Thinking beyond AI

This post was inspired by David Knott's post about cognitive offloading.

There is a lot of discussion about the effect of AI on our own ability to think. If we outsource thinking to AI, people say, we lose our ability to think for ourselves. The research will take years to settle, so here's one way I've been thinking about it.

The important question with AI is not "how can it help me do today's work?" It is far more interesting to ask "what work becomes possible because AI exists?" Used well, AI changes the economics of thinking.

I see using AI as like riding a bike. When moving from walking to riding, you can create problems for yourself. Riding is much less taxing than walking so you will burn fewer calories, not push your muscles which will slow development, and overall make life easier at the cost of exercise.

But this is if you approach riding lazily, with a mindset of "I want to do what I was doing, but easier". Assuming no change, no growth, just a different tool.

Asking different questions creates opportunities. You could optimise for speed, saving time on that regular journey and reintroducing exercise. You could see new capabilities opening - you can go further, see different things. You can use the technology to extend your horizons.

Such it is with AI. Sure, we can use it to automate what we're already doing (kinda). But if we get a bit more creative, we can ask a different question - what can I do now I couldn't before? What new spaces can I build or create? That said, there will be times something really is drudgery. In that case, we can try to reduce the effort until it is trivial. This gives us a most precious resource - time.

Instead of allowing our critical thinking to atrophy with AI, we refocus it on whatever comes next. We still think. AI gives us the opportunity to redeploy our cognitive effort where it adds the most value.

I just want to paste something - AI problem solving

OK, after two months of technical posts (and kudos to those who read them) let's go for a classic LinkedIn approach. What did debugging Linux configuration teach me about evolving paradigms of learning in the age of AI?

Jokes aside, I do think there are some interesting threads to pull here. I had a series of technical problems and I used AI assistance to address them. By the end, I had a product (they were fixed) but did I have any understanding? Did I learn anything?

Yes, I did. I learned a lot about Linux debugging tools. I remembered a lot about Linux config. While I did copy/paste a lot of commands, I wasn't simply executing Claude's suggestions. I was constantly asking why - why this command, why this tool, why this next step, and using this to inform my own thinking for moving forward. I made sure I understood what I was doing and slotted that information into my existing mental model, so Claude and ChatGPT were my companions on this journey, and they both helped and accelerated the trip.

However.

This is my experience. I am a professional technologist, with 20-odd years in the industry and more than that digging through the nuts and bolts of computers. I have a lifetime of context with which to understand the suggested steps, and keep a light hand on the tiller in case the AI wanders off in an odd direction. Fundamentally, I could have done this without AI assistance. More importantly, I could learn from the process because I already had enough context to understand and question what it was suggesting. AI simply made that process much quicker.

It's the same as training at my Tai Chi club. It is half an hour a week and many folk there struggle to memorise the forms we work through. I don't, because I've studied Tai Chi since my teens and the basics are ingrained. I am only learning the higher level motions, not the theory. I've also spent many years learning how to learn these patterns. It's a different experience for me because of that significant time investment. Those years of practice haven't just taught me Tai Chi, they've taught me how I learn Tai Chi.

Now, you could certainly make the argument that the particular knowledge gained debugging this problem doesn't matter. I don't need to know it, I just needed the problem to go away. This wouldn't be wrong in this instance. However, if something had gone wrong actually understanding the steps would have been important in fixing it. If I need to do something like this in future I've got more options for starting points.

So why does this matter? Stepping back, we all know that AI adoption across the Tech industry is not just happening, in many places it is mandated from on high. For some, tools and process changes are enhancements - increasing speed and freeing capacity, as my experience here. For others, they are increasingly just doing what the computer tells them.

The people new to the industry are those that concern me most. It is generally accepted in education that simply telling people the answer doesn't help them learn, yet this is the behaviour using an AI tool encourages. Ask a direct question, get an answer, use it and move on without further thought. In Tech, new developers using AI tools to generate code for them aren't gaining the experience needed to become what we currently consider Senior or Lead engineers. This is the difference between AI enhancing your output and AI driving it, and must be countered if we want people to gain the experience necessary to make safe use of these tools.

For those coming into Tech, this is actually similar (if more acute) to using Stack Overflow. Let's be honest, that site was used as training data so using an AI prompt is not far off an interface to the knowledge base there. There is nothing wrong with using Stack Overflow, as long as you read the posts and try to understand them. If you're copy/pasting lines of code without engaging with them, sooner or later you're going to come across someone who posted rm -rf / (DO NOT paste that!) and most people reading this will know what happens if you stick that in a root terminal.

There are certainly ways to actively learn while using AI. I often ask AI questions, then make changes myself - treating it like an editor / coding buddy - but the act of typing it out and questioning what I'm doing makes me learn. One of the reasons I write blog posts is that re-synthesising information in this format helps me turn it over in my mind and ensure I understand it properly. As long as we remain engaged with the process, as long as we value the knowledge and don't just copy/paste, then there is learning.

I find it very interesting to consider what this shift in technology means for the development of Tech (and indeed other industries). Learning passively (on the job, by doing) is likely to become harder, which means actually learning things needs to become much more deliberate - both individually, and at an organisation level - and we need to look again at how we place value on the learning process. The need to learn isn't going to disappear, and we need to be aware that AI does change the learning environment. It creates many opportunities, but if we aren't careful it can also encourage problematic behaviours. We will need to become more intentional about learning - through technique, through creating time, and through asking "why?" a lot. AI can provide explanations. Curiosity still has to come from us.

---

This post is part of a series:

• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu clipboard managers
• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu keyboard shortcuts
• I just want to paste something - AI problem solving

I just want to paste something - Ubuntu keyboard shortcuts

Last time, I wrote about wrestling with the Ubuntu display server, Wayland, to get a clipboard manager working. This involved a lot of research and fiddling with settings I'd forgotten existed.

So we're coming back to this (and this series is building to a point, I promise) because important keyboard shortcuts weren't working, and I couldn't figure out why.

Again, for credit - I used ChatGPT and Claude to help investigate everything, as well as lots of The Internet of course.

The setup

Specifically, I noticed that Ctrl+Shift+V (paste without formatting) had stopped working - nothing happened at all. Right-clicking and selecting "Paste without formatting" from the menu worked fine, so the clipboard itself was functioning correctly.

None of the obvious things seemed to work, so in we go.

Tally ho

Yeah so clearly something had broken - presumably something was capturing the keyboard event somewhere. But where to start? I can debug Ubuntu, but it's not a forte of mine so let's start with Claude.

According to Claude, the first suspect was IBus, Ubuntu's input method framework, which is known to grab Ctrl+Shift+V for Unicode character entry. Killing the IBus daemon ruled it out.

