Wearing Out the Wardrobe

About a year ago, I had to move the bar in my closet. I decided it would be the perfect opportunity to try an experiment with my clothes and to see which ones were being worn. I can’t remember where I learned about the trick, but essentially you hang all the clothes in your closet with the hangers facing the opposite way. Every time you wear something, you flip the hanger around. At the end of a set time period, you review the hangers to see which pieces have never been worn.

Since I keep clothing for all four seasons in my closet, I let the experiment run for a full year. I started in September 2016. Throughout the year I occasionally went through the items to see which ones hadn’t been used yet. Every few months I donated a piece I knew I would never wear again, usually after buying a new garment.

This past weekend I finally took the time to go through each piece of clothing. I noticed a few items to donate. Many of the other pieces I hadn’t worn had a perfectly valid reason. Was I really going to give away my jungle print party dress with red trim just because we had a cold, rainy miserable summer? Or my crisp, white button-down shirt simply due to a casual summer dress code?

As for the other items that hadn’t been worn, but that I still like, I’m going to make an effort to wear them this year. Clothes require more than a 1-year cycle for me. Sometimes I have a “fat” year, or a “thin” year when certain items fit better. Or a particular style is back in fashion.

The only down side to having so many clothes is the time spent deciding what to wear. Usually it’s pretty easy, but there are mornings when I change my outfit several times before settling on one. I know it slows me down. On mornings like these, I can never tell if I would be better off with less options. Less choices means less decisions to be made, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it will be faster.

Going forward I’ve decided to donate what I know I won’t wear again and make a point to wear pieces that have been neglected for no good reason. And I’ll continue the annual review.


Technombie 5

When we last left Gillian Bean, her lifeless form was rolling towards a viscous slurry of primordial bacteria, jellyfish, and brightly colored plastics. Read about it here.

Hanna adjusted her night vision scope. Even the pale green light of her goggles wasn’t enough for her imagination to transform the slimy ooze into an ocean. And it did nothing to eliminate the stench. But still, she was here on a rescue mission and had to remain focused.

She crested a sand dune following the coordinates to the last place Gillian Bean’s feed had emitted a signal. Out of the corner of her eye, she glimpsed a flash of human flesh, a calf and part of a foot to be exact. One blink later, the limb had been obscured by thousands of gelatinous tentacles, sliding over the flesh, sinking it even deeper into the goo.

Dang. Hanna cursed silently. She looked away. Rescue was out.

She brought her forearm to her mouth and shook it once.

“Hanna, here,” she said.

“Speak,” a gruff voice barked back, amplified through her skin.

“She’s gone. I watched the last of her disappear into the ocean. No sign of the feed. Over.”

“Why didn’t you pull her out? Over,” the voice replied in a critical tone.

Double dang, thought Hanna. She had to carefully control every reaction now, even physiological ones so they wouldn’t be broadcast through her feed. Truthfully, she hadn’t wanted to wrestle Bean’s body from the sludge of faceless, invertebrate organisms.

This was her first “rescue” mission. The training had been extensive, but now confronted with reality, she was unclear what exactly was supposed to have happened. Surely Bean’s body would have been…something…

“I was too far away. It was by chance I even saw that much of her before she was gone.” Even as she said the words, Hanna knew she should have made more of an effort, or at least made some effort, instead of watching in petrified horror.

“Is that so? Interesting thing, #0076382,” the voice replied, referring to Hanna by her rank number. “Your feed is projecting a rise in body temperature and an accelerated heartbeat. It’s not a hot night. Over.”

“Check. I was moving fast to get here. Moving to phase 2 of the mission. I’ll check in from Bean’s residence,” Hanna replied quickly, hoping that would be enough to end the conversation.

“OK #0076382. We’ll be waiting. Over and out.” The transmission went dead. She took a deep, shaky breath, and started to follow the coordinates towards Bean’s home.


**Read previous segments of the story here:


In the Mayor’s Chambers



The bell rang signaling the end of the school day. Finally! At last Pilton was free. He could stop learning about this “fake news” business. As if there was any real way for him to discern the difference. Every headline that flashed in his brain, or appeared across his SmartScreen, was already customized for him and only him. He had discovered this accidentally one day when a similar headline popped onto his SmartScreen and his friend’s simultaneously.

Food Engineer Discovers New Method to Clear Invasive Jellies from the Oceans (Pilton)

Food Engineer Discovers New Method to Turn Jellies into Sustenance (friend)

The two friends had noticed the subtle differences. Pilton, a staunch environmentalist, always had stories and “news” running through his feed about the latest threat to the outside world, even if they rarely got to be in it anymore. His friend was on track to be an engineer and often had a more scientific slant on his feed. The content of the two stories had been similar, though the focus of Pilton’s story was on the environmental effects of cleaning jellyfish from the oceans. And his friend’s story emphasized the method and new technology invented to harvest jellies to transform them into a food source.

Same story, different approach.  How was Pilton supposed to know which one, if any, was fake? Even if Pilton did have suspicions about the validity of this story, or any other one, it would have been nearly impossible for him to discover on his own. Pilton had the forearm implant which meant anything, and everything, he looked at or searched for was automatically designed for him.

Pilton had heard rumors of others who had figured out how to dampen the feed’s effects and confuse the system. The effects, once minimized, meant those people received a jumble of stuff through their feeds and SmartScreens. A never-ending stream of news, advertisements, gossip, images, etc. And hardly anything was targeted to their specific needs.

Part of Pilton was interested to investigate these rumors, but the other part of him cringed thinking of the effort involved to scroll through all that useless junk in his feed everyday. He knew what he liked, so why would he care to learn about anything else?

