technology – Auxiliary Memory

The Coming of Household Robots

by James Wallace Harris, 3/26/26

By 2030, I expect to see robots for sale for $15,000 that will be as flexible as a Tai Chi master, stronger than an Olympian athlete, handier than a master plumber, and smarter than a college professor. These robots won’t have super-intelligence or self-awareness, because selling such beings would be unethical. Nor will they look human, although there will be another industry working to create human-looking androids that some people will buy for sex, but I don’t want to deal with that in this essay. I will predict that we’ll never create an android that can pass for human.

Will this technology disrupt society, blow up the economy, and derange human psychology? Can we integrate robots into our lives without destroying them? Science fiction has imagined possibilities since the 19th century, and fantasy, for even longer. Let’s examine some of the situations in which we might use a robot and extrapolate from that.

Already, hundreds of millions of people use AI today, so they can easily imagine conversations with an intelligent robot. And there are plenty of videos demonstrating the evolving physical abilities of robots. Recalling AI and robot progress from 2023 to 2026, it’s not difficult to imagine the progress this technology will achieve in the years 2026 to 2030.

The first thing we should do is visualize the robot you will buy. How tall do you want it to stand? Would a robot taller than you freak you out? Should the head have two eyes and a mouth, or would you be comfortable with a head with six eyes and no visible mouth? Should the body be humanoid? If so, should it wear clothes? If not, are there forms better suited for maximal utility? Do you want your robot to sit on the couch with you, or would you prefer it to stand?

Your wants will decide these choices. If you picture your robot kicking back in a La-Z-Boy and watching television with you, you’ll probably want it to be humanoid. If you buy a robot just for housework, yardwork, and home healthcare, you might purchase a robot that’s shaped easily to do the most chores. Right now, we buy robots to do individual tasks like vacuuming floors or mowing the lawn. But ultimately, wouldn’t it be more practical to have one robot that does everything rather than dozens of robots that do one thing?

Because so many millions use AI for conversation, I will assume faces will be important. Roboticists have experimented with giving robots facial expressions. And I’ve noticed that some robots in movies have body language, like C-3PO. Robots might not need to look very human to feel human.

I’ve been asking my friends about robots and their uses. One woman said she’s like a robot to share all her favorite activities and hobbies. She also said she sometimes wanted another husband, but ultimately decided they were too much trouble. Does that suggest we’re finding other people too much trouble, and we’d prefer machines?

Since most of my friends are around my age, their answers were much like my reasons. My wife can’t do much physically at all, and I’m getting less and less capable. I’d want a robot with the strength and stamina I had in my twenties to help me work around the house and in the yard. And as Susan and I got older, I’d want robots to be our live-in caretakers.

However, what if everyone did this? How many people would become unemployed? What happens to maids, gardeners, handymen, painters, car detailers, healthcare workers, and the other people we pay to come to our house? What if general-purpose household robots were also skilled at electrical work, plumbing, and maintaining HVACs?

If businesses replace white-collar workers with robots, and manufacturers replace factory workers with robots, and store owners replace retail workers with robots, what happens to the economy?

Some people worry that AI will become super-intelligent and want to wipe out humanity. That’s rather science fictional. But capitalists replacing labor with robots is all too real. Things are so complicated. How many people really want to wipe old people’s butts? Wouldn’t the wipers and the people being wiped prefer robots to have that job?

What jobs do humans want to keep, and which ones would they want to give to robots? And if you had no income, which jobs would you be willing to take?

I see owning a robot in old age as a prosthetic for my weakening body. It’s not to put someone else out of work, but to let me keep working on my own. But what if I were younger, and considering a robot to do housework? Right now, housework is good exercise for my mind and body. I keep telling my wife she should do housework to keep her from becoming an invalid. I tell her she shouldn’t let me hog all the healthy benefits of housework. She doesn’t buy that.

Susan wants to hire a maid or cleaning service. Many of our friends have. I reply that as long as we’re strong enough to do housework ourselves, we should. But what if most people could afford robots to serve them? Would many people love living the upstairs lifestyle we see in Downton Abbey? Won’t that make us lazier? Will we become like astronauts, vigorously working out in the gym for two hours a day to make up for twenty-two hours of weightlessness?

