and I particularly like the walkthru Jason does of the AI features.
You see a good demonstration of the dialog a user can have with Gemini Live, it’s impressive if not a little creepy. You also see how Add Me works, the resulting photos Jason show looks a bit obvious to me that they were “edited.” The use case for the screenshots/OCR/AI Pixel feature of the Google Pixel 9 series sounds like how I use archivebox to capture and save web pages that have information that I may need to reference in the future. I probably will use the screenshots feature, but I honestly don’t know whether any of them are attractive/useful enough to compel me to buy the Pixel 9 in order to use them.