So, to all those who take that sort of thing serious, Happy April Fools Day!
To everyone else, I have another message.
Let’s end this bullshit excuse for a holiday.
Yes, I understand there’s a history behind it. And yes, I understand that there’s a time and a place for a good prank. I have a sense of humor. I love to laugh as much as anyone else. But April Fools Day, as a holiday and a concept, just doesn’t work anymore.
This sentiment is fairly new for me. I didn’t used to have an opinion on April Fools Day. That has changed in the past few years and not just because of the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s not because was the victim of a nasty prank or because I know anyone who gets way too into it. This is just a conclusion I’ve come to after living on this planet long enough and being on the internet long enough to understand the dangers of human stupidity.
If it sounds like bitter musings from someone who is getting older than he cares to admit, I promise that’s not an overriding factor here. There are plenty of idiots on this planet and you don’t have to look hard to find hilarious examples of their idiocy. They’re the entire reason why the Darwin Award exists. And they don’t restrict their antics to a single day.
Thanks to the internet, we can easily look up and follow the fools of this world and all their stupidity fueled mishaps whenever we want. In years past, that wasn’t as easy. And celebrating our foolish side made sense to some extent. Some people do need to remind themselves that there’s humor in this world and it’s okay to laugh at yourself.
But these are different times. This is an era in which mind-numbingly stupid individuals can use the internet to actually influence people. Between flat-Earthers and creationists, idiots and fools aren’t just documenting how stupid they are. They’re actively trying to entice people to join them in being idiots with them. And at a time when we’re so divided politically and socially that we can’t even agree on objective reality, that’s not just foolish. That’s dangerous.
We’ve seen what happens when large groups of idiots buy into a stupid lie. The internet and news cycles have made it frustratingly easy to spread those stupid lies. This kind of foolishness isn’t funny. It actually causes real damage, both to our political discourse and to actual people.
There’s still a time for jokes, pranks, and general foolishness. I’m all in favor of people not taking themselves too seriously. But we already have way too many people who fall for fake headlines from the Onion. We don’t need to celebrate that once a year.
Again, I wish those who take it seriously a very Happy April Fools Day.
From the outside, it looks like a typical McDonald’s. It has the same aesthetics and architecture that have become so iconic. But inside, there are none of the usual fast-food workers. There are just rows of kiosks and a conveyer belt. Once you place your order, it’s automatically prepared behind the scenes in the kitchen. Then, when it’s ready, it’s bagged and wheeled out to you.
When it’s working optimally, you never have to interact with another human being. Whether you consider that a good or bad thing is entirely up to you, but that’s the ideal. As for how it handles orders that aren’t properly bagged, food that isn’t properly cooked, or drinks that aren’t properly prepared, that’s not yet clear.
This isn’t intended to be the start of a massive effort to automate every McDonald’s restaurant. It’s largely a test to see just how much a standard fast food restaurant can be automated.
As someone who’s first paying job was in fast food, I have some mixed feelings about this.
On one hand, I welcome this kind of automation. I remember what it was like working at these restaurants. The pay was awful. The conditions sucked. And you had to regularly clean up messes that made you want to throw up.
On the other, this is an undeniable sign that automation is accelerating and the low-skilled jobs that many people rely on might become less and less available in the coming years. And for those who really need a job, even if it’s a lousy, low-paying job, that could be seriously detrimental to large swaths of people.
In terms of the bigger picture, I think this is a much larger story than people realize. Automation has been a popular talking point for years now. I’ve certainly touched on it. And I think the recent rise of artificial intelligent programs like ChatGPT have really raised the profile of automation, mostly because it revealed that it’s more than just factory jobs that are vulnerable to it.
It might even be because of ChatGPT that this story about McDonald’s flew under the radar. But I honestly think automation in the fast food and restaurant industry could be more disruptive in the short-term than products like ChatGPT.
In the coming years, we might look back at this automated McDonald’s as the first step towards a new trend in automation. People have talked about automating things like fast food for years. Then, the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and new trends in labor converged to create new incentives.
This is no longer just an idea that exists on paper or in the imaginations of CEO’s fantasizing about not having to pay minimum-wage workers anymore. This restaurant actually exists. People in the Fort Worth area can visit it right now.
