Is AI a force for good?

"You know the biggest problem with AI? Wrong direction. I want AI to do my laundry and dishes so I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes."  -  SciFi author Janna Maciejewska

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is everywhere these days. You may not have thought where it is being used, but I bet it has helped you already today in many different ways. Whether it is your smart watch, car sat nav, door alarm, or mobile phone app, it is there. AI is the buzzword of the software industry at the moment. If you're a business who's not using it, or at the very least looking to use it, you're behind to curve.

So we should be afraid of it right? Not really. Like any newish venture, it can have unpleasant side effects if not implemented properly. In the case of a smart watch, it could tell you you're in a fine fit of health when you should be taking yourself to A&E. Your sat nav could lead down a road and over a cliff. We're not at a stage where we should trust AI, so we're safe from a James Bond villain for now.

That's not to say we shouldn't be weary of how it is developed. Take the following examples of AI mentioned in a recent issue of Private Eye magazine:

• Perplexity have launched a "shopping assistant" in the US. It lets you ask for product recommendations, and lets you buy them without visiting the merchant's website. Asked how the product selects product recommendations Perplexity's CEO said, "To be honest with you, in terms of how the ranking works, I don't think we understand it fully ourselves."
• Sauron has a home security system and is looking at how it can use AI to take countermeasures if a problem was suspected. Could it take out a burglar with a bullet?

It is because of this that I don't fear AI. We need safeguards and thorough testing of applications for sure, but we also need human oversight. Like any algorithm, it is data based and that doesn't include intuition or nuance. Yes some jobs will largely disappear. Others will change significantly, but this has been happening since man and woman walked this earth.

AI can be a cause for good. It will change the way we live and work. It already does. You can't really avoid. It's here to stay. So let's embrace it.

Finally if your thinking of raging against the machine, take heart from Korean users of X (formally Twitter). Appalled by the platforms unilateral decision to use their content to train it's AI model, users have taken to describing how to "destroy Elon Musk's testicles with a spinning kick." What seems like a healthy traditional activity has the result of contaminating the model.

Limerick: I'm sorry I haven't a clue

I’m sorry I haven’t a clue.
A radio quiz show. Who knew?
Sound charades and Mornington Crescent,
Are examples of rounds ever present,
For comics to do silly things to.

The craic of an Irish parkrun

I've enjoyed exercising all my life. Not even getting up early on a cold Saturday morning can put me off. OK sometimes it does, but the endorphin rush you get when you finish is worth it. That is one reason why I parkrun.

Parkrun is a five kilometer run organised by a local volunteers in many  countries around the world. Started in London in 2024, it has become a regular sight in parks, trails, and promenades on a Saturday morning. There are no prizes for speed. It's for all abilities. You can even walk if you want. It's just a community of likeminded folk getting out of bed for some exercise.

I don't participate every week, as life has a habit of getting in the way. I run when I can, but it has become such an enjoyable pastime that I've even participated in parkruns whilst travelling. If I'm away to watch a football game, I'll see if there's a local parkrun before the game. Away with the family, and maybe there's an event I can go to.

On one of my visits home I attended Shanganagh parkrun in the foothills of the Wicklow mountains. The beautiful scenery was sufficient to distract me from the bitterly cold wind. So was the warm welcome and flat course. There was even a banana on offer to runners from some local political activists at the finish after my vote. There was a general election in Ireland a week after you see.

Parkrun in Ireland has really taken off. In fact it is the most popular place to parkrun according to the state broadcaster with:

• 9% of the population registered to take part.
• 143 parkrun events in total including 42 for younger runners.
• 500,000+ finishes in 2024.

That's quite something. 

WDSA February 2025: Craig Cope and the ghosts of AFC Wimbledon

The transfer window an unsettling time for a football fan from a club in the lower leagues. As fans we all have our opinion about which players should go or stay at all costs, but it isn’t always that easy. If you’re a bigger or richer club looking to push on in the second half of the season, getting your recruitment right is of paramount importance. Get it right, and you avoid relegation or gain promotion. The fans are happy, and you did your job. Get it right wrong, and the fans are on your back and the board are asking questions. Who’d want to be a Director of Football?