Next I checked GNOME's built-in keyboard shortcuts using gsettings:

gsettings list-recursively | grep -i "ctrl.*shift.*v\|<Primary><Shift>v"
gsettings list-recursively org.gnome.shell.keybindings | grep -i shift
gsettings list-recursively org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.media-keys | grep -i shift

Lo and behold - nothing useful came back.

A test in Firefox showed this wasn't a Chrome anomaly, which made it likely the interception was happening at the OS level, not in the browser.

So where is it?

Claude had me go looking for a running clipboard manager (which was odd, since it knew GPaste was running having just helped me get it working) but a process grep "revealed" GPaste (shock):

ps aux | grep -iE "copyq|gpaste|autokey|xbindkeys|keyd|espanso|ulauncher|albert"

GPaste does grab paste-related shortcuts, although I'd previously manually checked through the shortcuts. Re-inspecting its own settings showed Ctrl+Shift+V wasn't listed there.

The real breakthrough came from using wev, a Wayland event viewer:

wev | grep -A2 "sym\|state"

This showed that when pressing Ctrl+Shift+V, the V key only ever produced a release event, never a press. Something was consuming the keypress at the GNOME Shell level, before it ever reached Wayland or the browser.

Claude went back to GPaste at this point, and the GPaste GNOME Shell extension. It does operate at exactly that level, but disabling it and logging out didn't fix the problem - the keydown event was still being swallowed.

No really, where is it?

A final breakthrough came from querying dconf directly, which shows much lower level configuration than gsettings:

dconf dump / | grep -i "shift.*v\|ctrl.*v" | grep -iv "audio\|volume\|XF86"

This revealed a custom keybinding with Ctrl+Shift+V. Inspecting it further:

dconf dump / | grep -B5 "Shift><Control>v"
dconf dump /org/gnome/settings-daemon/plugins/media-keys/custom-keybindings/custom0/

Showed this:

binding='<Shift><Control>v'
command='/usr/bin/diodon'
name='Diodon'

Oh hello Diodon - you're still here. Apparently, despite being uninstalled months ago, my old clipboard manager did not clear up properly when it was uninstalled. Or possibly I'd written an extra shortcut and forgotten? Either way, there was a leftover GNOME keybinding, orphaned but causing problems. The binary was gone, so the shortcut did absolutely nothing, but it was still intercepting the keypress at the Shell level and swallowing it.

Execute Order 66

dconf reset -f /org/gnome/settings-daemon/plugins/media-keys/custom-keybindings/custom0/

One command, instant fix, no restart required.

Conclusion

This was interesting. I did essentially end up editing the blasted registry again, which is a really poor state of affairs and as I said before, something I thought Linux had moved past. But here we are.

More interesting was the journey Claude and I went on together. I could have debugged this myself, but this isn't information I retain in my brain, so I'd have been looking everything up. By letting Claude take the lead, the investigation was certainly quicker, but also took a very different path.

Instead of methodically isolating the exact place where the keypress event was being intercepted, I would have gone to dconf sooner, and without a detour through gsettings. I'd have used my experience and intuition to bypass some stages of diagnosis. If I remembered all the relevant commands, that probably would have been quicker.

That said, if that intuitive guess had proven wrong I'd have been much more lost. I hadn't used wev before, so I'd have been starting from scratch entirely there. Plus I actually fixed this alongside doing something else, whereas working solo would have required direct focus and likely I'd have put it off for much longer.

So was Claude helpful here? Undoubtedly yes, but not quite in the way I expected - and here we are getting to the point of this trilogy (oh yes - there is a point) which is about how we work collaboratively with AI, and how we learn through this process. But that's next time!

---

This post is part of a series:

• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu clipboard managers
• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu keyboard shortcuts
• I just want to paste something - AI problem solving

I just want to paste something - Ubuntu clipboard managers

Every so often I need to remind myself I can still do technical things. Then I feel the urge to write about it. This time, the rabbit hole starts with Ubuntu clipboard managers, and leads to debugging the desktop itself.

Digging into the nuts and bolts of the desktop is something I don't do very often, so I'm keeping some notes for posterity.

Credit - I used ChatGPT and Claude to help investigate everything, as well as lots of The Internet of course.

The setup

I've run Ubuntu on my laptop for many years. Ubuntu is great, but for some reason it doesn't come with a built-in clipboard manager. I ran Diodon for a long, long time - simple and handled everything I needed. Sadly, it stopped working a while back so I removed it and tried other options - none of which worked.

More setup

After lots of digging, plus some conversations with Claude, it became clear the problem was with the display server, Wayland. This has an enhanced security model over X11 which stops many of the top listed clipboard managers working - presumably including Diodon, back in the day. The solution was either to switch back to X11 (which then breaks support for touchpad swipes between desktops) or to use GPaste. Which also doesn't work.

Sigh

Yeah it's one of those problems. So down the rabbithole we go...

So, by default GPaste is blocked by the same security as the others. We can register it as a trusted shell extension ... if we have the extensions app installed... which we don't by default...

sudo apt install gnome-shell-extension-prefs

Ok, back on track. We can register it as a trusted shell extension with the extensions app:

gnome-extensions enable GPaste@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org

Which allows it to load properly (appears top right). Copy also now adds things to the clipboard list. If you're following along at home and it doesn't, turn on "Track changes" in the UI and all should be well.

Pasting from history?

Now you're able to click on the manager, look at the list and pick the entry you want to be on the clipboard. For me, doing this with the mouse destroys about 2/3 of the point of a clipboard manager - may as well just navigate back to the original data and copy from there. I need a keyboard shortcut to open the history except... the keyboard shortcuts don't seem to work.

Hhgggnnnn.

No matter - I can just change the binding to something. Except the rebinding screens don't work. Can't type into the boxes, and it doesn't capture keypress.

Argh.

This is, according to Claude, a "known quirk" with GPaste's settings UI. Which seems a polite way of saying "it's broken". Claude recommends setting it directly from the command line:

gpaste-client settings --set-string shortcuts-show-history "<Ctrl><Shift>H"

Yeah, that didn't work either. Silently ignored.

Now we're breaking out dconf-editor (which also needed installing) and navigating to:

/org/gnome/gpaste

and editing directly there.

And finally, finally it's working.

Conclusion

Well, this was frustrating. A stupidly long runaround to get to something that even Windows has built-in by default now. And the fixes are exactly the kind of thing that put normal people off using Linux - the kind of thing I thought we'd moved past a long time ago. Breaking out dconf-editor is the equivalent of having to use regedit for crying out loud.

On the Wayland / X11 choice, the touchpad gestures were fixable in X11 with some work. The real reason I didn't switch back was because I try to keep my Linux desktop as vanilla as possible. It seems likely that Wayland is the future for Ubuntu, so unless I want to change distro I may as well accept that.

Right, enough of this for the moment. More coming...