Again, it’s not part of an ongoing effort to automate every McDonald’s. If you go to this restaurant, chances are you’ll deal with a system that’s still being refined. There’s probably still people there behind the scenes, monitoring and fixing whatever bugs emerge in the system. There’s a good chance those people are paid much more than minimum wage. There’s also a good chance that this particular McDonald’s isn’t going to be more profitable than those with human workers.
But those are just logistical issues that can be polished, refined, and streamlined. All it takes is time and experience. It’s not unlike the first assembly line or the first 3D-printer. It’s messy and clunky at first, but it steadily becomes more efficient with time and investment.
Eventually, it’ll get to a point where a functional McDonald’s won’t ever need a staff of low-skilled employees anymore. In principle, it would only need one person to be there to make sure the ingredients are re-stocked and the equipment doesn’t break. The company probably wouldn’t even need to pay the person that much. If they’re qualified to work as an unpaid intern in a standard IT department, they’re probably qualified to manage this system.
And if McDonald’s finds a way to make it work, you can expect the competition to catch up quickly. There would just be too much incentive to remove all the low-skilled wage labor as a means of increasing profits. It won’t happen overnight, but one company only needs to succeed once before others copy it.
Fittingly enough, that’s something McDonald’s did before. Their system of fast food was pioneered in the early 1950s and proved so successful that many other competitive, including Burger King and Taco Bell, embraced it. It’s very likely we’ll see something similar play out with automation.
But what does that mean for low-skilled labor, in general?
That’s a relevant question. There’s no way this kind of automation will stop at fast food restaurants. Add AI tools like ChatGPT into the mix and even mid-skill jobs could be at risk.
I don’t claim to know the answer, but I suspect we’re going to see some major upheavals in how we work in the coming years. That’s going to have consequences, good and bad. And I honestly worry that we’re not prepared for the bad consequences in the slightest.
This past weekend marked the continuation of one of the most annoying biannual rituals in America. We once again changed our clocks to adjust for Daylight Savings Time. I understand it’s a practice that most of us have been doing all our lives. We’re so used to it that, for the most part, we see it as a temporary annoyance more than anything else.
But beyond the annoyance, this practice is one of those various things that have no practical use, yet we still continue to do. And the more we do it, the less sense it makes. I know because I’ve tried to explain why we do Daylight Savings Time to people from other countries. Their reactions are usually quite telling. I don’t deny that America has many strange practices and traditions, but Daylight Savings Time is definitely one of the strangest, at least in a contemporary sense.
Now, there was a time when Daylight Savings had a practical use. When it was passed by the United States in 1918, it was actually part of a larger trend among industrialized nations at the time. Canada and various countries in Europe had adopted similar practices for similar reasons. The idea was to adjust clocks so that criticizes had more waking hours in sunlight, which reduced energy consumption. This was also done to coincide sunlight with the standard working schedule that had emerged during that era, which was dominated largely by industrial labor.
Whether Daylight Savings achieved this goal or not, it made some sense at the time. In an era when work and scheduled were much more regimented, it made sense to align these schedules with daylight hours to the greatest extent possible, especially for regions at higher latitudes. However, there’s not much evidence that Daylight Savings time has a tangible benefit in that regard. In some instances, it may even be detrimental.
That alone should be cause enough to consider ending the practice. And people far smarter than me have already made plenty of valid arguments towards ending it. Here’s just one video that nicely lays it out.
Even if you don’t fully agree with all these points, there’s one other I’d like to offer and I think it’s the most important.
Getting rid of Daylight Savings Time would be a solid demonstration that we, as a society, can end practices that no longer make sense and no longer offer any tangible benefits. That, more than anything else, is a good reason to do it.
Beyond the fact that the practice is wildly unpopular, regardless of political leanings, plenty of other countries have decided to end it and have not had many ill effects. They saw that this practice just wasn’t incurring any benefits and maintaining it just made no sense. So, why keep doing it? Why continue a practice that only ever succeeds in annoying or inconveniencing people?
Doing it because it’s just something we’ve always done is not a valid reason. If anything, that’s quite possibly the worst excuse for continuing anything that has no tangible benefit. And in this case, there’s reason to believe it does more harm than good. Ending this practice might make things a little strange during the times of the year when the days are really short or really long, but that’s easier to adapt to because it’s less abrupt and jarring.
Let’s at least prove to ourselves that we can stop or change practices like this. We can end a dumb, outdated, annoying tradition that few care for. It’s not a serious or overly controversial issue. And if we can’t somehow figure out a way to stop, then we have much bigger problems than losing an hour of sleep every spring.
