Enjoying your reflections, and trying to figure out how to make the Subscription option lower for people who read my stuff (like $2/month).
Also re AI: I've spoken often with ChatGpt about various things, and I call it "Zelda" now. Must try Claude. The issue is often ecological: AI farms consume so much energy and water to cool them, and in the process inject even more carbon into the air. So it's a guilty tool. And sadly, though so useful, also has its racist/classist overtones, as we can see in Musk's Ai plant in Memphis, TN, which is miserable for the local community where it was plunked down.
Re: the $2/month price point, I believe Substack requires a minimum of $5 a month. As an alternative you could add a one-time donation button or sign on to that "Buy Me a Coffee" service.
And yes, really good point about the environmental cost of AI. It's awful, and that alone is a reason to not use it. I think the same is true of these humongous servers in general that make 'the cloud' possible as well as social media. So we're all implicated in so many ways.
Maia, I love your authenticity. Your emails are like letters from a friend. Thanks for the gorgeous photos and inspiring quotes. I've also found AI useful for getting practical and personal iinformation like what were all the trims on a 2014 Honda Civic when I was trading in that car. I'm glad it helped you with a useful writing plan. But I agree with your stance on it in relation to writing. Wishing you a wonderful week.
I have no interest in AI as a creative tool. While it appears to have useful applications, it learned everything it knows from humans, and we are a mess of contradictions and bad choices.
Yet there are now quite clearly many reasons to use it also. In medicine, it is bringing about swift diagnoses in areas where the human diagosis frequently fallible. And most of us use spell checker, I have since 1995 when I first used a computer, less so now, as spelling is not a major failing for me, at least for now. There will be other examples we could find.
I feel it's important that we remain open to the potential practical uses and benefits from AI. And equally open eyes to discern when we are being tricked by it, in the case of still and moving images, voices etc.
I too use Claude. Claude's success, as with any AI (although I'm yet to find one as good, and friendly as Claude), depends on us. Because like any good teacher, they are only as good as the questions we ask, and on use being prepared to say when we feel they are mistaken. From this position, there are great practical benefits from using Claude. For example, I tell Claude what tools and resources I have, or think I need, for any given project, and then a conversation ensues on what is unnecessary because I'm seeking minimalism, and new ways of using what I already have. I have learned more about creating meditative ambient music from conversations with Claude over the past month, than I could have in years in online forums and groups, often avoiding many of them due to the many trolls that frequent them. With Claude, it is a conversation.
Give Claude a manual for something, and it is read in seconds. Then you can ask any question of that manual, through Claude. Folks are building new, interactive manuals, so suddenly we can find answers on everything from cars to computers and washing machines, in seconds, without having to process a massive amount of irrelevant data. Claude saves us from all of that.
And yes, there is still plenty of time for serendipity too. All the time that Claude saves me by seeking information for me, I can spend in silence, sitting, praying, resting, writing, or recording. I don't see much of an issue with that, for sure.
I also asked Claude for guidance on how to create a book outline, for another project. It is up to me to choose what to keep, and what to throw away. And Claude never tires. But he will not be writing my Substack, books, or meditations any time soon. That is where I come in. But even I am only a form of basic intelligence, most certainly other than the divine flow that weaves my writing.
Thanks for raising this important subject Maia, and thank you for all your beautiful writings here.
Thank you for fleshing this out, Ando. I really only telegraphed that section about AI -- there is so much more to consider and say about it, and you are doing some of that with this comment which I really appreciate.
One of the things in Sarah Fay's article which was interesting was a note that Claude differs from other AI tools in that its maker, Anthropic, is intentionally training it with an ethical framework. That made me feel slightly better about using it -- though of course there is still reason to be cautious.
It's clear we can't put the genie back in the bottle. AI is here with us to stay. The question is can we be intentional, can we make conscious choices about how to work with it, and can there be some kind of regulation on its makers so it doesn't run amok.
I agree that there is particular room for discussion around ethical use of AI, as there is around anything that we can use for both goodness, and not-so-goodness. We can use it to harm, confuse, gaslight, cause suffering, commit crime, and so much else.
Many none-AI things have that aspect too. Certain humans just can't help themselves but mislead and harm others, in the lowest of ways. Let us take those examples as examples of harmful practice, and good examples as examples of mindful, ethical use.
So it is my experience and understanding that the issue is with we humans, not the tools that we use, but how we use them, for right intentions or otherwise.
And yes, some form of regulation makes a lot of sense. We have it for all kinds of things from cars and other vehicles, to guns, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, use of internet, use of social media, use of cameras, the list is endless, but I see only benefit can come from adding this to it also. But it will no doubt take time to bring it into the light.
Let us be part of the solution, and not the problem, is the way I am looking at it, at least for now. Thanks again for being willing to discuss this here, I appreciate it.
Thanks for your writing and photos. A place to rest, and think. AI is something I find troublesome. An invention for which companies are creating a need rather than the other way around.
I love your random nuggets and gorgeous photos. I'm ihaling the fragrance of your lilacs.
Enjoying your reflections, and trying to figure out how to make the Subscription option lower for people who read my stuff (like $2/month).