At any rate, Pilton was grateful the day was over so he could go home, snack on jellies, and read the news, just for him.

Social Media and Fake News

For over a year, I’ve been reading about the proliferation of fake news on social media. My interest was first piqued when I read articles about people/companies using “chatbots” to automatically create and disseminate messages on social media channels (e.g., Twitter). Essentially a chatbot is a computer program that can reply to, or create, messages and disseminate them automatically. They can produce one message or thousands. Dissemination and broadcast takes seconds.

Last week I read an article in the New York Times called “In Italian Schools, Reading, Writing and Recognizing Fake News.” The article describes a new program being taught to school children in Italy about how to recognize fake news stories on the internet and social media. The students are taught how to verify resources and spot propaganda, to prevent the spread of damaging messages and news stories.

It’s great that the Italians have decided to start this program, educating their students on how to spot fake news and assess resources. But these skills are nothing new. Ask any librarian, or decent journalist, professions that have specialized in this very thing since their inception. Somewhere along the way, we lost these skills and the desire to have them.

I’m not sure what’s changed since I was a student, but I was always taught to vet my resources, even before becoming a librarian. What is it about the internet, and especially social media, that makes us so willing to believe everything we read without using our judgment?

Three factors exacerbate this problem.

  1. People are inundated with information and “cool” things to read on the internet (and social media) 24/7. It’s only natural this would cause some fatigue when trying to vet every resource.
  2. Social media is the perfect medium for spreading news, including fake news, fast. It doesn’t take long for bad information to become part of the main stream.
  3. The methods used to disseminate fake news are clever. Sometimes fake news can imitate almost perfectly a reputable news source, making it difficult to spot.

The internet has opened up an infinite number of options for receiving and disseminating information. To my librarian sensibilities this means having the skills to discern and evaluate resources are even more critical than before. And yet, it’s all too easy to get what you need from a Google search, without any regard to the credibility and reliability of the resources.


Phone Tag

One of my biggest peeves when making plans with someone is when critical details are missing in the written communication, requiring another round of messages and the inevitable time delays. In other words, I’m not given enough information to make a decision. Sometimes I get an invite and the date, or location, won’t be included. These are important factors for my decision making process.

Usually when I’m making plans, finding a date and time is the most complicated part. Rather than dozens of messages to coordinate something, I always think that this part could be easily accomplished with a quick phone call to compare schedules IRT (in real time). I delude myself into thinking that a phone call will be the fastest and most direct way.  However, most of the time coordinating the phone call takes so long, that I eventually resort back to a volley of emails or text messages to confirm details.

Here’s a classic example. Last month, a friend of mine was in town for a few weeks. After messaging for days to coordinate a time to meetup, she sent me a message to call her to compare schedules. My immediate impulse was to message her for a good time to call.

In the end, we ended up sending messages to coordinate a time for a phone call to avoid sending a whole bunch of messages to confirm a meet up. With so many options, communication should be easy, but yet it feels more cumbersome.

Even though I would rather make plans by phone because it’s faster and more direct, it’s not always the most convenient. Electronic messages can be sent anytime, but usually phone calls happen during certain hours when people are awake.

Another convenience with electronic messages is they’re easier to deal with when I’m out. I can take my time to respond and noise doesn’t matter. Electronic messages can be read, and replied to, when I’m in a noisy place. I sometimes have trouble finding quiet places to make phone calls.

Not that long ago, it would have been easy for me to just pick up the phone and call someone. Now I feel like I have to message someone first to schedule a time to call. If I don’t, I risk a long game of phone tag. People are slow to return calls, but messages often get answered quickly.

The Plight of Punctuation

We’re evolving to “talk” to each other primarily through digital forms of communication such as messaging, chat, email, etc., with very little direct, personal contact. This already puts us at a disadvantage to understand what people really mean since so much is expressed non-verbally (i.e., facial expressions, body language, tone, inflection, etc.). Consequently, we’ve adapted our digital language to include things like capital letters, emojis, hashtags, and dozens of slang abbreviations and acronyms to compensate for what we’re missing from human-to-human communication.

On top of all of that, I feel challenged to try and interpret these jumbled messages without the benefit of punctuation. How am I supposed to make sense of messages without periods, commas, apostrophes, and question marks?  One little apostrophe can make a huge difference with some words (were vs. we’re, its vs. it’s). I can forgive the lack of semi-colons, since I barely understand when to use one.  But as for the more common punctuation marks, there’s no excuse.

I noticed on my phone’s keyboard that adding punctuation takes time. By default, my keyboard only offers me the option to add in a period.


If I want something different, I must press on the period for a couple of seconds until other options appear. And yet, I can easily access dozens of emoji with a simple tap on the smiley face (blue rectangle).

Over time, the extra effort adds up making it feel tedious, especially when I’m using different punctuation marks in rapid succession. The keyboard will retain whatever punctuation mark I used most recently by default, until I change it. I admit, sometimes I send a question without a “?” just because I can’t be bothered to add it in.

I appreciate having a keyboard with numbers and letters available. I’m optimistic that the next update will have a keyboard with letters, numbers, and a few of the most commonly used punctuation marks (e.g., periods, commas, question marks, exclamation marks, apostrophe). The strange thing is that when I first got my smartphone in 2013, punctuation used to be offered automatically with text messaging. After every word I would be offered an array of common punctuation options. Now I have to make an effort to add it in.

We now have so many options available to check and correct our grammar automatically. I expect better when it comes to writing on mobile devices.