#oneaday Day 301: Weird things from Lidl

My wife Andie and I have started doing a lot of our food shopping at our local Lidl. It's not really any further away from the Tesco and/or Sainsbury's we had typically been going to up until now, it's generally a bit cheaper, and there's something just a bit more fun about it, inasmuch as grocery shopping can ever be fun. Also, I am nearly forty-four years old, and thus several decades too old for people to take the piss out of me for going to Lidl.

For the unfamiliar, Lidl is a budget supermarket that, as well as having the usual supermarket groceries, tends to have a bunch of random crap down its middle aisles ranging from portable greenhouses to cookware via dog toys, and also has an aisle or two that have a rotating "themed" selection of foods, with the theme usually being a particular geographical area.

The one… challenge we have, if you want to call it that, is because Lidl has these interesting "novelty" sections each time you go, the temptation is to do that thing where you go to another country and visit their supermarkets, and then you want to do stupid shit like buy their version of Corn Flakes to see if they taste any different, stuff like that. I know I'm not the only one who does this because Andie does it too.

Okay, the Corn Flakes thing is an exaggeration, but the natural response to seeing unfamiliar but tasty-looking things in a supermarket is to go "ooh, that looks unfamiliar but tasty, I'll give it a try". You will then repeat this process approximately 10-15 times over the course of your complete visit to Lidl — along with deciding that you actually do need a new frying pan, and the one they had in the middle aisle really wasn't that unreasonably priced — and end up with a shopping bill a good £20-£50 more than if you'd just gone to Tesco.

This, I guess, is the genius of Lidl. They can position themselves as a budget supermarket, because they are, but the way they merchandise their products means that people are, on the whole, probably more likely to spend more than they normally would. This is a work of dastardly genius, but I'm not mad about it.

I like being able to do the weekly food shop and discover weird American snacks that are a cross between Wotsits and a bag of salted peanuts. I like knowing that when I'm buying bread and milk, I have the option to also purchase a chainsaw at the same time. I like the fact that I could show up to Lidl at any hour of the day, purchase a large pack of toilet paper, some lubricant and a large item of garden furniture and no-one would look twice at the contents of my trolley. Well, all right, they might in that last instance.

Also, you remember a while back I talked about my lifelong desire to rediscover the brownies the friends of my parents once served me in America one Halloween? Lidl's in-store bakery brownies are the absolute closest thing I've had to those brownies. I still don't think they're quite there, but they are, by far, the closest I've had to those brownies from all those years ago. And thus their merchandising genius can't be all that evil, can it? Unless they're lacing those brownies with something that makes you inherently more suggestible…

Oh well. Anyway, we need to do a food shop soon, so I will be intrigued to see what nonsense we come back with next time. Perhaps I'll even report on it. Bet you can't wait, no?

Want to read my thoughts on various video games, visual novels and other popular culture things? Stop by MoeGamer.net, my site for all things fun where I am generally a lot more cheerful. And if you fancy watching some vids on classic games, drop by my YouTube channel.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 298: Can you give up your phone?

I watched a good video earlier, and I recommend you do too if you have a spare 46 minutes and 4 seconds. It's by a chap called Eddy Burback, who makes videos that are just… about stuff. He always puts in a decent amount of research to the topics he talks about, he makes his discussions both interesting and personally relevant, and he's genuinely entertaining. If you've never watched his stuff before, this video is a great place to get to know him.

For those too lazy or disinclined to click that video and actually watch it, his aim was to go 30 days with his smartphone locked up in a safe so he couldn't use it at all. He wasn't denying himself access to the Internet, social media or anything like that, and he set up an old Mac laptop in the corner of his living room to access iMessage if he needed it, but only allowed himself a cumulative total of 5 minutes across the entire month to check it. He found, among other things, that after checking it once, he decided he didn't really need to check it at all.

The other things he did were deliberate, conscious steps "backwards". He set up a landline with an on-device answering machine. He made plans with friends over the phone, and then just showed up at the place he said he'd be at the time he said he'd be there, rather than constantly checking in via text or chat. He navigated by looking things up on the computer at home, then either writing things down in a notepad or just remembering them. He bought a physical pre-payment card to ride the bus rather than using an app. He handled electronic "tickets" for events and facilities such as the cinema by printing out a hardcopy.

And he seemed happy. I'm sure part of this was to aid with the storytelling — you tend to go into a project like this with a hypothesis that you kind of want to prove — but I don't doubt that spending a month without habitually, obsessively checking one's phone is a healthy thing to do. And as time goes on, I increasingly find myself wanting to do just that.

There are, as Burback talks about in the video, drawbacks. If you're not someone who likes talking on the phone, a landline isn't going to do you much good — and likewise if your friends tend to interact with you primarily via text message or chat applications. On top of that, landlines attract spam calls even more than mobiles do. This means you can very easily find yourself feeling even more isolated than you were already, which is probably counter-productive to the intent of the experiment: the aim is to get off your phone so that you can enjoy living your life a little more, and part of that is spending time with friends. If you can't get in touch with those friends via any means other than a text or chat message, that's a problem.