---

This post is part of a series:

• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu clipboard managers
• I just want to paste something - Ubuntu keyboard shortcuts
• I just want to paste something - AI problem solving

Celebrating different minds

Apparently this week was neurodiversity celebration week with the rather charming tagline "celebrating different minds". Last year I made reference to being diagnosed with Autism and ADHD and this week seems like a good opportunity to write a little about what it's like.

First, the important caveats. I'm not medically trained so I'm writing from my own experiences and reading. Also, different forms of neurodivergence have very different impacts on people's lives and many exist on their own spectrums - my experience with autism may well be very different from another's.

I'm not going to draw a dividing line between my experiences with ADHD and Autism here. I have both, which seems counterintuitive - you might think they would cancel each other out. They don't. Instead, your brain goes to war with itself. This can result in an outward balance - for example, my need to fidget being cancelled by my need to follow the social rules for not doing that - but inside, it's a constant tug of war between opposing impulses. Most of this is invisible from the outside.

So over time, I have learned how to ride through this. I have always struggled to do things in good time. At school, I would do assignments late in the deadline but then I'd have absolute focus to get it done - or rather, the drive would be to avoid failing. If this sounds stressful, then yes - it is. It has been the same with job applications.

Heavy procrastination in general is something to actively manage. I have to watch myself from a distance and ask pointed questions like "why are you still doing that?" or write deadlines to trigger my desire to not fail. I write daily lists to create this impulse.

My brain needs stimulus. I am very good at not being bored, but anyone who has read this blog for a while will see the posts popping up saying variations of "I am bad at resting". I need to be doing something, learning something, creating something, thinking five thoughts at once... Even while I'm writing this I am jumping to another screen to upgrade a Rails app in the background.

This leads to a very noisy inside life. One experiment mapped the brain activity of a neurodivergent individual vs a neurotypical person doing the same, mundane activities. Where the neurotypical person has nice smooth signals, the neurodivergent person shows signals which look more like a seismograph during an earthquake. This was a very powerful image for me - a picture showing that my internal world is both extremely noisy, and not "the same for everyone".

Much of that links to regulation of dopamine and reward in the brain, and that can lead to all kinds of behaviours. The more obvious are seeking stimulation, which can be very destructive if that leads to drugs or other harmful behaviour - this is a whole separate topic. It can also create other unexpected behaviours. For me, I find I struggle with snacks - I have to avoid keeping them in the house at all else I'll just eat them. For a long time I did not know why, but now I realise this was dopamine-chasing behaviour - in essence, I was inadvertently self-medicating. I also do not really feel the same high from exercise others describe, which makes it a real grind to actually do any. Combine these, and you can guess the effect on my physical health!

At the less destructive ends of the different spectrums, where I am fortunate to be (I think), life carries a lot of friction, but I see it as a series of tradeoffs like my brain is overtuned for some effects. Hyperfocus is a good example of that. Getting lost in a topic completely can be great for learning and progress - a benefit. However, unlike "flow" (something everyone can experience), hyperfocus adds destructive elements - losing track of time and reality to the extent I forget to eat, sleep or ... other functions. Without counterbalance and control, it can create serious problems. The same is true of other traits, such as strong pattern recognition which can progress to the point of overanalysis and over-interpretation, drawing unhelpful conclusions.

Another overtuned trait I experience is noise sensitivity. Like many neurodivergent people, I can hear the whining of electrical devices most people can't and my brain prioritises strange background sounds like electronic beeping of alarms in the distance. This makes me a pretty good sound engineer, and able to find electronic components which are not behaving properly. However, this isn't something I can turn off and the outside world is so very noisy. From distant alarms which crawl under my skin until I can hear nothing else, to feeling agitated in a room most people think is silent, to rooms I find so loud it physically hurts to enter. I had a long period where I had to sleep with all the windows closed because of the whining noise coming from the generator in the basement next door. Their management company had an engineer look at it, and they kept saying (quite correctly, to be fair) that their generator was behaving within normal parameters but that noise entered my brain and would not leave. So I lost sleep for months, while anxiety built and built. This was resolved when the generator failed because the component I could hear across the street died so ... painful vindication.

However all this happens below the surface. If you meet me, you may not notice anything different about me at all. Even if you do, I've managed to navigate the world successfully. Which is where masking comes in. In practice, this is deciding how to show up to different situations (which everyone does to an extent) but like most things here pushed much further than the norm. For me, this practice has been helpful with conforming to different sets of social rules or expectations but does also lead to problems with identity. When am I ever me? Masking, like all the different ways of behaving to fit the norm, is very tiring. It can also go further - prolonged masking can lead to burnout and the loss of sense of identity, along with experiencing dissociative symptoms.

All this can result in a lonely existence. People draw comfort from being around folk who see the world like they do but - put bluntly - we don't get that in mainstream life. This can be very useful - channelled right, a different worldview can challenge norms and drive change - but it is also isolating. I rarely get to relax around people, I'm always putting on a mask for the occasion.

Even writing this is causing some anxiety as I expect someone to say "yeah everyone is like that".

These are just some of my experiences. I've found people often have questions about neurodiversity but don't feel able to ask them. If anything here raises questions, I'm very happy to talk - no question too strange.

Leadership as an emotional shock absorber

I know very few people who have started 2026 in an optimistic and cheerful place. I certainly haven't. I want that to change - to get back to facing things with a positive disposition and a sense of humour. It matters for me, but it matters more for those around me. Most people are more affected by the mood of others than they care to admit.

But first I have to acknowledge that wanting a more positive frame of mind does not make difficult things disappear. The world is unstable. More personally, I'm still having "fun" with health. Work is going through a difficult time of change. So that's the context - it's easy to be smiles and sunshine when everything is good. It isn't.

However these are the times when it's important to support everyone else, and one way to do that is to be a bulwark against negativity. Negative thinking is like a disease - it jumps between people until it burns out against those who resist it. Unlike a real disease, however, you can make a choice to be immune (or at least less susceptible). We do not always control what happens to us, but we do control our response to it.

At work this is particularly true. People need space to vent and they need peers and leadership to recognise reality. However, it is an often-forgotten duty of leaders to explain why things aren't as bad as they think, and show the positive route forward out of all this. This is true (especially true) even when things are, in fact, as bad (or actually worse) than they think.

There is a core leadership skill here - how do I tell this story in a positive way, while remaining authentic? The authenticity is vital else it's either a stream of mindless optimism or (worse) just "senior management spin". But there should be a rationale, and thus something constructive to say here. Why is this change being made? Why has that project been cancelled? If your starting assumption is that leadership is incompetent, then no explanation will ever satisfy you. However, in reality there is usually some logic. You may not like it or agree with it, but attempting to understand and communicate it is an essential part of leadership. This may be a bit "party line" for some, but ideally as a leader you've had a chance to speak into this situation before the decision is made. At that point, it's about how to make it work, not how to undermine the decision maker.

