…because I did warn you:  it’s Saturday, and I’m writing a blog post, because I’m on my way in to the office.

I think there was a brief moment in the middle of the day yesterday when the boss considered just keeping everything closed for the weekend, but then there were at least three people besides me and the “closer” who were planning to come in.  Since they are paid on commission (so extra work is an opportunity for them) I can’t feel too bad about having to come in, too.  As I wrote yesterday, it’s not as though I have anything better to do with my time.

Actually, today of all days, that’s not quite correct.  Today is the day of the first of the 60^th anniversary Doctor Who specials, which I mentioned yesterday.  But since that is supposed to be streaming on Disney Plus, I can watch it from work (things are often slow-ish on Satudays) just as easily as at the house, and I will probably be more comfortable at the office.  My desk chair is decent, whereas at the house I basically sit on the floor.

Now that we are past the main temptation holidays, at least until Christmas/New Years, I need to go back onto a stricter diet.  I find that my physical energy is much better when I’m controlling my input.  This might seem ironic, given that I’m restricting input of the most easily “usable” calories, but the biochemistry and physiology of this fact is entirely reasonable and well understood.

It does sometimes have a detrimental affect on my mood, decreasing my emotional energy somewhat—which I guess makes my sugar cravings/sweet tooth a bit akin to the addiction of someone who uses illicit drugs to “self-treat” an underlying mood disorder.  This shouldn’t be too surprising, since sugar triggers activity in the nucleus accumbens and related centers of the nervous system that is very similar to what cocaine and amphetamines do.

I also should just avoid alcohol—not because I have a big problem with it or anything, but because it doesn’t actually make me feel good, even in the moment, but I kind of expect it to do so, and by the time I realize, “Hey, this isn’t even helping me relax or making me feel good while it’s on board”, I’ve already bought myself some GI and neurological discomfort later.

Sorry, I know this is all boring.  In a way, though, everyone is boring to most other people, or at least not terribly interesting.  And many people who are apparently interesting to so many other people are actually astonishingly uninteresting to me.  For instance, though I recognize her talent and skill and brilliance, I have no particular interest in Taylor Swift’s career or music—except to recognize those stated attributes—and I certainly have no interest in her love life.  Yet, since I do follow the news fairly regularly, I cannot help but become aware of these things.

To be fair to her, she’s much more interesting than most celebrities*.

I suppose it’s a small price to pay for making sure that I get my news input from a variety of different sources to try to avoid bias—or, at least, to balance the biases against each other as much as I can.  I don’t generally like to take in commentary on news, so I avoid editorials; I can decide what I think about issues for myself once I have the data and don’t need pundits to tell me what they think I ought to think.  I’m only too aware of studies that have generally shown that such pundits’ predictions on various news events are no better than, and quite often significantly worse than, chance.

In other words, if you get your news from sources that editorialize, let alone from pundits, you’re actually worsening your likelihood of getting a good take on events in the world.  Why not just get a “magic 8-ball” and save yourself the trouble, while ironically improving your odds?

Mind you, there are people with expertise from whom I might be interested in hearing (or reading) their take on particular, narrow issues within their wheelhouse.  For science and related news, for instance, I go to a few specific science-related YouTube channels like Dr. Becky, and PBS Space Time, and Sabine Hossenfelder, and Sixty Symbols and Deep Sky Videos and Periodic Videos and Numberphile and Computerphile—those last five are all channels pioneered by Brady Haran, a remarkably intelligent and curious science and math journalist who gets experts to discuss science (and mathematical and computer-related) stories.  He asks very good questions.

I find that the mainstream media does just an unacceptably sloppy job at conveying science news, on average.  To be fair to them, the standard deviation of that sloppiness is pretty big, so some good work happens now and then, but it’s well into one small tail of the curve.  Sadly enough, even Scientific American has become a severe embarrassment to itself—and it’s even more embarrassing that the editors thereof don’t seem even to realize how embarrassing they’ve become.  I used to love that magazine, but it’s dead to me now.

Anyway, enough kvetching.  My train will be here soon, and I’ll be on my way to the office.  I hope to have at least one hour of today that is quite fun—the Doctor Who special—and I certainly always get some satisfaction from writing these posts, at least when it’s clear that people are reading them.  I hope you all have a good remainder of the weekend, and I will return Monday morning, barring the unforeseen.

*Even David Tennant, for instance, is mainly interesting only as the Doctor (or as Hamlet, or in one of his other roles).  Ditto for the other Doctors, and for musicians whose work I enjoy, and for writers I like to read, and even for scientists whose work I follow.  I guess it makes sense; people are most interesting when they’re doing what it is that they do that is exceptional.