Most other things, there are ways round, though. For navigation, you can still print out maps and directions from sites like Google Maps and Mapquest (which, yes, still exists!). For convenient payments, most places accept contactless cards now, particularly since the pandemic almost outlawed cash altogether. For public transport, pre-paid cards exist, even if you have to go digging to a retailer who actually remembers where they keep them after not selling one for a decade or more. And for making arrangements with friends? Well, if they're good friends, they'll respect your lifestyle decision and be willing to interact with you and make plans via whatever means you are allowing, such as the phone; the fact that people were perfectly fine with adapting to his situation is one of the things Burback seemed most surprised about.

One thing Burback found was that without the constant connectivity a phone in your pocket brings, he was much less likely to cancel plans on a moment's notice or suddenly decide he wasn't in the mood for something. Instead, if he'd made plans, he'd made a commitment to another person, and not showing up for that commitment would be letting them down. Of course, sometimes these things are unavoidable — but that's why you still have means of communicating like the landline or email. It's not like locking your smartphone away completely cuts you off from society altogether. It just means that you are reachable on your own terms.

And I think that's the important thing. It allows you to really take control of your own life. It means you are not beholden to social media algorithms and the arbitrary schedules of whether or not "interesting" people are online posting mindless content that doesn't really enrich your life in any way. It means you're more likely to pick up a book and read it all the way through, instead of scrolling through 50 TikTok videos, not taking anything in from any of them.

Completely getting rid of your phone is obviously a drastic option. But the conclusion Burback came to was that while there are undoubted conveniences — and pleasures — to having a smartphone accessible at all times, having a month completely disconnected from it allowed him to develop a more healthy relationship with it. He was less inclined to doomscroll through social media, less inclined to experience the world through a camera app rather than his own eyes, and more inclined to having fewer but more meaningful interactions with the people who are important to him. And that, in turn, left a lot more time for doing things that he found enjoyable and pleasurable: watching movies, reading books, all that sort of thing.

I won't lie: that sounds nice. I have already cut back on using my phone a lot compared to what I used to do with it, but there are still times when I really resent its presence. Perhaps I should try a similar experiment sometime.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 296: Hefty project

I put together a new video this weekend. Just the one, because it turned out being quite a beefy one to put together, but hopefully you will appreciate the effort once it's live, which will probably be tomorrow.

Inspired by the recent launch of the Fun Factor Podcast, I thought it was high time I got back to my retrospective look back over the issues of Page 6/New Atari User magazine that I started a while back, but only got around to doing two issues of. The reason I've been putting off doing any more may well already be self-evident: each "episode" of this takes quite a bit of time and effort to put together!

I mean, to my satisfaction, anyway. I could just turn the camera on, rabbit on about what's in the magazine and leave it at that. But one thing I like about doing these videos — and the bit that's particularly time-consuming — is that I can supplement the magazine's contents with actual footage of the things that are being discussed, whether those are programming techniques or the latest games. Getting together all that footage as well as recording the actual run-through of the magazine takes quite a bit of time all together — but the end result is worth it. I like these videos.

If you haven't seen the previous ones, by the way, may I present them below. Here's a look at the very first issue of Page 6, including the back story of where it came from and what it means to me:

And here's a look at the second issue, in which we observe the rise of a mostly forgotten piece of '80s slang: the adjective "keen" to mean "cheap" or "eminently reasonable", which I had never come across before. Well, I mean, I had, because I'd read this issue before, but somehow it had never struck me as odd:

As I note in the videos, these old magazines are of tremendous importance to me, and I'm happy to have the opportunity to be able to share them with everyone through the medium of video. The ability to splice in footage of the stuff being talked about allows you to get some context that you might not have had just reading the magazine back in the day, and this is a part of retro gaming culture that I'm always happy to celebrate in one form or another.

The new episode is uploading and processing right now, so it should be live on YouTube tomorrow as soon as I've done a thumbnail and all the other gubbins for it. Watch out for it then — stop by my channel and subscribe if you haven't already. Go on. You know you want to.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 295: The sky isn't falling

I've had a pretty stressful week, the reasons for which I won't get into for now, but suffice it to say they were work-related issues. (Nothing anyone who cares should be worried about, I hasten to add; part of the problem is my own disproportionate sense of panic-stress to even slight mishaps. And that is, essentially, what happened this week.)

I don't like getting stressed out or annoyed at my current job because, for the most part, I actually like it and want to stay there. At this point I think it's the job I've held on to for the longest without going insane, but I do find myself worrying that The Way My Brain Is is just sort of fundamentally incompatible with… work.