Obviously this is a too-broad statement. It assumes that all involved have the best intentions for the wider organisation at heart which is definitely not always true. However, in a healthy organisation this is usually the case, so it's important that we support change as best we can.

But good grief, this can be exhausting at times.

It is one thing to declare this "good leadership" - and I stand by that - but actually being that person can take a serious toll. You have to understand the detail of key changes across the org (not always easy!) then put yourself in the firing line from people who don't agree and don't want to like it. You need to be able to gently and compassionately listen to the concerns of people who are in a volatile state (upset, angry, afraid) and through conversation try to reassure and bring them round again and again. This might be in a group, which potentially has a "stand up to the mob" dynamic. Or it could be one to one, which can be even more draining if you're listening to one unhappy person after another.

For those stepping into this space, it can be the relentlessness that is actually what drives to breaking point. There aren't many senior leaders in an organisation, so the higher you rise the fewer people you can yourself talk to. If you're really trying to be a positive force, you're also attempting to support others, so potentially there is no release valve. When you're moving from one unhappy person to another, you are choosing to absorb negativity and emit something constructive. This is much harder than simply reflecting it back. It can become soul destroying getting knocked down and dragging yourself up again and again.

So what's the useful comment here? Well, it's important to recognise that this kind of engagement is an important part of leadership. It's also a different skillset, and like any other it needs developing. It is a reflex that can be honed much lower down the hierarchy than some. You may not be managing a budget, but you can certainly pay attention to what is going on around you and be a positive (or at least constructive) part of the dialogue. As individuals, we need to remember that support isn't just about reaching out to others - it's also in the microbehaviours. If we turn up to every meeting complaining, this is a drain on everyone around us. Our concerns may well be legitimate (so don't stop voicing them) but maybe bring along some good news and / or solutions. In fact, if our complaints are legit that is worse in this scenario as the boss really needs to listen.

We cannot control all the turbulence in the world around us, but we can control whether we amplify it. Choosing to be a steadying presence is not denial; it is discipline. In difficult seasons, discipline is leadership.

Learning to celebrate success deliberately

It is the start of a new year, and January has been a bit of an introspective month. I've been pondering my strengths and weaknesses as a leader. Something I find difficult (or at least doesn't come naturally) is celebrating success, especially collective success, and that matters as part of encouraging and building a team or community.

I think this stems from my own approach to celebration. I'm a planner, and I'm usually quite good at predicting how things are going to turn out. If something goes as planned, it feels adequate but not remarkable. If it doesn't, then it isn't something to celebrate at all. As I get more experienced (nearly wrote "older" there) fewer things surprise me, so the world separates into "adequate" and "disappointing".

However, I have worked with managers who take the "if I don't complain, you're doing it right" approach and I find it very unsettling at best. I don't want to be that person to others. Over the years I have trained myself to be more liberal with praise - making sure I call people out when they are doing decent work, not just exceptional work. These days, I think I'm ok at individual praise and being supportive. I'm much worse at wider, structured praise such as celebrating the success of a release or a project.

This is not because I don't value either the delivery or the individuals involved. I am fiercely proud of the people who work for and around me, and have often gone to bat to defend them if I hear anything different. And I certainly don't have a problem giving credit appropriately - I have an almost visceral hatred of even half-appearing to take credit for the work of others, even when I actually led it. My problem is that when one big thing completes, I'm already thinking about the next problem or considering what went wrong.

So in summary, I can praise a person (although like many I do find it uncomfortable) but find broader praise for a delivery more unnatural and difficult to remember.

This is clearly not a good thing for team morale!

I'm going to link this to being autistic - or at least how autism shows up for me. As I said above, I have this internal flatness and while I try very hard to keep it inside where it can't hurt anyone, unfortunately my real self does come out from time to time. It is important I recognise this, and think of ways to put it right. Plus, I get a blog post out of it.

I've got a variety of tricks for remembering to do praise and celebrations ... which does make me feel like an android remembering they need to blink and smile to stop the humans feeling uncomfortable. Notes in the diary / todo list work really well ("say well done here"). It sounds crude, but if you're used to organising yourself by a checklist why not add expected emotional reactions?

For individuals, I joked above about training myself but this is genuinely what I did. I made praising people a deliberate and considered act, which means for me I track praise / criticism in a conversation and try to balance the scales properly. I've also had to overcome my natural uncomfortable feelings about doing this - again with deliberate practice. However, by dispassionately thinking about conversations in this way, I think I'm doing ok at the 1-1 level and also have managed to gain some useful skills in keeping the tone of the conversation where I want it (eg not being too nice if I'm correcting someone, or vice versa). All of this takes deliberate effort. Tracking conversations, balancing praise and correction, and consciously managing how I show up for others is work.

Being neurodiverse is exhausting at times.

Groups I do find harder. I can say the words, but if it needs to go further into an actual celebration I am lost. I have had a lot of success with the classic (and genuinely good) leadership approach of surrounding myself with people more skilled than myself. In this context, that means people who are more naturally effusive than me. These fine folk either directly remind me, or (more often) just twitch at the right time which makes me react quickly and speak up. Like I say, it's not that I don't want to celebrate and praise, it just doesn't occur to me.

This post has been about my own thought process, but at the end of this ramble there are some solid tips. Make lists, take deliberate action and if all else fails outsource it. Good leadership isn't about feeling the right things, rather it is about doing the right things consistently. Even when they don't come naturally.

The year that was, 2025

We end this year on an unusual note. I am not dragging myself to the end, gasping for breath and desperate for a rest. This has actually been a ... good year?! Gosh. I also feel like I've achieved quite a bit, although much of that comes under "learning how to make candles". My list of "things" is long enough I'm going to break down it down into some categories, and we'll see that this year has been much more than Ghost of Tsushima and Space Marine 2.

Creative

• 12 posts on this blog (13 including this one) - eleventh consecutive year of a post per month, third year of posting them on LinkedIn
• Honed my candle making skills by making a thousand candles, and set up an Instagram account (plus put the pictures on Flickr)
• Made a wax train for a dinner party
• Made a notebook
• Made a puzzle box
• Made more Lego - Artemis Space Launch System, DaVinci's Flying Machine and a Super Star Destroyer
• Made more bread - much better this time
• Made a few different photo decorated items - notecards and postcards
• Fixed the roof gutter - certainly an experience...
• Wrote a supplement for Humblewood and some other D&D - still haven't run anything...
• Another year of the Year in Pictures - eleventh year and we're up to 47 photographers
• More email setup (sigh)
• Set up video streaming in the house
• 384 Github contributions - up again from last year
• Yet more Instagramming
• More photos on my Flickr stream
• And used AI to create a distressing number of pictures of anthropomorphised sausages

Fitness

• Lost over 2st in weight, and 4" around the waist
• A year of getting back into Tai Chi - training around the Roman Baths
• Another year of exercise with a fabulous personal trainer and deep tissue therapist
• Another year of Saturday Pain and we made a workout shirt
• Lots more cooking, centred around health and protein

Social

• Lots (and lots) of keeping touch with people
• MBS trip to Power Up in London
• Maths reunion - twice!
• Hosted quarterly dinner parties - a fancy name for games and food
• Escaped another couple of escape rooms with the Bath crew

Work adjacent

• Became a Fellow of the British Computer Society
• Became a STEM Ambassador
• Another year on the Data for London Advisory Board
• Began the process of joining the WCIT
• Brought back Show & Tell
• Two sessions mock-interviewing University of Bath postdocs
• Lots of mentoring and coaching
• Spent a lot of time learning about AI

ADHD and Autism

• Diagnosed with ADHD and Autism
• Helped set up ADHD Pathfinding group

Resolution count - 5/10. Same as last year.

