Category Archives: Life

Your blog category

Smoking and carbon emissions

When dealing with a global issue with local variations of a problem and the need to change culture the way we are trying to do with climate change, there are important lessons we can learn about curbing smoking, especially here in Singapore.

Before we go there however, I want to first envision a state of the world where carbon emissions become more like stigmatised like smoking. Carbon-emitting industries would be like the cousin or uncle we have who is our relative and we can’t quite shake off but still be puffing away, causing our clothes to smell and our lungs to be polluted. We would want them to smoke far from us but they will inevitably bring that odour and whiff of smoke, and also ash back to us.

As employers, we would have competent workers who are smokers – and while we know that they might be taking smoke breaks, we still need to keep them as they are largely productive. So they will continue to exist, but we can treat them a little badly to nudge them to reduce their carbon emissions. Currently, we’re definitely not doing enough.

Some ideas on how to treat the carbon-intense companies/industries like smokers:

  • Labels could be slapped on all of the products and service invoices of these companies – imagine going down the aisle of supermarkets and seeing these labels on the fresh beef packaging.
  • These industries could be made to situate together (maybe within a yellow box); and if they are not in that given zone, they cannot run processes that emits carbon dioxide above certain threshold.
  • Tax them based on escalating, progressive carbon tax rates; this is above
  • These companies are not allowed to emit carbon dioxide until they registered their business in the jurisdiction and operated for at least 21 years.

So consider if we are doing enough for climate change; compared to public health. Both concerns survival of a nation, of the entire mankind.

What would a net zero business in your industry look like?

We spend a lot of time thinking about emission reduction. And it is all based on considering the existing state of affairs and how to move ahead from here. So we often consider how a process can be optimised to use less energy, or to use alternative materials. So a decarbonisation roadmap plays an important role in considering an existing business and how carbon emissions can be gradually eliminated from the workings of the business to transit it towards a low-carbon economy.

But just as important is how we can envision a new business to perform exactly the functions of an existing business but with zero carbon emissions. It is no longer about mapping or developing emissions baselines but rethinking how the same process can be achieved without emitting as much carbon. It is rethinking processes altogether. Heck, it might even involve rethinking products.

Major oil & gas companies are now refashioning themselves as provider of energy, competing with their customers who are power generators. Or they can think of continuing to supply the electricity generation players by going into mining and extracting of minerals and metals that are needed for wind turbines and solar panels. Or they could reconsider that they are actually logistics players ferrying molecules around and look into dealing more with chemicals transport. They could even consider themselves producers or inventors of new materials.

This exercise can be repeated for other industries and we could potentially have very interesting outcomes.

Do less work

This is not about quiet quitting. It is about doing good work. Sometimes you can only do this amount of good quality work and no more. Because good work takes time, effort and attention – all of them are short in supply. Work is not short in supply. There is plenty of work. But good work is, because there is only a limited amount of work that is actually worth doing.

The other work are mostly responses to corporate pressure, urges or itches from bosses, the kind of work that involves corporate politics, and so on. If we could all do less of those and focus on the good work, we can be sure the world will be better.

So if you’re in a place of influence, maybe focusing on a more fundamental cause of doing less work would be good. The world doesn’t need more work; it needs more good work.

Forgetting ignorance

Once we learn something, it is hard to unlearn it. In fact it is impossible to unlearn it to the extent of being ignorant of what you have learnt. In some sense, learning changes us irreversibly. In learning something, we forsake the ignorance. And we forget what it is like to not know.

That is really something we can’t forget.

Problems don’t end the world

Emily Kingsley wrote a tongue-in-cheek blog post on the point that yes there are problems in the world but the world doesn’t end because of it. It is one that is fitting for a time of the big overwhelm, when the world is struggling with huge problems that are so intractable the younger generation feels hopeless.

Yet problems are unlikely to be causing the world to end. It is quite likely that the world ends because actions were not taken to deal with the problems. I’m not saying here that blindly taking actions are going to solve all our problems. But action is necessary to recover our sense that we can do something, to prevent us from spiraling into hopelessness.

