I’m re-reading “The Case for Keto”. I re-read this one a lot. It has a great group feeling while reading, as in “some people just can’t eat carbs, and that includes you and me”, e.g. the author too. “The message should be straightforward: Carbohydrate-rich foods are fattening. Or to complicate it slightly such that naturally lean people might more likely understand: For those of us who fatten and particularly those who fatten easily, it’s the carbohydrates that we eat—the quantity and the quality—that are responsible. The relevant mechanism appears to be simple, as well: Carbohydrate-rich foods—grains, starchy vegetables, and sugars—work to keep insulin elevated in our circulation, and that traps the fat we eat in our fat cells and inhibits the use of that fat for fuel.” ...

I’m re-reading Gary Taubes books. I re-read them, and similar books, about once per year to brainwash myself to stay off the simple carbs. It seems to only stick for about 6-9 months before I need a reminder re-brainwashing. I’m lean, but it takes work. At core, calories in, calories out (CICO) works, but there is an undeniable level above that and it’s a level of simple carbs. For whatever reason, my frame fattens quickly when I eat them and staying lean requires complete abstinence. ...

I was joking to my wife that people will get sick of AI writing and will push back with a reactive style. Something like impressionistic and abstract art pushing back against polished realism. We have seen this with music as well, the preference for analogue vinyl records over CDs. Or the preference for being disconnected like CD and tape walkmans over streaming. Jokes often have a kernel of truth, I think some version of this will happen. ...

I just read pg’s latest essay “What to do”. It’s great, as always. He gives the generally good base advice of: “One should help people, and take care of the world.” He then goes on to suggest: “Make good new things.” Clumsy phrasing, but great advice. The rest of the essay mops up. I can’t argue. But I was thinking about this myself, personally. For me, I follow the maxim: ...

I’m revising my next novella. And it’s coming out dark. Each revision is even darker. I’m reminded of Steven Pressfield in “Do the Work”: My friend Paul is writing a cop novel. He’s never written anything so ambitious—and he’s terrified. “The story is coming out dark,” he says. “I mean twisted, weird-dark. So dark it’s scaring me.” Paul wants to know if he should throttle back. He’s worried that the book will come out so evil, not even Darth Vader will want to touch it. ...

I’m re-reading Natalie Goldberg’s Writing Down the Bones. Like her Wild Mind, it’s less on tactics and more on the mindset of a writer and the writer life. The books make you feel okay with the disgust you have for your own writing and self-loathing you feel almost continuously. Or maybe that’s just me. I have internalized an early chapter in the book: “Writing as a Practice”. You write every day. It’s what you do. And the more you do it, the more it be comes a habit and hopefully the better you get. ...

I just reread Jeff VanderMeer’s Wonderbook yesterday. It’s great fun, lots of useful advice. It’s also a beautiful book. The section on revision was particularly helpful to me right now. I try to jam everything I can think of in my first draft/s so and trim it back later. Jeff agrees: “Exactly because revision combines analysis and redeploying your creativity, most things you get wrong in your first draft can be fixed in revision, especially as you gain experience. Usually, however, it is easier if you have too much in your first draft rather than too little; mangled can be altered more readily than the invisible.” ...

I recommend reading (or listening) to AI 2027. Then consume (watch/listen) the most recent episode of the Dwarkesh podcast. It’s a huge amount of work. The site is beautiful. The implications, if accurate, terrible. The authors are very impressive and Daniel Kokotajlo’s What 2026 looks like written in 2021 is very impressive (it’s probably more than survivorship bias). Yes, it feels like science fiction in places, but it’s all very plausible to (naive) me. ...

I’ve been fighting an epic struggle with my LLM friends on some writing, and failing mostly. My mistake was trying to one-shot or two-shot the piece. I loaded in all of the context in structured sections (3k or 5k words), ask for a plan for a piece of writing, then ask it to follow the plan and all the context and write the piece. And every variation I tried failed. The writing was TERRIBLE! So bad. ...

I just finished Richard Dawkins’ 2024 book “The Genetic Book of the Dead: A Darwinian Reverie”. Another great book. Dawkins rarely misses, although the older I get the more I want a tl;dr. This was a shorter book of his, but it felt a little repetitive and a little long. Anyway, the premise is that you can look at the genes of something alive as a snapshot of what the pressures of its evolutionary past look like. From the genes, we could reconstruct the environment that shaped the current instance of the creature or plant or whatever you. ...