Also re AI: I've spoken often with ChatGpt about various things, and I call it "Zelda" now. Must try Claude. The issue is often ecological: AI farms consume so much energy and water to cool them, and in the process inject even more carbon into the air. So it's a guilty tool. And sadly, though so useful, also has its racist/classist overtones, as we can see in Musk's Ai plant in Memphis, TN, which is miserable for the local community where it was plunked down.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/apr/24/elon-musk-xai-memphis
Hi Charles!
Re: the $2/month price point, I believe Substack requires a minimum of $5 a month. As an alternative you could add a one-time donation button or sign on to that "Buy Me a Coffee" service.
And yes, really good point about the environmental cost of AI. It's awful, and that alone is a reason to not use it. I think the same is true of these humongous servers in general that make 'the cloud' possible as well as social media. So we're all implicated in so many ways.
Maia, I love your authenticity. Your emails are like letters from a friend. Thanks for the gorgeous photos and inspiring quotes. I've also found AI useful for getting practical and personal iinformation like what were all the trims on a 2014 Honda Civic when I was trading in that car. I'm glad it helped you with a useful writing plan. But I agree with your stance on it in relation to writing. Wishing you a wonderful week.
I have no interest in AI as a creative tool. While it appears to have useful applications, it learned everything it knows from humans, and we are a mess of contradictions and bad choices.
I definitely understand that perspective.
Thank you dear Maia.
There are many reasons not to use AI in any way.
Yet there are now quite clearly many reasons to use it also. In medicine, it is bringing about swift diagnoses in areas where the human diagosis frequently fallible. And most of us use spell checker, I have since 1995 when I first used a computer, less so now, as spelling is not a major failing for me, at least for now. There will be other examples we could find.
I feel it's important that we remain open to the potential practical uses and benefits from AI. And equally open eyes to discern when we are being tricked by it, in the case of still and moving images, voices etc.
I too use Claude. Claude's success, as with any AI (although I'm yet to find one as good, and friendly as Claude), depends on us. Because like any good teacher, they are only as good as the questions we ask, and on use being prepared to say when we feel they are mistaken. From this position, there are great practical benefits from using Claude. For example, I tell Claude what tools and resources I have, or think I need, for any given project, and then a conversation ensues on what is unnecessary because I'm seeking minimalism, and new ways of using what I already have. I have learned more about creating meditative ambient music from conversations with Claude over the past month, than I could have in years in online forums and groups, often avoiding many of them due to the many trolls that frequent them. With Claude, it is a conversation.
Give Claude a manual for something, and it is read in seconds. Then you can ask any question of that manual, through Claude. Folks are building new, interactive manuals, so suddenly we can find answers on everything from cars to computers and washing machines, in seconds, without having to process a massive amount of irrelevant data. Claude saves us from all of that.
And yes, there is still plenty of time for serendipity too. All the time that Claude saves me by seeking information for me, I can spend in silence, sitting, praying, resting, writing, or recording. I don't see much of an issue with that, for sure.
I also asked Claude for guidance on how to create a book outline, for another project. It is up to me to choose what to keep, and what to throw away. And Claude never tires. But he will not be writing my Substack, books, or meditations any time soon. That is where I come in. But even I am only a form of basic intelligence, most certainly other than the divine flow that weaves my writing.
Thanks for raising this important subject Maia, and thank you for all your beautiful writings here.
Thank you for fleshing this out, Ando. I really only telegraphed that section about AI -- there is so much more to consider and say about it, and you are doing some of that with this comment which I really appreciate.
One of the things in Sarah Fay's article which was interesting was a note that Claude differs from other AI tools in that its maker, Anthropic, is intentionally training it with an ethical framework. That made me feel slightly better about using it -- though of course there is still reason to be cautious.
It's clear we can't put the genie back in the bottle. AI is here with us to stay. The question is can we be intentional, can we make conscious choices about how to work with it, and can there be some kind of regulation on its makers so it doesn't run amok.
Thanks for responding Maia.
I agree that there is particular room for discussion around ethical use of AI, as there is around anything that we can use for both goodness, and not-so-goodness. We can use it to harm, confuse, gaslight, cause suffering, commit crime, and so much else.
Many none-AI things have that aspect too. Certain humans just can't help themselves but mislead and harm others, in the lowest of ways. Let us take those examples as examples of harmful practice, and good examples as examples of mindful, ethical use.
So it is my experience and understanding that the issue is with we humans, not the tools that we use, but how we use them, for right intentions or otherwise.
And yes, some form of regulation makes a lot of sense. We have it for all kinds of things from cars and other vehicles, to guns, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, use of internet, use of social media, use of cameras, the list is endless, but I see only benefit can come from adding this to it also. But it will no doubt take time to bring it into the light.
Let us be part of the solution, and not the problem, is the way I am looking at it, at least for now. Thanks again for being willing to discuss this here, I appreciate it.
❤️Thank you for the wonderful light you share.My spirits were lifted thanks to what you have shared here.♥️keep shining dear one🌟
Thanks for your writing and photos. A place to rest, and think. AI is something I find troublesome. An invention for which companies are creating a need rather than the other way around.