I don't mean that I don't want to do anything, or that I just want to sit around all day doing nothing. I've been there, I've done that, and it's nowhere near as much fun as you might think. I am grateful for my current position, and I believe that if I were to leave (I'm not planning on doing so!) I would be missed, which is more than can be said for some positions I've held in the past.

But still, there's the stress. I'm beginning to feel like work-related stress may simply be an unavoidable part of literally every position out there, and that kind of sucks. Because if I can still be feeling the kind of stress that makes me not want to get out of bed in the morning at a job I actually like and want to keep, it really doesn't feel like there's a way to escape it at all, short of winning the lottery, jacking it all in and living purely for whatever you, specifically, want to do.

Even then, though, the modern world manages to bring in stress. If I were to win millions and be able to quit my job comfortably, I would almost certainly want to continue writing and making videos. And I would not be doing those in an attempt to make money; I would be doing it purely because I want to. But I just know from bitter experience even if you're doing something you absolutely love doing and expressing pure, unbridled enthusiasm for it, there's always someone lurking around a corner waiting to make your day miserable with an unpleasant comment or a wilful misinterpretation of something you say.

The only escape, really, is to completely cut yourself off from everything and live off the grid from a social perspective, only making use of the Internet for essential things. Because at this point, I feel like completely living without the Internet at all is probably impossible.

But anyway. The stress this week was not pleasant, but I survived it, and I need to tell myself every time something like this happens that the world is not, in fact, ending, regardless of anything that has happened. Instead, it seems that Shit does indeed Happen, whether or not you think it "deserves" to, and the only real way to stay standing is just to weather the storms that come your way every so often, learn any lessons that can be learned from the situation, and hopefully come out of the other end stronger.

That's what I should tell myself when this happens. But we all know that's probably not going to happen. The next time Stress Happens, it will have the exact same effect on me, and I will come to this same vaguely philosophical conclusion after the fact once again. It has happened before, and it will happen again.

Oh well. Something about recognising a problem is the first step and all that.

Time for bed, I think!

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 294: Microsoft Teams is where joy goes to die

Working from home is, on the whole, infinitely preferable to having to do a daily commute into an office to spend time with people I don't know very well or like all that much and attempt to find ways to look busy and/or enthusiastic about working on things I don't give a shit about. (To that I will also add: it is infinitely preferable to have a job you give a shit about, populated by people you like, which thankfully I have. I've paid my dues at shitty jobs full of shitty people.)

But there's one thing I have come to hate about working from home, and that is waking up of a morning and seeing Microsoft Teams notifications already waiting for me. It's my own fault, really, for allowing Teams onto my phone, but there are occasions when it's useful to be reachable when not sitting in front of the work computer, so there it is for now.

I hate Microsoft Teams. I don't really know why. It's not as if it's a completely broken, non-functional piece of software; by Microsoft's standards, it's reasonably not-bad, though like all their other modern pieces of software, it defies pretty much all interface standards which Microsoft set themselves with their own operating system, which continues to baffle me. Plus, as with everyfuckingthing else these days, "AI" is starting to creep into it with the ability to "add chatbots" to conversations.

I think it's just the utter joylessness of it as an application. It's a piece of software primarily designed for facilitating boring online meetings that only the person hosting them actually gives a shit about, and even with the inclusion of the ability to post GIFs in text chat (because, of course, what says "professional" more than copyright-infringing memes?) it just feels so incredibly po-faced at all times.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't want Teams to turn into Discord with its cutesy wutesy oopsy woopsy we made a fucky wucky update notices and gradual introduction of myriad stupid features no-one actually wants or needs. But it's also a program I just find depressing to open up.

And, as I say, I don't really 100% know why I feel that way. Functionally, it's inoffensive, if riddled with strange design decisions. Practically, it's useful for being able to converse with colleagues easily. And yet I still hate it. I hate its ability to intrude on things you're doing. I hate the fact people can just "call" you without you giving your consent. And, as I say, there are few things worse than waking up of a morning and seeing there are already a bajillion Teams notifications waiting for you.

Maybe I should just delete it from my phone and if people can't reach me until I'm at my computer, that's tough shit. I mean, that's no different from working in an office and no-one being able to reach me until I'm at my desk and within reach of my work phone, right?

Not that I ever answered my work phone when I actually had one in the few office jobs I've ever had, mind. Email or bust.

Anyway, I'm going to bed now. Notifications off!

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 292: Thriving within limitations

Most of you reading this who are at least A Certain Age will probably think back on your school days with varying degrees of fondness, but I suspect pretty much all of you are glad that those days are behind you for one reason or another — the chief one being the freedom you have once you are no longer constrained to an institution's timetable and rules.

As I get older, this is probably the rose-tinted nostalgia talking, but I increasingly miss that whole sense of structure that the school day had. I'm talking as a student here, not as a teacher; as a teacher, the school timetable was nothing but a source of stress, particularly when I forgot I was supposed to be "on duty" (whatever that actually means) and ended up on the receiving end of snarky comments from dickhead colleagues. But I digress.