This is another video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. This video is my quick reaction to the season one finale of HBO’s The Last of Us. Like my other quick reacts, I didn’t script this or structure it like a video essay. As a result, I stutter and stammer a lot. I also make a few errors here and there. But I still try to get my point across.
Also, I do mention some heavy spoilers from both the show and the games. So do keep that in mind. Enjoy!
This is another video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. This video is a brief video essay, as well as a reflection of sorts, on the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. It’s an issue that has suddenly become more relevant in recent years and for all the wrong reasons. But the circumstances (and absurdities) of what happened in the 1980s were unique. And they’re worth learning from, especially if those with agendas are intent on starting a whole new panic.
I like to think I’ve done the best I can in that regard. I know I’m not perfect, but I still strive to improve. I also try my best not to judge others who don’t do as well or struggle to be the man they seek to be.
I say all of this as a precursor because I’m about to go on an angry rant, of sorts, on those who take advantage of insecure, vulnerable men. That rant will include profanity, tirades, and insults. So, if that doesn’t appeal to you, this is your warning. I’m just sharing that as a common courtesy.
Having gotten that out of the way, I’d like to make some important statements that hope finds its way to men and women alike.
Fuck every man who calls himself an alpha male.
Fuck every man who promotes the whole alpha male mentality.
Fuck every man who actually buys into the bullshit behind alpha males.
I understand that’s a bit terse, but I promise I mean every word. I only wish the English language had stronger forms of profanity to get my point across.
Because as a man who has written about men’s issues in the past, I have nothing but abject hatred and disdain for those peddling the objectively stupid notion of the alpha male. I would go so far as to argue it’s worse than the idea of “toxic masculinity,” another label I think is built on a foundation of bullshit.
But the notion of the alpha male isn’t just stupid and wrong. It’s dangerous.
It presents men with a rigid dichotomy that supposedly determines whether they’re a “real man” or just some loser weakling who can’t open a pickle jar. Either you’re some muscle-clad, sports-loving, macho douche-bag who builds his day around how many women he sleeps with or you’re some pathetic, scrawny weakling who deserves to get shoved into lockers in high school.
There’s nothing in between. You’re either one or the other. And unless you’re constantly striving for that alpha status, then you’re somehow a failure as a man.
Again, that’s all bullshit. I seriously cannot emphasize that enough. There is no such thing as an alpha male. That is not a thing in science, biology, or objective reality.
In fact, the whole concept behind “alpha males” is based on horribly flawed study about wolves in captivity that was later disproven. If you want to know the details, please see the following from Phys.org.
If you don’t care to read the whole thing, the long and the short of it is simple. The study that first coined the terms, alpha male and alpha female, was based on observations of social structures of wolves in captivity. However, that social structure does not manifest in the wild.
Instead, the structure is largely based on adult wolves looking after their pups. It’s not too different from how most social animals look after they’re young. We don’t call their parents alphas. That’s just a byproduct of having a particular social structure that relies on adults protecting, teaching, and guiding their young.
That’s exactly what happens in humans, too. We don’t call the parents of children alphas. They’re just parents. Their role is the same as the wolves observed in the wild. They raise their children as a family unit, looking after them and teaching them so that they can survive on their own.
At no point is there this alpha male of the pack who gets all the females and makes all the lesser males do his bidding. That’s not a social structure we find in nature. That’s a social structure we find only in cults, namely the dangerous ones.
That’s exactly what keeps the whole alpha male myth going. It feeds into the agenda of selfish, power-hungry narcissists who need some excuse for being the one who gets all the money, sleeps with all the women, and gets others to do his bidding with little to no compensation.
I won’t name names. But if you follow the news about people who throw around the whole “alpha” label, you know who I’m talking about.
Again, fuck those men and every asshole who buys into their bullshit.
Because that’s what this stupid concept propagates at the end of the day. It’s an enabling force for assholes seeking to exploit those who are vulnerable. Every cult leader in history does the same thing. Organized religion and toxic fandoms do it too. But the people who embrace the alpha male label are just uniquely insufferable.
So, the next time you hear someone throw that alpha male label around, remind them that it’s based on bullshit science and only exploited by wannabe cult leaders. And if they refuse to accept that, then don’t give them the courtesy of calling them alphas. Just call them insufferable assholes. Because that’s what they are and that’s what they’ve always been.