Many people are questioning what social media, smartphones, and the Internet have done to society. Will AI and robots undermine human nature even more? It’s so hard to answer these questions. If millions of lonely people find comfort with AI and robots, is that bad? The obvious solution would be for half the lonely to meet up with the other half.

Since those people aren’t doing that, does that suggest that something else is wrong? Could it be that some people prefer machines to other people? If so, the market for robots will be tremendous. So, even if we think AI and robots are bad for society, businesses will sell them, and we’ll buy them.

I should be out working in my yard. It needs a lot of work. But I rate the creative activity of writing this blog higher, so I’m skipping yardwork this morning.

I can easily visualize a robot working outside, landscaping my yard, because of all the Ray Bradbury and Clifford Simak science fiction stories I’ve read. I don’t really like working in the yard, but I do wish it were nicer. I’d like to redesign my yard to maximize its benefits for insects, birds, and other wildlife. I wish my backyard were all wildflowers.

The idea of looking out the window that’s just behind my computer monitor and seeing a robot crafting a nature preserve for living creatures would be immensely pleasing. I can even imagine going for a walk in my neighborhood and seeing both people and robots working together and separately as I pass each yard. I even picture humans and robots walking dogs, stopping together to chat and let their pups sniff each other. In this daydream, I also see robots pushing old people in wheelchairs and babies in strollers. I also imagine coming home and finding Susan directing a robot to repaint the living room.

This is an idyllic fantasy. But is it one we really want?

JWH

Are You Preparing for the 2030s?

by James Wallace Harris, 3/23/26

The 2030s will cover ages 78 to 88 for me. If you’re a teenager, the 2030s will cover your college and job-seeking years. If you’re in your twenties, the 2030s could be the years you get married and start a family. If I hadn’t started seriously saving in my fifties, I couldn’t have retired in the 2010s.

It is impossible to know the future. Even speculations based on extrapolation about present trends are nearly always wrong. However, it doesn’t hurt to be prepared like good Boy Scouts. In fact, I’ve heard luck defined as merely proper preparation.

For those of us who have orbited the Sun dozens of times, we have lived through constant change. We’ve learned that society never stays the same. People and their behaviors never seem to change, but relentless change churns our lives. Just observe the 14 decades of change in the films presented by TCM.

The iPhone was announced on January 9, 2007. I don’t even think Steve Jobs had any idea what it would do to the world in the 2010s and 2020s. Nor did we imagine what Amazon (1994), Facebook (2004), Twitter (2006), Instagram (2010), TikTok (2016), and ChatGPT (2022) would do to society. And how many folks expected the end of Globalism and the return to nationalism in the 2010s?

I believe two technologies will transform society in the 2030s: AI and intelligent general-purpose robots. Ever since the Industrial Age began, Capitalists have resented the cost of Labor. But the reason we’ve always needed capitalism is that it gives most citizens employment. Capital and Labor were always tied together, but AI and robots could disconnect the relationship. What will that mean in the 2030s?

I know AI and robots will transform society in ways that will be judged evil in the coming decade. However, I will consider buying robotic caretakers for my wife and me in the 2030s. For a childless couple in their 80s, robots might be the cheapest and most advantageous solution. We will all find reasons (excuses?) to go along.

Humanity should decide to halt all development in AI and robotics right now. But we won’t. Greed is a dependable predictor of human behavior, and the millionaires and billionaires who see trillions in AI aren’t going to allow their greed to be curtailed.

It’s the same way the owners of trillions in fossil fuels haven’t let the threat of climate change interfere with their greed. But we can’t put all the blame on the rich, because we’ve all continued to consume fossil fuels. The weakness of human nature is also a reliable predictor of the future.

Societies only change during violent upheavals, such as the American, French, and Russian revolutions, the Civil War, WWI, and WWII. Moral upheavals, such as feminism, civil rights, and LGBTQIA+ rights, have been less effective at creating long-term, permanent change. Even the great upheaval created by the Enlightenment might not be permanent.

When thinking about what we might experience in the 2030s, we need to consider Black Swans. Donald Trump was a political black swan in 2016. There’s always a chance we’ll elect an Abraham Lincoln black swan in 2028 that will pull the nation back together. But black swans can’t be predicted.