The ghost of seasons past

In recent years, the transfer window has had a negative effect on our season. A bright start in August has disappeared in January when our best player is sold. Think of Ollie Palmer going to Wrexham, Ayoub Assal going to Al-Wakrah, and Ali Al-Hamadi going to Ipswich. It may have made our bottom line look healthier, but them leaving had a detrimental effect on the pitch. Those three leaving saw our goals per game ratio dramatically reduce. That’s OK as we’ve always been a selling club. Ever since I’ve been a Wimbledon fan, the importance of having young, talented, and hungry players in the squad could not be underestimated. We need to have players that excite football agents enough to want to give us bags of money. It is how clubs like ours manage to survive right?

The ghost of seasons present

Well maybe there’s a different strategy. Could we not continue to develop our talent, but decide that we should keep them? Why should we do all the hard work only for some other club reap the benefit of it? In other words, let’s stop acting like a small club. We are Wimbledon, not some feeder team for a Championship or Premier League club.

That’s the shift in attitude I’m seeing from our Director of Football, Craig Cope. That doesn’t mean we don’t sell our players. It means we only do so when it is right for us. It’s a fine line, but we’ve seen a backbone since he’s arrived with the likes of Jack Curry and others. Craig is generally regarded as one of our biggest signings in the AFC Wimbledon era. Many fans probably would walk past him without knowing who he was, yet his influence and impact is massive for us on the pitch.

A Director of Football’s job is not all about keeping players. It’s about getting them through the door too. Craig responsibilities now include the youth setup, but what if those players aren’t ready for first team football. Craig’s connections, particularly with the likes of Chief Scout Andy Thorn, has seen us start to reap the benefits of their collective talents. In his two years with us, we’ve seen a sea shift in strategy and professionalism in the way our recruitment is handled, with the results laid bare on the pitch.

For the first time in years, we’ve a real prospect of at least a playoff place going into the transfer window. As I write this there’s a week left of this season’s window and there’s no sign of any major event that would derail that prospect. There must be clubs sniffing around the likes of Lewis, Ogundere, Bugiel, and Stevens, yet there’s not a sniff of anything likely to see them disappear. Our backbone seems to be radiating an aroma of “We’ll start talking when we’re a Division One team.” Not only does that please us fans, but it also means potentially more transfer money in the future.

The recruitment of players like Joe Lewis and Ronan Curtis were master strokes last season. This season he’s matched that with the likes of Sam Hutchinson, Romaine Sawyers, and Marcus Browne. From what I saw of them, each had something new to offer. Sawyers and Hutchinson were never both likely to stay, and I wasn’t surprised to see Sawyers leave and Hutchinson stay. Sawyers had the more flair and options, and Hutchinson made more business sense. I’ve only seen Browne play 15 minutes so far, but his signing signals an intention and direction for the remainder of the season.

The ghost of seasons yet to come

Perhaps the biggest problem we have with Craig is keeping him. There must be clubs in the Championship or above keeping a close eye on him. If an approach was made, what then? He’s been with us two years, and made a massive difference. It’s clear that he wants the club to progress. A promotion on his list of achievements wouldn’t do him any harm. However, a word of caution. What if we don’t get promoted this season and our top players leave? There’s a fine line between success and failure in football. Ah sod that! I’m an optimist. Provided there isn’t a curve ball out there heading towards me, I really can’t see why we can’t reach the playoffs as a minimum, and we’ve got Craig Cope to thank for that.

Ireland's 2025 Eurovision entry

Ireland has a long and successful Eurovision history going all the way back to Dana's 1970 song "All kinds of everything". Eurovision was very different back then of course. This positive, sweet song about (presumably heterosexual) love fitted the Eurovision bill perfectly and stormed to success, even being covered by Sinéad O'Connor.