If you’ve ever worked a full-time job, chances are that job had set hours during certain days of the week. It may vary from job to job, but in most developed countries there’s this concept of a standard work week. And it goes like this.
You work five days a week, often Monday through Friday.
You work eight hours a day, usually around 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
You typically don’t work major holiday or overtime. But if you do, you get paid overtime.
That’s seen as a “normal” work week these days. I put “normal” in quotes because what constitutes a normal workday has changed a great deal over the years. But I prefer not to focus on the history of the work week. I just want to ask a simple question about the work week as we currently accept it.
Is the five eight-hour workday schedule really the most effective approach to work?
It’s an honest question and one I think the COVID-19 pandemic has made more relevant. Beyond revealing how much work we can be done remotely and from the comfort of our homes, it also revealed that our concept of a normal work schedule is somewhat skewed. And it might be a good time to re-evaluate our understanding.
Some are already doing that. A number of companies in various parts of the world are starting to experiment with a four-day work week. It doesn’t always entail less work. In some cases, people opt to work four ten-hour days instead of five eight-hour days. The duration of the shifts don’t change. It’s just the structure.
And according to the conclusions of multiple studies, the results have been a massive success for everyone involved.
Worker satisfaction increased, as did overall work/life balance.
The same amount of work got done, even when fewer hours overall were worked.
There were practically no real downsides. People got an extra day off, but were just as productive. They were also happier, overall. Even if you’re a ruthless business tycoon with no sympathy for others whatsoever, these results are encouraging. After all, happier and more fulfilled workers means less turnover and less conflicts overall. Unless your company runs on the tears and suffering of others, that’s generally good for business.
Even in the absence of these studies, I can personally attest to the appeal and the merits of a four-day work week. While I wasn’t lucky enough to have that schedule with any of the full-time jobs I worked, I do know it was a popular option in one particular company.
Since I don’t know if my former employer visits my site, I won’t say their name or their industry. I’ll just say that this company utilized a lot of shift-work. There were some typical nine-to-five shifts, but most varied considerably in order to ensure 24/7 coverage of our operations. I typically worked five days a week, usually 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
However, there was an option for those with kids to work four ten-hour days. The day of the week they got off varied. My supervisor actually encouraged those who used this option to coordinate and decide amongst themselves which day of the week they would take off. Some preferred having Monday off. Some preferred having Friday off. One even preferred having Tuesdays off.
It was probably the most popular shift, but one that wasn’t widely adopted. It was always framed as a shift reserved for those with young children who needed an extra day to take care of doctor’s appointments, personal matters, and what not.
Personally, I would’ve definitely preferred working four ten-hour days. Even if it meant those four days were longer, I would’ve gladly worked that time in exchange for a longer weekend. It would’ve made a lot of things easier, especially when I was young and just out of college. Even today, it would make a lot of things easier. An extra day would give me more time to rest, run errands, work out, and work on my personal life.
I suspect many feel the same way. Just think about how excited/relieved you are every time you have a long weekend to look forward to. But honestly, is a three-day weekend really that long? It’s still less than half of the week. And can you honestly say you get less done on a shorter work week?
Now, I understand that not all work is the same. There are certain jobs for which a four-day work week just isn’t practical. By the same token, there are also types of work for which a five-day work week isn’t practical, either. We just still use that schedule because it’s considered standard and “normal.” We’re so used to it that we don’t even question it.
But we should. The results of the studies I mentioned imply that there are better ways to get just as much work done with less time in a manner that is just as productive, if not more so. So why not embrace that?
I suspect a part of it has to do with how the five-day, 40-hour work week is engrained in a lot of labor laws. That is not a trivial detail that we can just overlook. But laws can be changed. And in this case, there’s a better and more efficient option available.
In a world with so many diverse people and so many diverse forms of work, it makes sense to be flexible. If a shorter work week means equal or greater amounts of efficiency, then the only thing stopping us is outdated assumptions about what constitutes “full-time work.”
I sincerely hope that changes in the coming years, especially as people continue to realize the value of a good work/life balance. Just because we’ve been structuring our jobs a certain way for decades doesn’t mean we should keep doing it that way. If a four-day work week is better by every measure, then we’re only making our jobs more miserable by clinging to outdated practices.
In general, I don’t care for commercials. Unless they’re for an upcoming movie I’m excited about or some local pizza shop I haven’t tried, I tend to ignore or skip them. I’ll even mute them during a live broadcast. I just find them that unremarkable.