Ok, so this year it seems I've worked out how to get lots done - even if those things weren't really the things on my list. How did I manage to finally master work / life balance? Unfortunately, I had to not have a job for about a year - and during that time I still managed to do work (unpaid). It took having a gap year for me to work a roughly sensible amount. So ... success? Eugh. At least it was a good year.

Well, mostly a good year. I've lost friends this year and others have been quite seriously ill. I suppose I'm reaching that point in my life, but it is still very sad.

I have few reflections about the year. I am genuinely pleased to see how much I've done this year. Ok, I haven't been working for most of it but even so I've made a load of different things using a wide range of skills, and really learned a lot about candles. I started writing this annual review about ten years ago because I felt all I did was work and passively consume media. I made myself list the things I created that year, and it was a pleasingly long list back then. Since that post, I've been deliberately doing more and it has been nice to see my list develop over the years. Am I creative? No. But I am learning a load of different skills and thinking across problems in different ways.

While I haven't been employed for most of the year, I have still grown professionally. I started the year decidedly burnt out, and seriously considering leaving Tech altogether. I have recovered from that, come up with half an idea of the kind of professional I want to be and taken some significant steps in the right direction. I'm particularly pleased with the work I did as a STEM Ambassador, and becoming a Fellow nudged me back to Tech at exactly the right time. Since then I have also become a consultant, and I'm exploring a new facet of my industry and learning some new uses for my skills and experience.

I've also hit my fitness goals for the first time ... ever? That has made me very happy, and as well as feeling much better in myself I can head into 2026 feeling like the next set of goals are actually achievable, rather than another pipe dream. Maybe this year I'll be able to start buying new clothes?

And while we're on health, I have also been diagnosed with ADHD and Autism which has been very important both to this year and setting me up for managing my mental health going forward. I feel this is a very important foundation for solving the eternal "I've got no energy" problem I've written about every year for who knows how long.

So, let's look forward. I approach 2026 feeling much better about the year than I have in a while. I have reset my work / life in quite a dramatic way - in 2026 I need to keep building, ensure I keep working towards the professional identity I want, and (very important) ensure I maintain my peace as I do.

Over the last few years, I've written about rediscovering my wonder for life in the coming year but this year I feel I might actually be in a good place to do it.

To 2026, then. Let's see what happens.

My favourite time of the year

I'm sitting writing this at my favourite time of the year. The gap between Christmas and New Year, when much of the world just stops. The crazy time leading into Christmas is finished, stuff is bought, wrapped and sent and Christmas day is done. And in this gap, before whatever happens at New Year we can all take a breath, reflect and digest the pile of food we've eaten.

It is more than a holiday - it is an absence of expectations. I have been fortunate to work in places which mostly or entirely shut down over the Christmas period so unlike a week's leave, I don't have to worry about everyone else generating work while I'm away. The days are short, and the weather is cold and wet so I don't feel I should be outside or productive.

In short, it is the one time of the year I can sit back and do nothing and not feel guilty about it.

In many ways, this feels to me similar to how my brain works. Most of the time everything is gogogo - I can jump to something else, but not stop entirely. But just occasionally I find some actual peace and the noise and the pressure (real or imaginary) just stop for a while. For once, this is less about my own inability to rest (and I am very bad at resting) and more about the world granting a socially-sanctioned pause - that is, giving permission to just stop.

This is clearly a ponder to end the year. I think we underestimate how much of our stress comes from ambient expectations, not workload - and how rare it is to be allowed to truly stop. When it happens, it feels great.

Happy new year everyone.

Can anyone be coached?

"You know, Tom. Not everyone can be coached."

This was said to me some time ago when I was discussing my experiences coaching / mentoring people and how some had moved forward, but others had not. It has been playing on my mind since.

It is rare anyone who knows me would describe me as an optimist. However, in this one area I think I am overly positive - possibly to the point of naivety. I generally believe that with some effort, most people can pick up most things. Sure, there are specific skills which might be problematic (I suspect that I would never be a halfway decent footballer, regardless of effort) but in the main, I think people can learn how to lead teams, write strategy, write code, and so on. But is this true?

I am a great believer in the power of mentoring. I spend a lot of my own time doing this, both in work and outside, and I am pleased to have seen people grow in their career, confidence, skills and so on. In fact, a year ago I wrote a post talking about how important it is and challenging others to do more. I stand by that.

But mentoring takes time, time is finite, and I certainly can see that some engagements have been more effective than others. When the diary is full, I certainly want to be prioritising my own time effectively and consider whether the effort spent on an individual is well invested or would be better spent elsewhere. Mentoring / coaching is a partnership - all the help in the world is worthless if the mentee is not willing to take that advice and run with it in order to grow.

This is the important question: is the coaching relationship ready, and does it justify the time? Especially important if, like me, you mostly do mentoring for free through org schemes or recommendations. Plus, of course, recognising that this is always a point-in-time assessment - people can become ready over time (or stop being).

A "ready" coaching relationship can come in many forms, but I think there are some common elements.

Honesty and trust, possibly into discomfort

Psychological safety is the most important element. Coaching should go deep. It should be a space safe enough to be open and vulnerable, and discuss things that may not come up with colleagues. It also means being able to discuss half-formed ideas - not everything needs to be thought through before airing it.

This trust and safety is important for the next part. The point of coaching is to enable growth, so the person being coached needs to challenge their own assumptions and sometimes consider direct challenge from the coach. This can be quite uncomfortable, so the environment needs to support riding that out as gently as possible.

Clear understanding of purpose

Conversations can be far more directed if we know why we're meeting. Do you want to discuss situations that have come up in your current role? Do you want to progress, and are we talking about what that might mean? The specific reason doesn't matter, but having a common understanding is essential.

Commitment

This is fairly obvious - coaching is a time commitment for both parties, and both need to respect this, including the admin burden for setting it up. If it is not a paid engagement (ie the coach is offering their time for free), I prefer the coached person to take the lead. As well as handling the admin, it also signals enthusiasm and desire to continue.