No, I'm talking about the sense of structure you have when you are a student: the knowledge of exactly what is going to happen when for the day ahead, and the fact that you know your time is most likely going to be spent in at the very least a vaguely productive manner for the next 8 hours.

Sure, there were always the lessons that summoned up the inevitable sense of dread — Maths for me — and, of course, there was always the blind panic you'd feel when you realised you hadn't done the homework for the lesson that was scheduled for immediately after break, leading to frantic completion of said homework outside, leaning on a wall and hoping your teacher for the next period doesn't wander past and clock what you're doing.

But for the most part, it was nice to wake up of a morning and know what to expect. It was nice to have "favourite days" because that's when your best lessons were. It was nice to know exactly when you'd have the opportunity to work with your friends, or learn from a favourite teacher.

If this all sounds insufferably swotty, I don't know what to tell you; outside of some bullying incidents (where I was the victim, I hasten to add) I mostly thrived in secondary school in particular, and I enjoyed having things that I was good at, and which got acknowledged as things I was good at. Because heaven knows I wasn't "cool", and I knew that wasn't likely to change, ever.

I often find myself thinking whether the daily grind of work could be made better if I split it into discrete "periods" like the school day, with specific times set aside to do specific things. I suspect it actually might, but actually developing that schedule has been my sticking point. As a lot of my work is pretty self-directed, I'd be responsible for both setting and sticking to that schedule, and I'm not sure that's what worked well for me back when I was at school. Rather, I think I thrived because I had a schedule set by someone else, and during that schedule I was told exactly what to do, and exactly what was expected of me — again, by someone else.

I know part of "growing up" is being able to do those things for yourself, but lest we forget, I am what is politely termed these days as "neurodivergent", and thus I find myself wondering if I wouldn't just be better off in a situation where someone sits me down, says "9am-10am, you're doing this. 10am-11am, you're doing this. Then go have a bit of a break. Then 11.15-12pm, you're doing this…" and so on.

Sure, we have weekly Teams meetings (God, I hate Teams meetings… scratch that, I hate meetings in general) but those aren't exactly what one might call "engaging" in the same way a good old-fashioned school lesson was. Perhaps I was just fortunate enough to have, on average, very good teachers, and in other places, school is, in fact, ideal preparation for a life of adult misery in Teams meetings. But I doubt it.

Anyway, perhaps I should actually make an effort and try the "schedule" thing for myself. Who knows, it might actually work? Can't hurt to try, right?

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 290: Foxit? More like Fuckit

Good one, I know.

As I alluded to yesterday, I've been spending a bit of time collecting together scans of old computer and video games (and Computer & Video Games) magazines with a mind to sticking them on an old Kindle Fire tablet to use as a portable "magazine reader". As part of that process, today I found myself looking for PDF readers, both for Windows and for Android.

I wanted one for Windows so that I could potentially use it to make some videos about the magazines I don't have hard copies of, and neither Chrome nor Firefox's built-in PDF handling quite does what I wanted. (Chrome, notably, still lacks the ability to display two-page spreads but assume there is a "cover page", meaning it fucks up magazine and book layouts and there's nothing you can do about it.) So I did what any normal person does, and I Googled it, even knowing that Google itself has been gradually going down the toilet.

After skipping past the fucking useless AI summary and sponsored links, I clicked on an article that was absolutely bullshit SEO bait ("The best free PDF readers for Windows!") but was at least from a vaguely reputable outlet, TechRadar. This article informed me that Foxit was the best PDF reader for Windows.

Great, I thought. I've used Foxit before in the past. I doubt it's changed that much.

EH. WRONG.

Foxit has enshittified itself beyond all recognition. Not only has it made the inexplicable decision to model its UI on Microsoft's odious "Ribbon" interface, it also boots up with a floating "AI" button that you can't get rid of without some tinkering deep in the options and then quitting and restarting the program.

Let's take each of these in turn. First, the Ribbon.

I hate the Ribbon. I've despised the Ribbon ever since Microsoft introduced it in Microsoft Office 2007, and every time I use a program that uses this obnoxious piece of crap instead of normal toolbars and drop-down menus, I make a specific effort to find something else to use instead.

The Ribbon is an eyesore. The Ribbon takes up far too much space on the screen. The Ribbon's myriad tabs and huge buttons make it a massive chore to find simple functionality, since each tab is organised with no real care or attention. It doesn't conform to any standard functionality, so you'll find the same functions in different places in different applications, and it feels the need to take over the entire fucking window when you want to do something as simple as open, save or close a file, or look at the program's settings page.