Predictions for artificial intelligence range from the extinction of humanity to an age of unlimited abundance. Because technology has been a reliable agent of change for many decades, it’s probably safe to assume that trend will continue.

For example, if battery technology improves as much as companies working on battery science promise, expect a huge transformation. If just the Donut Labs battery turns out to be real, no one will want fossil fuels because renewable energy will be so dramatically cheaper.

If Elon Musk keeps his promise to manufacture millions of general-purpose robots with AI-powered minds, what will that do to human employment? Of course, business owners will buy them, but what about you? Could you resist owning your own Jeeves? How many fans of Downton Abbey and The Gilded Age will try to create a cybernetic service class? If you asked people in the 1950s if they’d ever want a computer in their homes, 99.9999% of them would have said no.

We can’t imagine black swans; that’s part of their definition. But most of the spectacular changes in society have come from technology that began its existence decades before transforming society. To imagine the 2030s, look at everything discovered in the last two decades.

As a science fiction fan, this will sound odd, but I think science fiction is a poor weathervane for the future. I believe the best bellwethers for the next decade are always revealed in the current decade.

JWH

Ever Wonder Why Web Pages Keep Reloading on Your Phone? Or How Advertisers Know What You Are Thinking About Buying?

by James Wallace Harris, 3/20/26

I’ve practically stopped reading web pages on my phone because I can’t get to the end of an article without it reloading several times. That irritates the crap out of me. Yesterday, my friend Mike sent me a blog post that explains why web pages do this: “The 49MB Web Page.”

Shubham Bose realized while reading a page at the New York Times that it involved “422 network requests and 49 megabytes of data.” Bose is a software engineer and decided to deconstruct how and why. I highly recommend reading his explanation of what happens when you load a webpage. He also explains the hidden machinery that tracks our personal data.

My friend Anne and I joke that we can talk in person about something we’re interested in, and the next time we get on our computers, the algorithm is sending us information about what we talked about privately. Bose does not explain that apparent bit of mind-reading by our AI overload, but if we’re being observed in 422 ways each time we read a page, it can probably predict what we will think about soon.

Bose is an engineer interested in the user interface (UI) and user experience (UX), and recommends programming techniques that could make me like reading on my phone again.

Is that the real solution? Make our experience better so we don’t notice all the activity behind our reading?

Personally, I’m slowly returning to magazine reading. It’s hard to give up the convenience of the internet, but the UI and UX of print magazines are more enjoyable.

Magazines cost a lot of money and people naturally prefer free. But that’s another philosophical issue over technology. The internet provides endless free content, but is it really free? There’s a reason why free comes with 422 network calls and 49MB of spying programs.

My friend Linda and I are reading If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares. The book is about how we should worry that AI will wipe us out. The authors present many scenarios in which AIs could drive us to extinction. Most of them sound like science fiction, but there are mundane hints we should ponder.

This morning, I read “The Laid-off Scientists and Lawyers Training AI to Steal Their Careers” by Josh Dzieza about several companies that hire laid-off experts to train AIs to make fewer mistakes. Online systems entice desperate humans to work in digital sweatshops to train AIs to put other humans out of work. The same kind of monitoring used to sell us shit is used to track their work. The system traps them in a cycle of working for less and less money because they know these people are desperate to put food on the table and pay rent.

Is artificial intelligence doing this to us, or is it our own greed? At some point, we need to decide. There are many stories like this YouTube video, which suggest that AI can’t take our jobs.

It might be dangerous to get too comfortable with that idea. Because I also watched another video that shows how fast AIs are learning.

We have to decide, although our greed might not let us. One article and one video claim the solution is to develop a symbiotic relationship. But what happens when the AI gets smarter than us? If they don’t need us, will they want us around?

Many claim the internet brings out the worst in people, and it makes us overall dumber. There’s that old saying, “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.” Isn’t AI and the internet teaching us how not to fish?

JWH

What Computer OS Do I Recommend To Friends in 2026?

by James Wallace Harris, 3/15/26

I’ve been helping friends and family with their computers for decades. I managed hundreds of computers at work. I’ve set up thousands of computers since 1978. In the old days, it was easy, just recommend Windows to the average computer user, and Mac OS to Apple fanatics. But in 2026, Windows is annoying many people, Apple computers are becoming affordable, and Linux use is spreading. Plus, there are options like Chrome OS for minimalists. It’s much harder to help someone pick a new computer today, with prices spiking, AI, and all the new chips.

