I never paid all that much attention to Martha Stewart. I suppose I had a slightly negative impression, with little investment in it. And that led me to join the general pile-on that happened when she got caught in doing insider trading and subsequently sentenced to a few months in prison. I have vague memories of reading somewhere, or seeing on TV, that she did her time well, was helpful to and liked by her fellow inmates. Thus I had little interest in watching the new Netflix documentary, Martha.
Then Alex Tabarrok, at Marginal Revolution, wrote a post about it: “Stewart is as compelling a figure as Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. Not entirely likable, perhaps, but undeniably admirable.” So I watched it: “I agree, well worth watching. Though she does seem rather tightly wound during the interview segments, and not just the segments devoted to her husband’s affairs.” A section near the end of the documentary, about her participation in a roast of Justin Bieber and subsequent partnership with Snoop Dogg, that’s pure joy.
Concerning the insider trading charge, Tabarrok observes:
Stewart’s willpower and perfectionism are extraordinary. She becomes the U.S.’s first self-made female billionaire after taking her company public in 1999. Then comes the insider trading case. The amount in question was trivial—she avoided a $45,673 loss by selling her ImClone stock early. Stewart was not an ImClone insider and not guilty of insider trading. However, in a convoluted legal twist, she was charged with attempting to manipulate her own company’s stock price by publicly denying wrongdoing in the ImClone matter. Ultimately, she was convicted of lying to the SEC. It’s worth a slap on the wrist but the lead prosecutor is none other than the sanctimonious James Comey (!) and she gets 5 months in prison.
Beyond that, as I posted over at Marginal Revolution, I think she’s especially important in this age of AI and low-intellectual-threshold AI hype. She took what was and still is widely regarded as routine women’s domestic work and elevated it to, if not at art form, certainly a suite of craft skills with significant depth. She took special pride in her gardens. I know Tyler Cowen (at Marginal Revolution) has spoken of gardener as a job that challenges the limits of AI tech. It involves a wide range of physical, motor and perceptual, and cognitive skills. Is there anyone bench-marking their almost-to-AGI engines against gardening skills?
What about cooking and baking? Good cooks taste as they go along. How’s things going with the AI of taste? I assume that someone, somewhere, has been working on this. But I doubt that it’s very high on OpenAI’s to-do list. What about baking? Making good pie crust requires a deft touch. Puff paste? And then there’s Danish pastry. My mother’s was superb. I would be surprised if I could find its match at a good New York restaurant or bakery, nor would I be surprised if many are not up to her standard.
OTOH, one of the early computer prototypes was important in weaving, the Jacquard loom, which goes back to the early 19th century. That’s where punched cards originated. There's a connection to conjure with, Martha Stewart and the Jacquard loom.
* * * * *
ADDENDUM: Come to think of it, if and when UBI (universal basic income) arrives, lots of people will have time on their hands they don't know what to do with. Martha Stewart will be able to teach them how to fill that time in a fulfilling way. May gardens abound!
No comments:
Post a Comment