In Foxit's specific case, I am honestly struggling to think of why a supposedly "lightweight" PDF reader has enough functions in it to warrant having a multi-tab Ribbon. I need a PDF reader to do one thing: read PDFs. Occasionally I might need to copy and paste images and text from a PDF, and the ability to take a snapshot of a section of a PDF and save it as an image is always nice. But I do not need multiple tabs worth of disorganised functionality, making it a chore to do something as simple as display two pages side by side and let me flip through the entire document like… well, like a magazine or book.

This is what people are talking about when they say "the computer" is constantly being enshittified. Things that worked perfectly well are being "updated" for no other reason than to say that they have been updated. Simple, straightforward, intuitive interfaces that remained standard conventions for decades are being uprooted in favour of borderline abusive design that forces you to click through page after page of crap in order to find the one thing you're looking for. And for what? To say that the company is "growing"? To say that the company is "innovating"? Fuck that. Just make me a fucking PDF reader that lets me read PDFs.

Which brings me to the "AI" button. I do not need a fucking AI button in my PDF reader. If I have opened something in a PDF reader, I intend to read it or print it. I am not going to ask a fucking chatbot that gets things wrong an average of a third of the time you ask it things to "summarise" the thing that I'm trying to read either for information or pleasure. I am not going to ask a fucking chatbot that gets things wrong an average of a third of the time you ask it things to "analyse" the document or figure out "trends". I am a human being. I have a brain. I can do these things myself. I do not need "AI" to "do it more quickly". Believe it or not, I enjoy reading. I enjoy researching. I'm not so fucking lazy that I need a fucking chatbot (&c. &c.) to take the human part out of the equation. Because that's just depressing.

Things weren't much better on the Android front. I tried Foxit on Android as well, just out of curiosity, and sure enough, while it lacked the Ribbon (the one benefit of a phone screen is that it's too small for such a shitty interface) it still had the odious little AI bubble. So I uninstalled it immediately.

If you've been in a similar situation at any point, may I recommend Sumatra PDF for your desktop PDF reading needs, and PDF viewer lite for Android. Both of those seem to fit my needs perfectly well right now: no ads, no subscriptions, no Ribbon, no AI, no bullshit. Just a thing to read PDFs with. Which should not be a hard thing to find in 2025. But apparently this is the world we've built for ourselves.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 285: On that thing what Gareth Southgate said

Former England manager and renowned penalty whiffer Sir Gareth Southgate recently delivered the prestigious Richard Dimbleby lecture, as reported by The Guardian (and doubtless some other places, but The Guardian is where I saw it).

The thrust of Southgate's speech was the plight of young men, and how they are, I quote, "feeling isolated, grappling with their masculinity and with their broader place in society".

I agree with this part, though I'd probably broaden it to "most men" rather than just "young men". We are encountering a problem I could have predicted a decade ago: that strides forward in progressive attitudes are leaving some men feeling somewhat cast adrift.

This isn't to say that the broad shifts in progressive attitudes are in any way wrong, I hasten to add, whatever the current United States administration might be attempting to do right now. No, on the contrary, it's good that, on the whole, we have much less sexism, racism, homophobia and transphobia than we used to have. We haven't eliminated any of these problems, unfortunately, but progress has been made.

As part of all that happening, though, there was a certain amount of demonisation of privileged groups in society. Not universally, by any means, and again, I'm not saying that white men deserve to be "better" than anyone else. But for a good decade or more, men have been facing something of an existential crisis as society attempted to "make up" for their historical position of privilege. And this, in turn, has led to things like the loneliness epidemic among young men, the alt-right pipeline and all that business. That's a thing that has happened. The question is why.

Southgate argued that these men "spend more time online searching for direction and are falling into unhealthy alternatives like gaming, gambling and pornography". This quote, unsurprisingly, is the one that has been largely taken out of context and objected to. And I don't disagree with the people who did that. While gambling is hard to defend, I firmly believe there's a place in society for both gaming and pornography, and that neither of them are inherently evil things. The problem, as with so many things, is the groups that spring up around those things.

Which, as it happens, is what Southgate's speech went on to criticise.

"This void is filled by a new kind of role model who do not have their best interests at heart," he said. "These are callous, manipulative and toxic influencers, whose sole drive is for their own gain. They willingly trick young men into believing success is measured by money or dominance, never showing emotion, and that the world — including women — is against them. They are as far away as you could possibly get from the role models our young men need in their lives."

The key nuance that Southgate is missing here is that while some "influencers" (ugh, I hate that word, but I'll use it for the sake of quotations in this instance) in the gaming, gambling and pornography spaces are having a harmful effect on young men's wellbeing, this is not a universal thing by any means. (Again, I'd make the argument that gambling is the hardest to defend here, but even that's by no means a universal negative — look at things like The National Lottery and the charitable organisations attached to them.) I hate to be all "not all [x]", because people seem to take that as you having lost an argument, but it really is the case in this instance.

What he's getting at is exactly what I described above (and back in this post) — disenfranchised young men are finding what they believe to be "role models" in figures like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson, who are saying the things they want to hear, and reinforcing harmful attitudes. And these figures "recruit" from fields that young men are interested in — like gaming, gambling and pornography.