How Eurovison has changed though. One contestant for Ireland's Eurovision entry on the Late Late Show described Eurovision as the "Gay Olympics". Indeed at least three of the six contestants were from the LGBT+ community. Plus Ireland's 2024 winner Bambi Thug is as far away from Dana's clean cut image as it is possible to be. She's non-binary, is covered in tattoos, and has a history of drug taking. She's divided opinion, yet remains a very popular act to this day.

Norwegian singer EMMY

Talking of dividing opinions, the choice of EMMY to represent Ireland did that to a degree. Her song Laika Party was definitely catchy. It's a good dance anthem with a strong up tempo rhythm and good vocal. The lyrics reimagine the life of a dog sent up to space by the Russians in 1957 who to this day is alive and partying as it revolves around our galaxy. A positive spin to a sad story about a dog. It should be met well by the Eurovision community. 

The song and group has a fun edge to them as well. I'm not sure what spelling their name in capitals is trying to say, but EMMY's choice of song title has a definite young and funky edge. For "Laika", read "Like a". Geddit? But what really set them aside from the other contestants was the song's performance. Flanked by two dancers flanked is silver shell suits, you could be forgiven for missing the singer's brother standing at the back playing a keyboard. His deadpan look and robotic choreography was a nod to Germany's Kraftwerk, and went down a storm.

As for any controversy, there wasn't much on the night. EMMY were one of two stand out songs and were always likely to be a strong contender. The expert panels may have thought Samantha Mamba's "My Way" was a stronger entry, and the public vote won out. As for Emmy themselves, they're entry makes we wonder about the entry criteria for acts. As Norwegians, should they really be allowed to sing for Ireland? Well rules are rules, and they're not the first non-native to represent a country. Besides Dana was from Derry which technically at least isn't Ireland.

Has EMMY a chance of winning? That's hard to say without hearing the other entries. Being Norwegian may count against them, but the song is a banger and it's on-stage performance was right up there with the great Eurovision performances of the past. Perhaps it doesn't have the shock value of Finland's Lordi, but I'd be disappointed if it didn't do well. Whilst I'm not a massive Eurovision fan, I be routing for EMMY in May.

Girl Guides and Mixology

Thanks to today's BBC's Pointless quiz show I discovered that Girl Guides can earn a Mixology badge. For those that don't know what mixology is, it is the mixing of ingredients to make a drink. This raised an eyebrow or two. Mixology is normally associated with alcoholic drinks. What is the Girl Guides movement thinking? Surely they aren't getting young girls to mix ingredients from their parent's cocktail cabinet.

Rest assured this is not the case. One look at their website and your mind is put at rest. Mixology does not have to involve alcohol. A tasty drink can be non-alcoholic. Indeed the Girl Guides website suggests experimenting with different juices, fruits, herbs, and spices. A simple recipe cold just involve adding cinnamon to a vanilla milkshake. It's all above board then.

Shame. I could just imagine a guide's mother asking her daughter to make a "slow comfortable screw up against the wall" on a Friday evening. On well. Maybe a more subtle "kiss from a rose" will have to suffice.

How to ensure good content

Last week the Society of Technical Communications (STC) declared bankruptcy and went out of business. It's demise won't have sent shockwaves through the world's stock markets. The news won't even have figured on intelligence reports for CEOs around the world, but perhaps it should have.

The STC is (sorry was) an organisation dedicated to the advancement of technical communication. It's vision, "To be the international authority in content design and delivery, advancing the professional development of our members and articulating the value of technical communication within industry and academia.", was laudable.

That's all well meaning, but unlike other professions you don't need to be an STC member to work in the content field. Accountants, lawyers, and doctors must be members of their professional organisations to work in their field. What's more they must regularly prove they've continued their professional development. So why does this not apply to the field of technical communication? 

The STC was founded as a reaction by content professionals in in effort to maintain standards in a fast growing profession. It did this to a degree, but as a relatively niche profession it didn't have the muscle or exposure to change the world. Roll on a few decades and the content world has changed beyond all recognition.