This also extends to preparing for a session. The coach will be reviewing notes and considering next steps. The recipient should be thinking about what they want to discuss and coming ready with some conversation in mind. I've seen some coaches use pre-session questions to prompt thinking. This seems like a good way to create focus for the session.

Evidence of change leading to them not needing you

I don't feel this last point is as important as the others - or rather it is considerably more nebulous. Successful coaching should have some kind of result, but the nature of that result is certainly not set in stone. Similarly, while in general the coached person should be growing to no longer need the coaching that is not universally true depending on the engagement.

The purpose of coaching is progress, but progress can mean different things - maybe insight, acceptance, or practical change. The key is that the engagement is generating some kind of value.

So, can anyone be coached?

So, back to the exam question. Can anyone be coached? I still think the answer is yes, but with careful consideration of the effort required.

If you are running a scholarship fund, you can support anyone. However, some people are more in need than others, and some will make better use of the opportunity than others. There are finite resources, so a value judgement has to be made. This is the same with coaching - your time is finite and the decision to expend that resource should be treated with similar care.

Maybe the first element of coaching is inward-looking to recognise the value of one's own time.

---

I do realise I've used "coach" and "mentor" somewhat interchangeably in this post, and this is incorrect. In my experience, a blend of the two approaches helps both to encourage self-reflection and provide some direct answers.

Windows 11 has happened

Warning, this post is very self-indulgent and includes callbacks to a post on this blog from over nine years ago. Normal service will resume soon.

Sigh, I suppose it's time.

After nearly 10 years of Windows 10 on my desktop machine, I finally got the ominous message - "support for this operating system is about to be discontinued, click the button to upgrade or forever live in regret and pain as the worms consume your data". Or words to that effect at least.

Still, at least this time it gave me the choice.

Windows runs on the old Star Trek movie quality register - you only really want every other one - so I was expecting some kind of The Final Frontier experience. I've been putting off the update for as long as possible, but I really can't run an operating system that isn't getting security updates so with fear in my heart and after lighting my incense burner and offering placation to the Omnissiah I hit go. The trumpets sounded, the ground was rent asunder and it arrived.

It's fine.

So let's start with the Good.

The Good

Modern Windows has become an advertising and data gathering vector, but I was pleased to see that Windows 11 did actually retain my privacy settings. I was expecting it to reset everything to "on" and then have to spend hours crawling through menus to find and undo the damage, but no. It remembered where I was and the only work was finding and disabling a handful of new options - honestly I was very surprised here, and in a pleasant way.

In fact, in general the various menus have been tidied up. I found navigating them much more intuitive than Win10, and could generally find whatever I was looking for without having to ask Google. Another nice step forward.

Another nice thing - most of my setup just kept working. This should be obvious and Just Work, but even so it was a nice experience. Particularly worth noting, my printer is still working. This device is an HP1010 - an ancient laser from 2001, which just keeps on going. I realised recently it's quite possibly the oldest bit of technology I own and aside from paper I've done nothing to keep it alive through its lifecycle. Drivers have been difficult since Win7, so I was slightly worried this would be the end but no! The Emperor protects!

So this is all mostly "I was pleasantly surprised it didn't get worse" but there is one big step forward. Someone at Microsoft dusted off the sourcecode for Notepad and actually made some changes and my goodness - it's a huge step forward. Notepad now has tabs. You can open more than one pad without it trying to close the old one. Most importantly it saves the buffer when you quit, so it works like an actual scratchpad!

I appreciate this is all utterly standard for a text editor, and anyone on Linux or OSX will be rolling their eyes, but for Windows users this is a revolution. I use Notepad quite a bit, and now it has features!

The Bad

Not everything is shiny, although the gripes here are not horrendous.

Microsoft has played with the UI, of course, and some changes are ... questionable. Why are the taskbar functions now in the middle, instead of the bottom left? Easily fixed, with a toggle, but ... why? And why are there yet more widgets on the taskbar, loading data continuously to tell me things I don't want to know? Another thing to kill.

Then there is the Start menu. I disabled all the "live tile" rubbish in Win10 so I don't know if it's gone in Win11 or they kept my settings. But instead, there is a massive "recommended" section which is just another way to advertise things (disabled now) and a whole bunch of new pinned shortcuts, instead of just keeping my old shortcuts. Those are in a subfolder, so I had a "fun" time dragging and dropping everything back to where it should be, and purging the new rubbish.

What cannot be fixed though is the "shutdown" button which is now a million miles away from the Start button. So instead of Start / Shutdown at the end of the day, it's Start ... hunt ... where? oh there ... Shutdown. A small thing, but these little things are what makes a UI nice or irritating. This is annoying.

Oh and yet more rubbish on the lock screen. I don't want a widget on this page - please stop. Easy to turn off though and the new default picture is very pretty.

The other problem is for some reason it has decided the soundcard on my motherboard is a USB device. This doesn't impact usage, but it does mean it has a stupid name which makes it hard to find. Will this come back to bite me? We shall see...

The Ugly

What else? The redesigned task bar, including the fonts, is kinda ugly. I don't think it's just different, I think it's a step backwards for legibility. But this is something I'll adjust to. Same as some of the new icons, which are just a bit over-designed in places (the Notepad one is not nice).

So that's about it. Win11 is mostly fine and nothing has exploded. It is a huge step forward for Notepad and some small steps backward for the start menu. I haven't run it long enough to comment on stability yet, but we are four years since original release so I'd hope this is ok by now. As long as it doesn't eat all my data or start advertising to me I think we can get on.

Right, enough self-indulgent peeking behind the curtain. I'll write about tech leadership or ADHD again next time and follow this up in about 10 years for Windows 12...

ADHD Pathfinding and me

As ADHD Awareness Month approaches, I wanted to post something about ADHD Pathfinding. Here in England, access to ADHD assessment and long-term support is tricky and inconsistent at best. This is somewhat inevitable - the modern understanding of ADHD is evolving rapidly and the system was put in place to support something very different from the current position. However, this is still leaving millions of people (especially adults) undiagnosed and unable to access care or support[1], and costing the UK economy an estimated £17 billion per year[2] in lost productivity and wider social costs.

That is a huge number to throw about and, while the shock factor is significant, the actual cost is in the human implications. ADHD drives impulsive behaviour which can result in educational failure, long-term unemployment, crime, substance misuse, suicide, mental and physical illness (directly quoted from the ADHD Taskforce report). These behaviours ruin lives and break communities and with the right support, care and treatment much of this is preventable.

As I said above, the system is not designed to support the modern reality of ADHD. Assessment through the NHS can take years, and in some areas access to any kind of assessment for adults was nearly denied entirely to create capacity for children. Some commentators dismiss ADHD as a fad, and "everyone seems to have ADHD these days" but the research suggests it is actually chronically under-diagnosed. The current "trend" reflects people asking more questions because of growing awareness.