The nuance is that gaming, gambling and pornography aren't themselves to blame for the existence of Tate, Peterson and others like them, but rather they just happen to be where figures like that found their most fertile markets. Being into gaming, gambling or pornography doesn't mean you're immediately going to get sucked down the alt-right pipeline into a life of perpetual fury at the world — but I can see how that happens, as I've described elsewhere.

I think it's important to highlight the positives of these things. Gaming, in particular, is probably the fastest growing creative medium in the world, and is a truly democratised form of art. Anyone from a solo independent developer to a huge multinational corporation can make a game, and the market will support that. Granted, it's harder for a solo independent developer to make as much of a splash as a huge multinational corporation with an army of marketing specialists, but it's not impossible — look at stuff like Vampire Survivors and even Minecraft's origins.

Gambling, as I say, is harder to defend, but not impossible. While a gambling addiction can be utterly devastating to individuals and families alike, I don't see the harm in an occasional flutter on the National Lottery, particularly when the money is going to Good Causes™. Sports betting, I'm not even going to try and defend. But you hopefully see my point.

And pornography. While there has always been exploitation and suffering surrounding the production of pornography, today we have a society where sex workers aren't treated as something shameful to be swept under the rug, but where they have meaningful contributions to online discourse, and where the most prolific, uh, performers can make a surprising amount of money, often for just posting videos online. We have artists who focus on drawing pornography as a means of self-expression, or to cater to the tastes of their audience. And that audience gets to explore their fantasies and learn about their tastes in a safe environment.

All of these fields have their negative, toxic ends. "Gamer" discourse surrounding the recently released Assassin's Creed Shadows, for example, shows that we still have a lot of work to do with regard to racism. I don't know anything about the gambling influencer sphere, but it doesn't seem like… something I want to get involved with. And, of course, pornography still has the exploitation element, even in seemingly democratised scenarios such as OnlyFans.

But then… doesn't anything have its toxic element? Southgate's own field of football has its own problems with racism, homophobia, xenophobia, hooliganism and violence, but I don't see him acknowledging that. It feels just a little disingenuous to specifically pick out the things he did in his speech; it's approaching "moral panic" territory, and while there are things we can work on with regard to all of those fields, I don't think it's justified to make blanket statements like "gaming is an unhealthy alternative to having a father figure".

Toxic influencers are a different issue to the games industry in general. The games industry has its own problems that it still needs to grapple with, but it is not a direct, straight line from gaming to Andrew Tate. Southgate argues that "success is about much more than the final score; it isn't a straight line, and it's not a single moment". The same is true for negative cycles, too; you can't point to one single thing and go "that is the cause of all my woes".

For my part, I believe the increasingly abusive practices of algorithm-driven social media are more harmful than anything else when it comes to the situation men find themselves in these days. Because social media is how those harmful messages get out and how they are spread — often with the full approval of the platform holders, because they know the most toxic waste of the Internet is that which gets the most "engagement". But social media is just part of a much more complicated picture, and one we could do well with trying to zoom out and see the entirety of.

Men are suffering. Men are feeling isolated. Men are grappling with their masculinity and with their broader place in society. Gaming and pornography, like anything else, within reason, can be a comfort for those men when engaged with in moderation. They are not the enemy. It is, however, correct to say that toxic "influencers" are a real problem, so that is what we should perhaps be looking at more closely.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 283: We should probably be resisting generative AI more than we are

There was a good piece by 404 Media on "AI slop" today. Author Jason Koebler described the issue as AI slop being a "brute force attack on the algorithms that control reality", and goes on to explain how those taking advantage of AI are exploiting social media algorithms to such a degree that platforms are now flooded with this garbage, making it hard to find 1) anything made by a real person and 2) anything made by someone you might actually want to connect with.

There is zero value to this stuff, other than self-fulfilling engagement. Presumably the long game is to build up "the numbers" with this shit, then sell the accounts, or make bank off impressions-based ad revenue. And the platform holders don't give a shit; as Koebler points out in his piece, it seems like Mark Zuckerberg actively wants the experience on Facebook to be real humans arguing over AI-generated slop rather than anything real and meaningful.

And I don't understand why we're letting this happen. Not only on social media, but in more "traditional" industries, too. It's happening to a frightening degree in publishing, with myriad "get rich quick" schemes fundamentally being based on churning out multiple AI-generated books every week (or even day) and then profiting off, let's face it, vulnerable people who aren't able to tell the difference between garbage churned out by a robot and something written by an actual human being.

As Koebler puts it, "there is a dual problem with this: it not only floods the Internet with shit, crowding out human-created content that real people spend time making, but the very nature of AI slop means it evolves faster than human-created content can, so any time an algorithm is tweaked, the AI spammers can find the weakness in that algorithm and exploit it."