The problems faced by the STC, and other organisations like the Institute of Technical and Scientific Communicators (ISTC), are many. First and foremost, the technical communication field changes constantly. It's gone from just producing technical documents, to producing UI copy, electrical wiring diagrams, flat pack furniture instructions, localisation, and much more. Neither is technical communications the domain of IT. Content is produced everywhere with marketing, finance, and everyone in between involved, seeing a rise in content strategist roles. After all, why have the same content produced two separate departments. Content reuse reduces cost and increases productivity.

Perhaps the biggest problem the STC faced is that as a largely volunteer run organisation, it never had the manpower or clout to become mainstream. In an agile industry that by necessity made up the rules as it went along, it was never going to become a category defining organisation without significant resources.

When it comes to working in the technical communication field, I've never been asked by a prospective employer if I was a member. Even if I've volunteered my membership of the ISTC, it rarely raises more than an inquisitive eyebrow. To my knowledge it has never been the defining factor is me getting a job. The reality is that organisations like the STC just haven't got the eyes and ears of those they are trying to educate about the need for good content.

Perhaps that's why STC membership has dropped off a cliff in recent years. Why should young workers struggling to pay off their student debt and get on the housing ladder, have to pay a couple of hundred pounds a year for something they don't need.

In the days of social media and online content, perhaps the STC had a brand problem. Was it seen as something too academic? Should it have renamed itself to something more appealing to a younger and diverse communications audience? Not all content is technical. As a social media specialist at a marketing agency, I wouldn't join the STC even if I knew it existed. 

That's the real issue here. In a world where the amount of available online content has increased exponentially, and in areas not envisioned by the original STC membership, it was always doomed to sit on the fringes of an ever expanding content world. It simply was never going to have the resources or contacts to fulfil its aims. That's a shame. We can all point to examples where poor content has cost companies millions, led to people being injured or killed, or just left frustrated users. 

Good content is important. The STC made a valiant attempt to implement a world where good content was the norm. It just came up short. Perhaps we should ask, is content in a better place now that it was when the STC came into being? That's near impossible to quantify, but it did its best whilst it existed.

What's in a name?

What does your last name say about you? In western cultures it describes where you've come from, who your family is, and who you identify with. For a man or unmarried lady, this is simple. It shows your lineage, perhaps going back centuries. It shows the world where your family got up to. The same is not necessarily true for married ladies. 

Tradition dictates that when a woman marries, she takes her husband's name. In effect she surrenders her identity in favour of her husband's. My problem with that is that who she is, or what she's become? What about her family's history and identity? Does that not matter?

More recently some women have taken to changing their surname to a double barreled variety when they get married. Using both their and their husbands surnames, this acknowledges the union of two people whilst maintaining a own identity. That's alright, even if it normally only affects the lady. The husband's name normally remains unchanged, leaving the legal necessities of a name change down to one half of the partnership.

What if there was another way that was less discriminatory? A young couple I met recently both changed their surnames when they married to a combination of their family names. One's surname was "Fan" and the other's was "Shaw". When they married they both changed their surnames to "Fanshaw". The romantic is me thinks this is a lovely way of two people agreeing to unite their pasts. It may be a genealogist's nightmare, but it signals a new beginning together.

When I married I didn't expect my wife to take my name. Why? I've always felt uneasy about the concept of engagement and wedding rings. Society expects the lady to wear a ring, but what about the man? To me this points towards a notion that the female "belongs" to the man. She's taken and off limits. My wife most definitely does not belong to me. She's her own woman with her independent thoughts. So why should she have to wear a ring to show she's taken, but I don't have to? It shrieks of misogyny.  

I was secretly pleased when my wife said she'd prefer to keep her family name once married. After all I'm proud of my family's heritage, so why shouldn't she? I like the idea of combining surnames, although it works better with shorter names. I'm less certain it would work with our names. It would be a bit of a mouthful and make filling in forms more tricky. Our status quo works for us, and that is what matters. Besides it helped eradicate a lot of post marriage administration!