I’m not even sure what computer OS I want for myself anymore. I was a faithful Windows user for decades. Yet, I’m writing this post on a Linux machine, running the Mint distro, an operating system suitable only for the nerdiest of computer geeks. However, my main machine is a Mac Mini M4 since I packed away my Windows machines.

Since retiring, far fewer people ask me for help buying a new computer. And I have much less experience shopping online and visiting Best Buy. But a couple of my friends, whom I picked out their current laptop, are talking about needing a new computer. Their main concern is price. Both spent $600 for Windows laptops about six years ago.

Several decent laptops in the $500-650 range are currently for sale from Lenovo, HP, Dell, and Samsung. Any of these machines would be superior to what they had before. All are configured with an i5, 16GB of memory, and between 256GB and 1TB SSD drives. Each model has a 15.6-inch screen. Recommending them would cause them the least amount of transition pain for my two friends

However, Apple’s new MacBook Neo for $599 is an excellent deal. The Mac Mini M4 at $599 is what got me to switch to MacOS last year. And both of my friends use iPhones and iPads. If they were willing to suffer learning MacOS, they might be happier with the MacBook Neo if they could handle a 13-inch screen.

The Neo has only 8GB of memory and a 256GB SSD. For their use, that’s no problem. However, for $100 more, they could get a 512GB drive and Touch ID. The real problem with the Neo’s small screen. I have the MacBook Air M1 with the 13-inch screen, and it’s really too small for my liking. The cheapest MacBook with a 15-inch screen is the Air, at $1,299. They won’t spend that kind of money.

There’s another factor. Windows machines typically last 5-6 years, while the latest Apple computers with the super-efficient and powerful Apple Silicon chips might last years longer. None of my other machines matches the quality of the Mac Mini and Air. It’s not even close.

The 13-inch screen on the MacBook Neo and Air has a default resolution that makes the typeface tiny. Of course, Janis and Linda are used to 6-inch and 10-inch screens on their iPhones and iPads, so they might adjust. I set my MacBook Air to a lower resolution to make the typeface bigger and easier to read. But this sometimes causes a problem when a button I’m supposed to click is off-screen. I have to change the resolution, click the button, then change the resolution back.

There are Chromebooks with 15 to 16-inch screens within my friends’ price range. And these are a possibility. But I have to explain their limitations, and I’m not sure if my friends will understand. If everything you do is within a browser window, then Chromebooks are a good solution.

Since I’ve been migrating away from Office 365 to Google Drive, I could almost switch to a Chromebook myself. Most of my computer work is writing, browsing, and emailing. It’s only when I want to scan old magazines and create PDF and CBR files that I need programs that Chromebooks can’t install.

I use my MacBook Air M1 machine only to write when I’m sitting in a recliner, and it does the job fine. And I do that in a Chrome browser window while using Google Docs. I could have bought a Chromebook and saved half of what I spent on the Air.

But there are other things to consider. There is a synergy between my iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air, and Mac Mini. And since I’m subscribed to Google Gemini, their AI, there is a reason to use Google Chrome, Google Docs, and all the other Google services, which all work with Apple hardware. It helps that Google and Apple are becoming big buddies. Having tight integration between my hardware platforms and all my software has many synergistic benefits. Yet, I must admit, those benefits require a learning curve.

I admire Linux. I root for Linux. But I’d never recommend Linux to a casual computer user. Being a Linux user is like being Sisyphus – always having to roll a rock uphill. It’s fun if you can dig it, but painful if you can’t.

The easiest solution for my friends (and me) is for them to buy something like what they had before. But that pains me. Windows is suffering tremendous enshitification. And Apple is producing stunning hardware, hardware that’s becoming affordable.

Technologically, my Mac Mini M4 is by far the most advanced computer I’ve ever owned, and it only cost me $549. The MacBook Air M1 was $749, and it’s been the nicest laptop I’ve ever owned.

The last computer I helped a friend buy was a tiny Mini PC. She had an HP laptop that was giving her trouble, but didn’t want to spend $600 for another one. She already owns an external monitor, keyboard, and mouse that she uses with the laptop. I asked her if she ever took her laptop on trips. She said no, that it always stayed on the desk. I said she could get a tiny Mini PC with an N95 chip for $190, which was more powerful than her laptop. She’s been happy with that solution.

