Efficiency for self.

on taking time for self, scooter dumpster fires

Welcome back to Erin for Tech, a newsletter about the ethics of tech things on the internet — written by me, Erin Fuss.

Erin for Tech is moving to a biweekly publishing schedule to better serve you more in-depth content, and more interviews with creative people.

If you were forwarded this newsletter, sign up for your own subscription here:

Send questions, comments, tips, and complaints to erin@erinfortech.com


Building to Recharge

We start our mornings fully charged, but as we find our energy levels running low as the day unfolds, we top up with coffee, energy drinks or drugs. On the weekend, we dedicate time and money to recharging: yoga, meditation, silent retreats – there’s a whole economy surrounding it. But the great irony is this: we recharge to avoid burning out … so that we can work longer and more efficiently in service of the very system that is draining our energy. 
- the Correspondent

The older I’ve gotten, the more I’ve realized the importance of recharging. (Admittedly, hence the delay in the latest newsletter — between a nasty cold, and taking time to recharge and recover from that, I got behind 😞). And as I’ve gotten older, I’ve removed a few things from my plate, and truly enjoyed doing nothing.

And that’s okay. But, as this post called out, maybe we should spend time recharging for ourselves, not just for our work selves. And given the recent COVID-19 scares, this is more important than ever. In times of a pandemic, simply existing can be traumatizing.

Yet another scooter company? 🤔

Usain Bolt. Yes, that Usain Bolt, of Olympic lore AKA fastest man on the earth, cofounded a scooter company, named Bolt. And recently, they closed a Series A funding round, with a total investment of $30 million.

But do we really need another scooter company? Has this model officially been piloted to death yet? Have we learned absolutely nothing from Lime? Because I surely have.

Things I’ve learned

Read more about Bolt, or order a Razor scooter here. IMHO, they’re way cooler.

Maybe journalists should kill their story more often?

It’s no question that I’m a fan of the Correspondent. I initially heard about this through my professor, Jay Rosen. (And for those of you shaking your heads saying I’m drinking the kool-aid, sometimes quite possibly, but there are plenty of things we disagree about as well). But the reason why is they’re so damn…. transparent!

Recently, journalist Irene Caselli wrote that she killed her story on male and female brains. And at first, I thought this was more of a gender binary thing. But in fact, its an even more important reason.

She shared this

graph originally created by researcher Simon Wardley, published in the Correspondent

And explained about where she’s at as a journalist, and what she’s learning, and who’s telling the story better than her. And its not because she’s a bad journalist, or even a bad researcher, it’s because she recognizes what is good.

It’s a beautiful piece, you should go read it.

But then take a moment, how many times have you read something and been like, “damn, that was stupid, XYZ does it better?” Or wished that they would have talked to an actual legitimate source rather than the loudest person in the room.

What if we all did that more often? Not just journalists, but everyone.


Quick Links