At the moment, there are a few common responses to generative AI:

"I love generative AI! The genie is out of the bottle, so if you're resisting it you're a Luddite who isn't embracing the latest technological innovations!"
"Generative AI is just a tool that people can add to their arsenal, like digital art packages. I can't really tell you how or why that's a good thing, but I heard someone else say it so I'm saying it too."
"Generative AI might be useful in certain circumstances, but I can't really tell you what they are because no-one really knows or can offer specific, concrete examples that aren't prone to hallucinations to such a degree to make them worthless."
"Generative AI sucks balls and I hate it."

I'm somewhere towards the bottom of that list, leaning towards hating it and very much wanting it to go away. At present, I am disinclined to trust the people who claim it will be "revolutionary" for things like medicine, because of the amount of times it fucks simple things up, still. I am also concerned for the field of programming, because as more and more junior coders show up who are only capable of feeding prompts into an AI, not actually doing (and checking!) the coding themselves, we're going to have a real problem on our hands with software development.

At the same time, I'm sure there are some worthwhile use cases for a means of communicating with a computer using natural language. I mean, hell, look at Star Trek; the assumption there was that you could just say "Computer" like you say "Alexa" today, then rattle off an often fairly abstract task for it to complete, and it would do it. That is, presumably, the goal.

But AI isn't there yet, not by a long shot, which is why ChatGPT costs $200 a month for a subscription and can't really tell you what it's for, let alone how to stop it making stupid mistakes, and in the meantime the companies involved in all this shit are burning through both money and the planet's natural resources in pursuit of something which might, in fact, be impossible. "Agents" are coming, apparently, but all we've seen of them so far is making things that are already pretty straightforward to do on the Web (like grocery shopping) actively more cumbersome, and OpenAI's "deep research" tool is utterly laughable at this point, pulling out citation-free forum posts and SEO-optimised slop ahead of actual, worthwhile information written (and reviewed) by humans.

You, reading this, almost certainly know all this, and perhaps you've even read or shared some articles talking about the problems with AI slop and the problems that is causing all over the Internet. But what have you done about it? Because I feel like we should be doing more about it, rather than just pointing and tutting at it, going "whoo, lad, that generative AI sure is a bit shit, isn't it? Someone should do something about it."

The trouble, of course, is that it's difficult to do anything meaningful about it, particularly when big corporate entities like Microsoft are the ones forcing it onto people through things people use every day like Windows, Office 365, and even the bloody Xbox. I mean, sure, you can find ways to disable it when it does show up, but these workarounds often end up circumvented by the corporations, meaning you need to faff around even more to get rid of the shit. And sure, you can install Linux, but that carries its own burden of needing to know how to do that. Which you and I might be comfortable doing, but what about people who use computers more casually; those who don't know how they work, but just want to be able to get on with simple tasks without intrusive AI features popping up every few seconds?

All we can do, really, is make a specific effort not to use generative AI tools when there are other alternatives available. I will never, ever use generative AI on this site, MoeGamer or my YouTube channel to produce words, scripts, images, thumbnails or videos, however tempting it might be as a "quick fix" to get something done. If that means there are things I either can't do or would have to pay a specialist to be able to do, I will either go without the thing or pay a specialist. Or perhaps even learn how to do the thing myself.

That's a crucial one, I think. Over the years, I've learned how to do a lot of things on computers simply by running into an issue I don't know how to solve, researching it myself and learning how to deal with it. Some of that knowledge I've retained, some of it fell out of my brain the moment I finished using it, but on the whole I've had a net gain on knowledge simply through running into problems and taking the initiative to learn how to fix them myself. I suspect many people who grew up with computers throughout the '80s and '90s are the same.

I'm not going to tell you what to do. But I am going to tell you what I'm doing:

I will not use ChatGPT to research anything, when perfectly good information is available through well-established, reliable, trustworthy and peer-reviewed sources both online and offline.
I will not use AI image or video generation for anything, period. If I need an image or video of something, I will produce it myself, search for a usable (and suitably licensed) stock or otherwise publicly available image or video, providing credit where appropriate, or just not use that image or video.
I will not use AI voice generation to make a "famous" voice say something it never said. Even if it's really funny. I will freely admit to having done this in the past (only among friends), but that was before we really knew or understood the numerous negative impacts that generative AI has on both the environment and on culture.
I will not use AI to create content for the sake of content. I write here because I like writing. I write on MoeGamer because I like writing about games. I make videos because I like making videos. I am not entitled to a "share" of the Internet based on the volume of stuff I churn out, nor am I entitled to be able to make a living from it. I will not pollute the Internet with meaningless slop.

Someday, there may be a valid use case for generative AI. I am open to that. Right now, I do not believe that is there, and I believe the continued proliferation of generative AI online is actively harmful to the Internet specifically, and human culture more broadly.