Most people don’t need powerful computers. Only gamers and content creators need to get expensive machines. I know several people who only use their phones for functions they once used on computers. Sme other friends find that a tablet covers all their computing needs.

It’s gotten very hard to recommend computers for people. AI has the potential to shake things up even more. If people get used to talking to their computer and asking it to do the work, the whole human-computer interface might change. We could all end up talking to our watches.

Most of my friends are retired. A few still take courses that require a computer. But for the most part, without needing a computer for school or a job, the desire to own computers diminishes. Most of the fun functions that families bought home computers for have moved to smartphones, smart televisions, and smart home products.

I might tell my two friends to try buying a keyboard for their iPads and see if they can get by without laptops. MacOS and iPadOS are getting closer, so features and functions are crossing over to the other form factor.

If I gave up on digitizing old books and magazines, I could probably adapt to blogging on my MacBook Air. I’m amazed by how so many young people only have laptops. But I haven’t made that decision yet. If I only browsed the net, emailed, and needed a word processor and spreadsheet rarely, I could consider a tablet with a keyboard.

I think the trend is towards smaller computers, or even away from computers. I’m still stuck in the past. I love large high-resolution monitors. I gave up loving big tower computers years ago and switched to mini PCs. I haven’t paid close attention to what all my friends are using, but I think desktop computers are disappearing from homes.

Finally, I will say that learning to use AI might make people want a big monitor again. If you enjoy learning, researching, and writing, Google’s Gemini and Notebook LM are wonderful tools. Juggling lots of knowledge works great on 27 to 32-inch high-resolution monitors. If you think you’ll be into that, I highly recommend the latest Mac Mini with the most memory and the largest 4k to 6k monitor you can afford.

Gemini, my AI of choice, just told me it currently offers more features to Windows users, but it’s catching up quickly for Mac users. I was disappointed to discover that many Gemini and CoPilot features I enjoy on the Mac aren’t available on Linux. That’s pushing me towards the Mac and away from Linux. I wrote the first draft of this post on Linux, but moved to the Mac to finish it.

Most people will use AI on their phones for reference and chatting. AI could replace Googling. However, if you create any kind of content, AI could influence how much computer power you will want in the future. I’m not sure anyone knows how much they will use AI in the coming years. It could inspire hobbies and pursuits we can’t imagine now.

I’d say the Mac Mini ($599) with a 27″ 4K monitor ($300) offers the most bang for the buck if you want to get into content creation and play around with AI for under $1,000. It’s also good for programming. But it’s overkill if you just browse the web, do TurboTax once a year, and maybe write a few letters or create a spreadsheet of your expenses. Gamers will want to stick with Windows, although many are moving to Linux. Production content creators will want something faster.

JWH

Can We Fight Back Against Enshitification?

by James Wallace Harris, 2/9/26

“Enshitification” is the trendy catchword of the moment. Cory Doctorow coined this handy term and describes what it means in his latest book, Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It. However, I don’t think you need to read the book to get the idea. At a minimum, just listen to the interview with Doctorow and Tim Wu below on the Ezra Klein show titled “We Didn’t Ask for This Internet“:

Tim Wu covers similar ground in his book The Age of Extraction.

For my purposes, I use both terms to point to a specific kind of corporate greed that’s making our lives miserable. We could use both terms in this sentence: The relentless extraction of wealth is leading the enshitification of society.

Cory Doctorow uses the Internet to illustrate the process. Every program, app, or site begins life doing something wonderful for users. Often, their creators promise to always keep their users’ best interests at the core of their business model. But as time goes on and they need to keep making more money, they forget that promise. Eventually, they will do anything to get more users and more money.

Tim Wu models his term on the evils of private equity and similar practices. For example, in the interview, Wu gives this evil example:

In America, hospitals preferentially hire nurses through apps. And they do so as contractors. Hiring contractors means that you can avoid the unionization of nurses. And when a nurse signs on to get a shift through one of these apps, the app is able to buy the nurse’s credit history.