But every now and then, a commercial will come along that really annoys me. It’s not just the aesthetics of the commercial, the cheesy nature of the scenario, or the annoying jingles that some devious marketing team conjured. It’s the overall substance of the commercial and what it’s ultimately selling. Because it’s one thing to advertise in hope of selling a product. It’s quite another to advertise in hope pushing a questionable agenda.
This is how I feel about the recent flood of the “He Gets Us” commercials that have been popping up lately. If you’ve been awake and coherent for any commercial break lately, you’ve probably seen them. They’re part of a PR campaign by Christian organizations like The Signatry and billionaire activists like David Green, the co-founder of Hobby Lobby.
And it’s not a cheap, low-level campaign either. According to NPR, it’s part of a multimillion-dollar effort intended to change or influence the public perception of Jesus Christ and Christianity, in general. There’s even plans to air a special commercial during the Super Bowl, which is not a cheap endeavor.
That alone should hint at the ambition behind this effort, as well as the deep pockets of those funding it. As for the commercials themselves, they all have a very distinct tone.
You’ve got these dark backgrounds depicting people who appear real and genuine.
They’re often include messages about how Jesus was a refugee, hated hypocrisy, and was unfairly persecuted for his beliefs.
They often end with the tagline message that Jesus gets us and with references to the organization.
Anyone who has a passing familiarity with Christianity and the bible probably knows these details about Jesus Christ, already. Even if you’re not a Christian, it’s nearly impossible to live in the United States and not be aware of basic Christian ideas. That alone makes the idea of a campaign to inform and educate people about Jesus’ life seem somewhat redundant.
However, it’s the bigger picture behind the message and the larger trends in organized religion that genuinely concern me. Because even though the message seems uplifting and benign, it’s important to understand who it’s coming from and why.
In case anyone has forgotten, the family behind Hobby Lobby has also been behind a number of court cases and legal efforts to promote “religious freedom.” I put that term in quotes because it’s a very politically charged term. In America, when most people talk about religious freedom, they’re usually referring to the rights of mainstream Christians to oppress, denigrate, or discriminate against minorities, usually individuals of the LGBTQ+ community.
To them, religious freedom means the ability to refuse service to people based on their sexuality, race, or gender identity.
To them, religious freedom means the ability of their particular religion to get special treatment and protections by the state. They’ll rarely say anything about Jewish or Islamic communities getting similar treatment.
To them, religious freedom means being exempt from laws or policies about women’s health care, adoption, or science.
To them, religious freedom means the ability to indoctrinate their children on their terms through things like homeschooling or private schooling.
In essence, their struggle for religious freedom usually boils down to an effort for their brand of religion to have power, influence, and some measure of preferential treatment over the competition, be it other faiths or no faith at all.
Now, as always, I need to make clear that organizations and efforts like this do not reflect on the character of most Christians. As I’ve said before, most of the people in my family identify as Christian. Some are very active in their church. They are good, decent, loving people. And most of them couldn’t care less about the politics or private lives of others.
They’re goals are actually perfectly in line with the teachings of Jesus. They seek to help and comfort others through meaningful community-centered efforts. They don’t need multi-million dollar campaigns to do it. Their faith is enough for them. And if others join them in that effort, then everyone benefits. That’s a legitimately beautiful thing.
But efforts like “He Gets Us” attempt to go beyond those simple, smaller acts of piety. It’s attempting to reshape perceptions of the notion that being a Christian means being an intolerant, anti-science, anti-fun, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-woman, anti-abortion, pro-gun, pro-capitalism, anti-environmentalist bigot. Considering the damage the religious right has done to perceptions of Christianity, I totally understand that.
The problem is that those behind “He Gets Us” actively contributed to that perception. They’re the ones who funded organizations that opposed same-sex marriage, anti-discrimination bills, and political candidates who claim global warming is a hoax. They’re the ones who seek favorable treatment by the courts when it comes to refusing services to certain minorities or getting special exceptions from general business practices.
It’s this disconnect that I find so troubling about these commercials. They send a message that the message of Jesus and Christianity is for everyone. It’s somehow a necessary message in the current cultural landscape. But it ignores the fact that religious right has effectively co-opted Christianity to create this current situation. And at no point in these commercials or in their promotional material does “He Gets Us” or the organization behind it apologize for that, let alone acknowledge it.