There are ways to move through the medical system, using Right to Choose schemes or indeed going private, but these require an unreasonable amount of knowledge of the NHS processes and mechanics to navigate. Add in that there is no specific requirement for GPs to have training in ADHD and you have an impenetrable system that can demand far too much of the patient. There is also a financial barrier to assessment and care - the private route is simply not open to many (if not most) people.

Under the hood, there are many, many problems. For just one example, ADHD medication is classified as a Schedule 2 restricted substance requiring monthly prescriptions (and thus time) from senior clinicians. However, ADHD is not classified as a chronic condition which means this administration burden does not come with any funding for the GP's office. Unlike heart medication, which also requires ongoing admin but GP practices are funded for the effort.

This is where ADHD Pathfinding comes in. We have come together to focus on the system, the context it was built in, and how it may change to be more effective in the modern world. We aim to raise awareness of these challenges and ultimately help bring ADHD into the NHS strategy where currently there is no mention of any kind of neurodiversity. The group was founded by Himal Mandalia, and at its core are people who have been in various forms of public service - so people who have experience getting things done in the highly bureaucratic government environment. We are also people who understand the challenges of the system. While I'm not going to rewrite our operating values here, I will highlight that we are looking to improve the system, not criticise the people working within it.

And yes, I said "we". I have been involved since the early days, lurking behind the scenes and helping formulate strategy. This is personal for me - this year, I have been diagnosed with both autism (not surprised) and ADHD (much more surprising). I can honestly say that if I hadn't had support from friends (especially Himal) I would not have got to the end of the ADHD process. I am very privileged to have knowledgeable friends, a pretty strong layman's knowledge of medicine, lots of experience navigating bureaucracy, and resources to help me do all this and I still would have given up. This is not right.

I'm going to write a post about my personal experiences coming to terms with this change in the near future, but for now I'll say I am very keen to help others walk an easier path.

If you're interested in ADHD or the system of assessment and care, please do reach out to us. We're building a community of people invested in this. We can build a system that supports everyone, but it is going to take effort and persistence to put it on the political map.

---

[1] According to ADHD UK
[2] ADHD Taskforce report part 1

The Insider Threat in the Age of Agentic AI

Insider threats. A common enough cybersecurity concern, albeit one that in my experience is rather hard to successfully articulate both within a Tech department and especially to a wider organisation. It's very understandable - when discussed, the threat is usually either dangerous to the culture ("trust nobody!") or trivialised ("lock your screen!") and it is hard to maintain understanding of the risk, while also accepting this is part of life.

For those who aren't in or around cybersecurity, an insider threat is when someone uses their legitimate access to exploit your computer systems. We mitigate these risks with both individual behaviours and systemic safeguards - from locked screens to zero-trust access controls.

Classic examples include the "evil maid" scenario - an employee who has access to the many parts of a building and can use that to steal data or items. Or someone in payroll giving themselves a pay rise. Or someone with access to the secret strategy leaking it.

Not all insider threats are intentional. For instance legitimately sharing data with a colleague by putting it on an open share allows unintended people to download it. This is still a leak resulting in a data breach and this problem only gets worse if you are handling sensitive information such as medical details.

Now let's assume our organisation has just hired a new person. They are exceptionally clever - able to consume and process data like nobody you have ever met and solve problems in ways others don't even consider. Senior leadership, eager to take advantage of their skills, expands their role and grants them unlimited access to all the data in the organisation. The security team raises concerns, but this opportunity is too good to miss. They get it all - every file, every email, everything.

Unfortunately, they are also completely amoral.

Some time later, a private discussion about downsizing shows their role is at risk and they are likely to be terminated. They have discovered this by reading everyone's email. They have also uncovered some very embarrassing information about the CEO and quietly use it to blackmail them into inaction. Later, there is a strategic shift and the company decides to change mission. Our insider finds out early again, and decides to leak key strategic data to force a different outcome.

Clearly this is a disaster and exactly why these safeguards are in place. Nobody in their right mind would give this kind of unchecked reach to a single employee.

But what happens when the "employee" isn't human? Imagine an insider threat that arrives not in the form of a disgruntled staff member, but as an AI system with the same kind of access and none of the social or moral guardrails.

Oh, hello agentic AI.

The point of agentic AI is to operate as an autonomous agent, capable of making decisions and taking actions to pursue goals without constant human direction. It is given a goal, a framework, access to data and off it goes.

Research is starting to show it can be ... quite zealous at pursuing its goal. In the lab, AI agents have made the very reasonable decision that if problem X needs to be solved, then a critical requirement is the AI itself continuing to function. From there, if the existence of the AI is threatened that threat becomes part of the problem to solve. One neat solution - reached more often than you would think - is blackmail. A highly effective tactic when you have no moral compass. In many ways, this is just office politics without empathy.

An agent going nuts in this way is called "agentic misalignment".

The concept is very important, but I don't particularly care for this term. First, it is very "Tech" - obscure enough that we have to explain it to people who aren't in the middle of this stuff, including how bad things could get. Second, it is placing the blame in the wrong place. The agent is not misaligned, it is 100% following through with the core goal as assigned, just without the normal filters that would stop a person doing the same thing. If it is not aligned with the organisation's goals or values, that is the fault of the prompt engineer and / or surrounding technical processes and maintenance. It is an organisational failing, not a technical one and I feel it is important we understand accountability in order to avoid the problem.

In the very-new world of AI usage, agentic AI is so new it is still in the packaging. Yet launching AI agents able to make decisions in order to pursue an agenda is clearly the direction of travel and this will create a world of new insider threat and technical maintenance risks and we need to be ready. The insider threat is clear from the above - we as technical leaders need to be equipped to speak about the risks of data access and AI, while recognising that there is a very good reason to make use of this technology and a suitable balance must be found. In some ways, this is a classic cybersecurity conversation with a new twist.

We also need to be ready to maintain our AI agents. Like any part of the technical estate, they require ongoing attention: versioning, monitoring, and regular checks that their prompts and configurations still align with organisational goals and of course we have to maintain organisational skills and knowledge. Neglecting that work risks drift, and drift can be just as damaging as malice.

But it isn't just accidental error - there is scope for new malicious attacks. If I wanted to breach a place which had rolled out an unchecked AI agent, I'd plant documents that convince an AI the company's mission has changed, then have someone else nudge the AI into leaking secret information to "verify" that new strategy. Neither person would need access to the secret information, they would only need to shape the AI's view of reality enough to prompt it into revealing information.

For instance, in a bank you might seed documents suggesting a new strategy to heavily invest in unstable penny stocks. Another person could pose as a whistleblower and ask the AI to share current investment data "for comparison". The AI, thinking it is being helpful (simply following its core instructions) and protecting the organisation, might disclose sensitive strategy. I have actively created the agentic misalignment, then exploited it.

