Santa Claus

I wouldn't be comfortable telling my kids that Santa wasn't real, because it would feel like a lie. I'd say, "Santa is metaphorically real, not a literal physical presence. Santa Claus is a collective identity for those who wish to do good with plausible deniability, a sort of nom de guerre if you will, a name which can legitimately be assumed for a time by anyone who wishes to do good anonymously, in company with others who are doing the same. You can legitimately claim to be Santa instead of yourself whenever you are doing the things that Santa Claus would do."

If they look confused at that, I'll give them the shorter summary: "I'll explain it when you're older."

--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Daesh/ISIS and existential threats

Dear J.,

There's a medium-sized fight going on right now in the policy space about whether to prioritize military spending or fiscal prudence, and whether or not the U.S. should get involved directly in fighting Daesh/ISIS in Syria. I don't know if you've heard about that fight, but a major decision factor is whether or not ISIS is an existential threat to the U.S. or if that is just panicky overreaction to a threat which is still far militarily weaker than, say, Italy.

For me, here's the thing about Daesh/ISIS: I don't know if they're an existential threat to the U.S. because I don't know what it would take to destroy us, practically speaking. I don't know why the economy works in the first place and I don't know what it would take to break it. Say somebody launches a cyber attack that takes down 50% of the power plants in the U.S. for six months and crashes the databases of half of the Fortune 500 companies, losing a lot of financial data in the process. Or if somebody does an EMP over New York, and another over Los Angeles, that destroys 90% of all electronics in those areas. Neither of these things will physically kill all the people in the U.S., but does either of them push us into a Great Depression? My answer: I have no idea. I can believe in scenario where we're up and running again in a year, and I can believe in a scenario where the country dissolves into mass chaos (unemployment, Ferguson-style rioting, martial law declared, backlash against martial law). I don't REALLY believe in the mass chaos scenario, in the same way that as a kid I never really thought my parents would get a divorce, but that disbelief is founded more in emotional inertia than logical analysis.

I don't know if Daesh/ISIS is an existential threat because I don't know what an existential threat to the nation looks like any more. We're fragile.

See also 3 Nephi 8, where the murder of the chief judge destroyed the government: "And the people were divided one against another; and they did separate one from another into tribes, every man according to his family and his kindred and friends; and thus they did destroy the government of the land." Looking at the fault lines in America, that pattern (in response to a different stimulus) is not at all implausible. I guess we'll see, huh?

Happy American Thanksgiving, by the way! See you tomorrow.

Love,
M.


--
If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Loved I not Honor more.

Enmity

Dear Y.A.

I want to share an experience with you.

In Elders' Quorum yesterday, re-reading President Benson's definition of "enmity" really brought something home to me. I don't really do "hatred" enmity, but he also includes "a state of opposition," and when arguments occur (about anything) I'm quite easily inclined to think, "No, what you're asking for won't work the way you think and is a bad idea. We shouldn't do that" which actually does qualify as "a state of opposition" and therefore enmity and therefore pride.

So I need to find a way to hold my opinions without opposition, without thinking to myself, "I don't want you to get what you are asking for." Non-religious example: gun control. I think trying to ban guns in the U.S. would be horribly counterproductive and just punishes law-abiders with more hassle without actually making anyone safer; but when someone starts talking about "gun crime," I need to not oppose them and want to gripe about their desires. Instead, I should find a way to disagree without opposing, which tends to emphasize areas of agreement and possible compromise. I don't have to think, "I hope you manage to ban guns in the U.S." but I CAN think, "I really value the culture of freedom in the U.S., and I value simple laws that people can actually keep. I hope you find a way to get what you want in terms of increased safety for everyone without compromising the things that I value." If I can do that I will avoid feelings of enmity and therefore pride.

It seems to me that the primary "re-thinking" the Church has done in recent years is to studiously avoid encouraging any kind of enmity or opposition between its members and gay activists. That doesn't mean that some people won't take offense anyway, but I do see a pattern of trying very hard to avoid opposition and seek mutually-agreeable compromises. Presumably this same approach would be taken by the Church on any potentially-contentious issue, not just this one. It's an emphasis on charity.

Hope you're doing great. I love you!

-B.C.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

Git magic, git

Written by Dan Glick:

You remind me of the branch
What branch? branch with the code
What code? code that hasn't shipped
Ship who? ship you
You do? remind me of the branch

My code was in too many folder trees, oh my
What could I do
My code was so spread out, and what were actual diffs?
Nobody knew

What kind of source control to use
SVN
or TFS
Maybe Perforce
Then somebody said

Git magic, git magic
Git magic, git magic
Pull my push and merge my change
Cherry-pick my commit range
DAG magic, DAG magic
DAG magic, DAG magic
Careful with rebase and squash
Pull the tip before you push

I couldn't find the hotfixes from prod
What could I do
Each file had conflicts left and right, and how to merge?
Nobody knew

What kind of source control to use
CVS
or VSS
Source Depot? Never!
Then somebody said

Git magic, git magic
etc.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.

An Entire Separation

November, 2015

Dear Y.A.,

I sometimes see people ominously speaking of what the Church needs to do "to survive", and threatening ("more in sorrow than in anger") a mass exodus of their presumably legion like-minded cohorts if certain doctrinal changes are not made to their liking. I find this a striking, and surprising, fulfillment of the words written in 1831, in the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 63:

"These things are the things that ye must look for; and, speaking after the manner of the Lord, they are now nigh at hand, and in a time to come, even in the day of the coming of the Son of Man. And until that hour there will be foolish virgins among the wise; and at that hour cometh an entire separation of the righteous and the wicked..."

I never could have imagined that the "entire separation" would happen THIS way. I always sort of expected to see the foolish virgins fall away in fatigue or embarrassment when faced with mockery and persecution and the need to sacrifice; it never occurred to me that they would threaten to hurl themselves out of the Church as a form of coercion against God.

We are always sad to see anyone leave, and yet no one can say the Lord never warned us that it was coming. Matthew 24:24. "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Our job is to make sure that, at least for ourselves, it is NOT possible to be deceived. Read your scriptures, say your prayers, listen to the Spirit. Amen, amen.

I love you! Good luck.

~B.C.

--

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I could not love thee, dear, so much,

Loved I not Honor more.