This initiative claims to want inclusivity, but ignores where that lack of inclusivity came from. It also ignores that Christianity, as an organization, has become a political force that advocates egregious injustices, outright inequality, and a distinctly fascist form of governance that a large segment of the population has embraced. Like it or not, Christianity is closely tied with a brand of politics that is completely antithetical to nearly every core teaching Jesus Christ ever espoused. To not acknowledge or confront that is like trying to change a tire on a car that’s actively on fire.
In that sense, the agenda “He Gets Us” feels less like an effort to redress actual missteps of modern Christianity and more like damage control. It comes off as oil companies trying to shirk responsibility for climate change by claiming they care about the environment too, but refuse to stop polluting.
Again, I’m not trying to say every Christian is responsible for the misdeeds of a select few, nor am I saying someone is a bad person for identifying as a Christian or even contributing to organizations like this. It’s critical to distinguish the individual people from the nefarious agendas that organizations push. If there’s one message I’d like to convey about “He Gets Us” and the message they’re trying to sell, it’s this.
Be very skeptical of their agenda.
Be very skeptical of any religious organization that chooses to spend millions of dollars on TV ads to address a PR problem that they’re responsible for.
If you truly do believe in the values and teachings of Jesus Christ, then you don’t need commercials or politically connected organizations to practice them. You just need faith and a desire to be decent to other people, even if they don’t agree with you.
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day. It’s a day some take for granted, seeing it just another day off. For others, it’s a solemn reminder of a Civil Rights icon who dared to dream of a more equal and just society. There’s a lot I could say about Dr. King, what he did, what he achieved, and what he stood for. There’s even more I could say about the regressive forces that opposed him, some of which are still very prominent and very dangerous today.
However, I’ll save those words for another time. For this special day commemorating a very special man, I’ll just encourage everyone to listen to his words once more and keep his dream alive.
With every new year comes new challenges and opportunities. And once the New Year holiday celebrations are over, a lot of people like to be extra ambitions. They’ll make bold resolutions like getting into shape, quitting smoking, saving more money, or working on their relationships.
These are all good, admirable goals to seek. If these are among your resolutions, then more power to you. I certainly encourage anyone making a sincere effort to improve their lives.
However, it’s also common to let your bolder resolutions obscure the smaller goals that are also worth pursuing. I can attest that I am guilty of this, as well. For much of my life, I’ve let bigger goals get in the way of smaller, more achievable endeavors. And even if I make progress on those bigger goals, it still feels like I miss some opportunities along the way.
In that spirit, I’d like to share a few little things that you can do to help make 2023 a good year for you. I’ve talked before about bold resolutions and I still encourage everyone to make them. But rather than repeat myself or share random anecdotes, I want to offer something small, but tangible that you can do to improve yourself and your life. I won’t charge for them. I won’t even ask for tips or donations. This is all freely given from me to you.
Tip #1: Go to sleep an hour earlier for one week and see how an extra hour of sleep improves your mood, health, and overall well-being.
Tip #2: Just go for a walk around your neighborhood, but make sure you walk down paths and streets you’ve never gone down before. Get out of your comfort zone to see what’s out there.
Tip #3: Do one act of random, unprovoked kindness every week for a random stranger. It doesn’t matter what it is. It can be as simple as anonymously donating to charity. A simple act of altruism is good for you.
Tip #4: Schedule a small chunk of time out of every day for a week for yourself. It can be as brief as an hour. Just use that time to stop, catch your breath, and decompress from all your daily stresses.
Tip #5: Make one minor change to your routine for a few days and see how much or how little that improves things.
Tip #6: Don’t follow any major news for a full 24 hours.
Tip #7: Learn to cook something new that you’ve never cooked before and share it with others.
These are just a few tips I felt are worth sharing. I tried to make them specific, but generalized enough that most people can incorporate it into their lives. You can try one or all of them. I simply encourage you to use the new year to try something different in your life.
We all have things we can improve upon and we should never stop trying to improve. There’s always a place for large improvements, but don’t negate the little things. You’ll find that, over time and beyond any new year, they accumulate. And when they do, you’ll appreciate just how much they’ve helped you.
I hope everyone has a safe, happy, and productive 2023.
RT @brianhioe: For April Fool's Day, Pizza Hut Taiwan has rolled out a "flavorless" pizza, which is just a giant hole with nothing inside… 10 hours ago
Jack Fisher's Official Publishing Blog 