‘And’, which Emily Kingsley was trying to cling on to in her blog post is the notion that the mere presence of a problem itself should not be enough to defeat us or lead us into paralysis. Ultimately if anything kills, it’s not the problem but the paralysis that we induce ourselves into by telling ourselves the wrong stories about those problems.

Serving the user

Following my observations on Google’s mutated identity, there’s more news of the company’s “decay”. The focus here this time is something else; about the shift in the company culture that results in a bureacracy that plays it safe. There’s a common strand around the fact that Google has changed. And part of the change involves becoming removed from the needs of the user and a bit less grounded on realities.

Indeed, reality is about what the market wants when your company is small and just leading parts of a large market – usually a small part. Yet when a company grows, the insides of the company and the decisions of the management often can be more real than the user. In fact, your boss is likely going to have way more influence over your fate than the users have over the fate of the company. At least in the short term.

So should we have a cultural metric that is about how much a company revolves around serving the user? Maybe. But it is only possible from the top-down. The management have to model and lead that. Yet the management is usually selected by shareholders and at some point when the company grows big. At some point, the short term interests of the shareholders can conflict with that of the user. Moreover, the business model of Internet companies like Google is “ads” – which means users don’t even contribute directly to the revenues of the company!

Information accuracy

My friend created a pretty cool Youtube video explaining some of the mechanisms behind ChatGPT; and you’d realise that behind the whole engine of this ‘artificial intelligence’ is really lots of brute calculations and updates. Never at any point of the calculations would ChatGPT ‘fact-check’ or validate anything that it ‘says’. It relies upon statistical accuracy in matching and finding the next most relevant word to string together.

So the entire system wasn’t quite ever designed to give you accurate or right information – just something you might believe rather than something real. In some sense, technology as an aid to humans have reach the new next level of helping us to ideate more by bringing up relevant connections to what you’ve first provided as a prompt. But it doesn’t replace thinking; it simply supercharge one’s memory prowess more.

What is interesting in this whole march of progress with technology is that we can say rote memory is no longer that useful and should not be tested in school. But associative memory remains important and the ability to actually triangulate and fact-check things becomes even more important. Search engines and all of the internet are now no longer ‘objective’ but creating bubbles to house its users, trying to deliver the most ‘relevance’ to them. Validation of information now becomes a super-skill that depend on random and highly dispersed connections.

Being entertained

After sharing David Foster Wallace’s speech, I looked a bit more into the things he said about the kind of themes he tend to think and write about. One of the really big theme is some kind of cultural addiction to entertainment, and in some sense, the growing feebleness of the mind – especially the part that deals with deeper thinking and autonomy.

We have in some sense, replaced that powerful autonomy that Victor Frankl described about the choice of our response to external environment/circumstances, with a kind of superficial sense of choice: which shampoo to buy, what clothes to wear, the jobs to desire, etc. We become weaker at assessing which politician deserves our vote, which friends deserve more of our attention, what character and values we want to truly establish for ourselves and kids.

The sheer noise and pervasiveness of entertainment, and the values of banal, basic type of stuff that gains our attention comes to dominate our lives. Intellectual domains becomes devolved to just what is considered professional and sophisticated at work, or some kind of aristocratic indulgences. Ordinary lives, which is often much more transcendental than we care to recognise, becomes just ordinary for the lack of exercising that deeper bits of our minds.

Fighting against the future

The future doesn’t just come; you choose to step into it. And your choices defines the future that you actually step into. So if you continue to live wastefully, use lots of resources and ignore issues around sustainability, then you may soon no longer have a future to step into. In fact, your choices and manner of life pits you against the future generations, and the future.

It’s not too late to fight for the future instead. And it definitely isn’t too early to fight for those who are not yet born. You can choose to do so by the things you choose to consume, the life you choose to take on, the people, brands, companies that you choose to get behind. It doesn’t matter if there are habits you still can’t kick, that it seem hypocritical to try reduce your carbon footprint when your work or life still requires you to travel around via flights.

At least, when you become aware and make that choice to fight for the future, you stop fighting against it.