The reason for that is that the U.S. government has not passed a new federal consumer privacy law since 1988, when Ronald Reagan signed a law that made it illegal for video store clerks to disclose your VHS rental habits.

Every other form of privacy invasion of your consumer rights is lawful under federal law. So among the things that data brokers will sell to anyone who shows up with a credit card is how much credit card debt any other person is carrying, and how delinquent it is.

Based on that, the nurses are charged a kind of desperation premium. The more debt they’re carrying, the more overdue that debt is, the lower the wage that they’re offered, on the grounds that nurses who are facing economic privation and desperation will accept a lower wage to do the same job.

Now this is not a novel insight. Paying more desperate workers less money is a thing that you can find in, like, Tennessee Ernie Ford songs about 19th-century coal bosses. The difference is that if you’re a 19th-century coal boss who wants to figure out how much the lowest wage each coal miner you’re hiring is willing to take, you have to have an army of Pinkertons who are figuring out the economic situation of every coal miner, and you have to have another army of guys in green eye shades who are making annotations to the ledger where you’re calculating their pay packet. It’s just not practical. So automation makes this possible.

Doesn’t that sound like a cross between Nineteen Eighty-Four and the way China monitors its citizens? Wu is seeing how the extraction of wealth is doing something just as evil, but we could call it enshitification too.

Another example, this time from my New York Magazine subscription, “Body Cam Hustle” is about how people are making money off of videos of drunk drivers taken by the police. States enacted laws requiring police to wear body cameras to gather evidence and protect the innocent. The Internet went from promoting cute cat videos to scenes of personal shame. To show how society is also just as corrupt, audiences prefer seeing women being arrested.

I doubt I need to give any more examples, we all instantly recognize the genius of coining the word enshitification.

Cory Doctorow and Ezra Klein recall fond memories and hopes the Internet gave them when they were young. But it seems the Internet turns everything to shit eventually.

Does every sucky thing that depresses us most today connect to the Internet?

And more importantly, can we fight enshitification?

One area where I noticed people fighting back is with subscriptions. Tim Wu says subscriptions are the new, and more efficient, method of extraction. People are switching to Linux, free and open source software, unsubscribing from cloud storage, and going back to DVDs, CDs, and LPs.

Other people are taking up analog hobbies like sewing, gardening, woodworking, cooking, and handicrafts. Young people feel they are embracing the hobbies their grandparents pursued.

And other people are buying local rather than ordering online.

On the other hand, millions are adopting AI and racing full steam ahead into a dark Blade Runner-like cyberpunk future.

Does running from the clutches of Microsoft or Apple into the arms of Linux really help us escape enshitification? If Facebook and X are evil, does it make them less evil to access from Fedora and use the Brave browser? (I’m writing this post from Linux, and it’s been a struggle not to use all my favorite software tools on Windows.)

Would we be happier if we shut off the Internet and went back to televisions with antennas? I’ve contemplated what that would be like. My initial fear is that it would be lonelier. I don’t know why. I have many friends I see regularly. I guess the hive mind feels more connected.

I think we like to share. To communicate with like-minded people regarding our specific interests. Before the Internet, I was involved with science fiction fandom. I published fanzines, belonged to Amateur Press Associations (APAs), was part of a local science fiction club, and went to conventions.

I suppose I could regress.

But do people do that? Shouldn’t we figure out how to move forward and solve our enshitification problems? But how?

What if we split the internet into two segments? We keep the existing Internet, and create a new one that requires identity verification. To get a login would require visiting an agency in person and providing proof of your identity. Like when we got Read IDs. But also connect that identity to three types of biometric data. The login to the new Internet would have to be absolutely foolproof, otherwise people wouldn’t trust it.

I know this sounds scary and dangerous, but we’re already doing this piecemeal. Both corporations and criminals already know who we are.

Would people behave better on the Internet if they knew everyone knew exactly who they were? I assume that with such tracking of real identities, it would be almost impossible to rip people off since all activity would have a well-documented trail.

For this to work, corporations would have to be just as open and upfront. They would have to make all their log files public. So any individual could examine all the ways they are being tracked.

Is a much of enshitification due to anonymity and hidden corporate practices?

What if everything we did on the Internet was out in full sunlight?

I have no idea if this would help. It could make things much worse. But isn’t everything already getting much worse?

JWH