It needs to stop. But I'm concerned the "genie in a bottle" people are right, and that now we've started this process of enshittifying the entire Internet, we can't stop it again.

But we can make our own little corners of the Internet a safe haven away from the deluge of sewage. And that's what I'll continue to do.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 280: Connecting to oneself

I missed yesterday, but in my defence I also wrote over 2,000 words about EXPELLED!, so it's not as if I didn't write anything. I just forgot to write anything here before I went to bed. Oh well, not the first time it's happened and it almost certainly won't be the last time, either.

Anyway, today I thought I'd write something about a blog post I read yesterday from Norm of My Bad Take Space. The thrust of Norm's piece is that blogs played an important role in the development of the Internet, and their apparent decline is a significant loss for self-expression, because social media just isn't the same. Blogs are useful not only for connecting to other people, but also for connecting with oneself. I, as is probably abundantly clear already if you've spent any time over here whatsoever, agree heartily with this assessment.

One of the things that pisses me off about supposed modern "best practice" on the Internet is the assumption that people won't read anything too long, won't watch anything too long and don't have the attention span to devote to one thing for more than about 30 seconds at most. It pisses me off not because it's true, which it, regrettably, is, but because this is a problem entirely of our own creation. We spent so long assuming that this is how people behave that we normalised it. And now we're stuck in a rut where the only (supposedly) palatable content for people to consume is short, snappy videos of someone yelling at the camera.

Except… no. I cannot be the only person out there who detests attention-deficit content culture. I really like it when I discover something interesting and thoughtful to read online — like Norm's blog, for example — and I find myself getting annoyed when I read a piece from a news site and it just sort of seems to fizzle out before it gets to any sort of point, which seems to be an increasingly common occurrence these days.

There is a place for this sort of thing, and the apparent popularity of things like Ed Zitron's Where's Your Ed At? newsletter/blog on the shittiness of modern tech and the "rot economy" gives me a certain amount of hope, but it's still not quite where we were. We're not quite back to a point where someone can just start a blog, use it to post their long-form thoughts about life, the universe and everything, and people will read it. If you start a "newsletter" these days, it needs to be about something.

Now, I've said numerous times before that this blog isn't here for any reason other than because I like writing on it; it's certainly not here as an engagement farm or a means of earning ad revenue. (You will, hopefully, notice that there are no ads.) But I still find it a little strange to consider that a few years back (probably closer to a decade at this point, upsettingly) I was getting maybe three figures' worth of visitors a day here, while today I'm lucky to break 10.

While I don't really care about the figures, what that lack of views means is that this blog doesn't act very well as a means of starting conversations any more. When I was getting a couple of hundred people a day visiting, chances are that at least one of those viewers (many of whom were regulars) would read what I'd written and have something to say about it, and from there we could have a nice little chat in the comments.

Alternatively, someone I know enough to have on an instant messaging service might pop up and say "hey man, I read your blog, let's talk about that". That doesn't really happen any more, outside of a few notable occasions. And even in the case of that link, that really only got people talking because I made a specific effort to get it in front of certain people that I actually wanted to read it.

To put it another way, while this blog remains great for connecting with myself, the connecting with others part has become significantly more challenging.

I don't really know what can be done about this, if anything. One of the things I used to like about writing this blog… well, no. One of the things I still do like writing about this blog is expressing things that I find difficult or outright impossible to say "out loud" to someone's face. The "expressing myself" part hasn't changed, but with the lack of readers, those things that I confess or express simply aren't getting to the eyes of the people I might actually want to confess or express those things to, thereby making the whole thing a little less useful as a means of communication than it used to be.

But times change, I guess, and I just haven't kept up with them. And I don't really have any desire to. I find TikTok and YouTube Shorts distasteful, distracting and uncomfortable to watch, and feel actively repulsed any time I see a vertical video thumbnail that is just someone with their nose pressed up against their phone camera yelling something. That's not how I want to express myself, and I don't feel that we should abandon an entire medium such as long-form writing just because something else is popular.

When I trained to be a teacher, one of the things that was impressed on us repeatedly was the fact that different people learn in different ways. Some folks learn visually, by looking at things. Some folks learn aurally, by having things told to them. Some folks learn kinaesthetically, by doing things. And some folks learn best when given a book and told to study it themselves. The same is completely true for communication and self-expression. While some folks doubtless think the short-form video revolution is the best thing ever for their personal preferred form of self-expression, those of us who, like me, have always preferred writing our thoughts down in long form are left a bit out in the cold. The two (along with any other forms of communication and self-expression) should be able to coexist and thrive, and it's frustrating that they don't.

I don't know what else I can really do at this point, honestly, other than continuing to write here because I still find it valuable to do so, and perhaps sharing what I've written on the one form of social media I actually use a little bit: Bluesky.

Anyway, that's that for today. I'm off to go have a nice relaxing weekend, and hopefully remember to write something for "today" a little later! Have a pleasant Saturday.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.