Category Archives: Models

Examples we can productively study

The Caffeine Advantage (and a Caution)

Caffeine helps us capture a good thought when it drifts by. 

As I first noted here in 2015, many of us owe the completion of some projects calling for mental rigor to a certain level caffeine. Some may avoid it to sleep better. The rest of us can take heart that we may be ready to catch a thought when it drifts by. Even Johann Sebastian Bach understood the power of coffee, writing a comic opera about its addictive attractions. And some of his fugues unfold at Formula 1 speeds.

Second Thoughts Banner

It is heartening to learn that this addictive stimulant wins qualified support from a great composer as well as medical researchers, at least for three distinct reasons. First, new research suggests that It’s use correlates moderately with lower rates of dementia. Second, there is also new evidence that it may slightly extend our lives. In addition, and as already noted, it may help in completing difficult cognitive tasks. Regarding this third point, caffeine in coffee and tea can help in the challenging business of doing the work of connecting with others. It can enhance our urge to locate the best ways to make a complex idea or explanation stick. Can yet-unknown medicinal uses of essentials like pizza or donuts be far behind? I’m hopeful.

coffee amazon

As was reported in the Atlantic over a decade ago, caffeine “hones our attention in a hyper-vigilant fashion.” It also “boosts energy and decreases fatigue; enhances physical, cognitive, and motor performance; and aids short-term memory, problem solving, decision making, and concentration.”

We have more than a few studies to suggest that writers and others who create things can indeed benefit from the stimulation. Most of us are at least a little better in finding our thoughts when a degree of mental fog is washed away. For some, writing works better when we catch a morning wave of several cups. Others like Bach can work best at night, when the rest of the household is quiet and caffeine can revive some flagging energy.

As to the larger issue of dementia, there are no cures, but recent evidence indicates that caffeine and a regular routine that includes reading and writing may delay its cognitively isolating effects a little longer. A large study reported this year in the New York Times found that caffeine cut an experimental subject’s chances of dementia by about 20 percent.

Even with these advantages, there’s reason for some caution if a person’s work includes addressing an audience. The problem is that an activity that is essentially a kind of performance may trigger what amounts to a double dose of stimulation, given the natural increase of adrenaline that comes when we face others in a public setting. For most of us, a modest adrenaline rush is actually functional in helping us gain an edge in oral fluency. Like caffeine, adrenaline makes us more alert and maybe just a little smarter. But combining what are functionally two stimulants can be counter-productive. They can make a presenter wired tighter than the “C8” string at the top end of a piano. We all know the effects. Instead of the eloquence of a heightened conversation, we get a jumble of ideas that are delivered fast and with too little explanation. Add in a vocal pitch that will probably be higher than our natural range–along with a dry-throat from the diuretic effects of caffeine–and you may not be quite ready for prime time.

All of us are different. But to play the odds to your advantage, it is probably better to reserve the use of strong coffee for efforts of invention rather than vocal presentation.

Triangulating Toward the Truth

retochet

It is not enough for a thinking adult to remain captive to the highly corrupted spaces of video fantasists.

With media such as YouTube, we have reached a point where the presumption going forward will have to be that the content is fake until it is verified.  More and more images and audio are A.I. fabrications.

Last week I was briefly taken in by the YouTube post, since taken down by the platform, that had columnist George Will describing a supposedly sudden transformation within the Republican Congressional caucus. He described their separation from President Trump, and even the possibility of using the 25th Amendment to remove the President from office. The video looked like Will and more or less duplicated his usually clipped cadences.

The first clue that all might not be what it seems was the source, which was not his newspaper, The Washington Post, but some sort of A.I. group called “Inside the Union.” A second was that the words put into Will’s mouth were not quite what he would use at this moment in time. Only a “synthetic content” flag visible for a short time in the corner of the video indicated that it is an A.I. fabrication.

My attention was initially heightened because I hoped the sudden report might be true. Alas, no one else at the AP, the New York Times, or The Wall Street Journal was reporting anything like this supposed GOP insurrection. Clearly Mr. Will had become an unwilling avatar for someone else’s political agenda.

short black line

Tech leaders who present themselves as in the forefront of the race to the future haven’t even left the starting blocks in terms of controlling the veracity of their offerings.

As we know, A.I. technology is capable of more convincing fakes. It was only a matter of time until fake news would become ubiquitous across the political spectrum. As noted in an earlier post, we may be OK with images of a cat minding the fry grill at McDonalds. The joke is obvious. But we should be on guard when the likeness of a person with a curated reputation is hijacked in complete defiance of what they actually believe. Elon Musk’s Grok image generator has similarly been used repeatedly to create false and malicious images that can end up on other sites. And, obviously, X, YouTube and other platforms are not immune.  Tech leaders who like to present themselves as in the forefront in the race to the future haven’t even left the starting blocks when it comes to controlling the veracity of their offerings.

A person’s reputation for accuracy may be the most important character trait they have. Routine fakery should not be allowed to rob them of that. Whether we want to or not, all of us are going to have learn to do what journalists and prosecutors do to test the credibility of their sources.

Their method is sometimes called “triangulation,” where a given story is checked against other sources known for credible reporting. To be sure, this takes a little bit of time. As landmark movies about journalism remind us, investigative reporters usually need two or three sources to confirm that a narrative is accurate. Think of All the President’s Men (1976), Shattered Glass (2003) or Spotlight (2015). The related and honorable practice of fact-checking is also a tradition at major news outlets and legendary at The New Yorker. In addition, triangulation usually means getting out of the video media bubble and moving on to more reliable human and print sources. It is not enough for a thinking adult to remain in the highly corrupted spaces of video fantasists.

All of this is a reminder schools should be regularly teaching some version of a course in Evidence and sources in the middle and upper grades. Every citizen needs to know what high and low credibility looks like, as well as some of the basic rules of evidence, Navigating the swamps of digital media where anything can be faked is going to require cognitive screening skills that will have to become second nature.