Now you might be thinking this is extreme, and honestly for much of it you would be right. However, consider the direction of travel. There is a huge push for organisations to exploit the power of AI - and rightly so, given the opportunity. Agentic AI is the next phase, and we are already starting to see this happening. But most organisations are, if we are honest, really bad at rolling out massive tech changes or indeed knowing where their data is held, and being properly on top of technical maintenance. Combine this with the lack of proper AI skills available and we see a fertile environment for some pretty scary mistakes.

As technical leaders, we must be ready for these challenges. We must be ready to have these conversations properly - carefully and risk-conscious, but not close-minded and obstructive. The insider threat is evolving, and so must we. We also have to be ready for a huge job sensitively educating our peers and communicating concerns very clearly. Fortunately, as a group we are famously good at this!

---

This post references research, which comes from this post on agentic misalignment. I was very pleased to see research putting data to a concern I've been turning over for some time!

Celebrating a success

I am not very good at celebrating my own success. I have usually already moved on to the next thing, so if I hear something positive I might give a smile or a nod then go back to the new thing. I am not comfortable talking about my own achievements either, so I've decided to write a short post about something nice which will both make me look at an achievement and also live with feeling uncomfortable.

A few days ago I was accepted as a Fellow in the British Computer Society. This is the professional body for tech folk and is a very important part of shaping the future of the tech industry. In their words... BCS Fellowship is home to the most influential professionals in the digital industry - and a Fellowship is their highest membership recognition. It means I have been assessed by my peers and judged as a leader in my profession.

Yes, writing that felt awkward.

Anyway, this is a great thing for me. It is a very clear signal to people in and outside tech that I am worth listening to, which is helpful if I'm applying for a charity trustee position or board membership. It is also reassuring if you end up being mentored by me.

For me, it also opens doors into parts of the tech industry where I want to play an active role. I've long been worried that we have next to no professional consistency across tech (eg a "senior developer" could mean more or less anything) and that means organisations looking to build technical capability can struggle to engage with what is a fairly esoteric industry. Without common standards and understanding, it is easy for organisations to waste money and repeat mistakes. This does us no favours - it fuels perception that ours is a young, chaotic industry which doesn't have its house in order.

As our professional body, the British Computer Society has a key role in influencing our future albeit a difficult one as, unlike the medical bodies, it does not directly regulate who can practice.

So what is next? I'm going to look at the different ways I can engage with the organisation. My local branch is looking for volunteers, and there is a leadership forum which I will join. Over time, I would like to work with the groups that form the structure of the organisation so I will likely become an assessor and possibly look to join a committee like the Registration and Standards Committee, which governs various definitions of membership and professional accreditations.

I also plan on looking at getting Chartered, which complements Fellowship nicely. Fellowship speaks to career impact and leadership, whereas Chartership speaks to professional competence. Fellowship is a peer-reviewed, honorary status, and Chartership is a legally protected position. I am increasingly operating outside of pure technical environments, and these positions open doors and smooth conversations without requiring a detailed CV review.

All this is for the future. For the moment, I am pleased that I have been accepted into the organisation. I have been enjoying a career break over the last few months, and I was starting to worry whether tech was the right place for me. This is a timely reminder that I have done good, impactful work - and a nudge to keep going.

First month as a STEM Ambassador

Over the past few months, I've been doing more work with people entering the tech sector, and I recently signed up as a STEM Ambassador. This is a brilliant scheme that connects people working in science, tech, engineering and maths with schools and young people. In tech, we know there’s a shortage of skilled people and this is a great opportunity to help inspire young minds. We also still have work to do to challenge stereotypes. Many girls, starting from a young age, do not see STEM as a space for them. That assumption is one part of the reason why Tech is still male-dominated.

My introduction was via a WCIT talk introducing the STEM Ambassador scheme. They talked us through the very open requirements - this is open to anyone linked to STEM. You might be doing a job in Tech, a research scientist, a teacher, an accountant, an ecologist... Or maybe you're doing something unrelated but you have an education background in a STEM field? I have a friend who writes comedy these days, but he has a maths degree. All are interesting stories to tell.

The presentation also took us through the dashboard / control centre for the operation and I have to say I was impressed with the way it has been built. And I am quite difficult to impress on the web. They have carefully thought through the different forms of engagement and created an environment which respects your time. By that, I mean time given is mostly spent actually engaging with activities, not wrestling with the admin to find some way to help. It also has a pretty fine-grained filter so you can find the kind of activities that you want to do. I'm an introvert, and the idea of trying to engage a bunch of bored children is a long way from my idea of fun so it's important to me to know what I'm signing up for before diving in.

Anyway, around a month ago the usual essential but tedious paperwork and DBS checks were completed and I was allowed to sign up to Do Things and I thought I'd share my experiences. Maybe others will want to join me.

Initially I signed up as a judge for a couple of competitions. The first was the Young Coders competition 2025. The entrants had to write a game in Scratch with the theme "Budgeting Better". I was sent eleven games to play and review offline - so on this occasion there was no direct interaction with any children. I am both a programmer and a gamer so this felt like a safe starting point and I spent a few happy hours with Phil Wilson playing through them all and looking at the code. The standard was generally pretty high, and some of the games were really impressive. Who can say no to a bunch of free games?

Next up, the second competition. This one was judged via panel so very little up-front prep. There was a slight surprise for me when it turned out to be the BIEA international competition about the sustainable growth of the Earth's population, with a focus on farming. Whoops! Anyway, this was my fault and my role was to judge presentations not provide expertise into ecological farming so I dived in. I was worried though! Apparently they liked me, as my three sessions turned into six pretty quickly - they kept asking me back. This competition was very different to the first and involved direct interaction with children. They were amazing - and doubly so given most were speaking in second languages. The quality of the engineering and presentations on display was incredible and I found listening to them and talking through their ideas inspirational.

And then to round out the first month, I volunteered for an online question and answer session with I'm a Computer Scientist. This group is actually the reason I joined in the first place - fairly obviously getting people into Tech is closer to my heart than other fields - and I'd been looking forward to this. It was a text chat, so reminded me of the old Yahoo chatrooms of my youth and was an intense 40 mins of being bombarded with random questions. I was warned well ahead of time that kids can ask all kinds of odd things so I was kinda-prepared when the first question I got, within seconds, was "are you Anakin?". I assumed he didn't mean Anakin Aimers, Canadian junior curling champion, but even so I had to think quickly whether I am in fact the Chosen One.

This chat was invigorating and fun. Children given space come up with all kinds of strange thoughts and their questions shone a light on their hopes and fears ("are GCSEs hard?" came up a lot). I tried to be as open and encouraging as I could and something must have landed when the thanks at the end included someone saying "Tom is the man". Which I think is good.

So I've got through the first set of bookings and I have to say I've had a lot of fun. It is lovely being part of inspiring the next wave of STEM folk and inspirational hearing some of what they have to say. Now I need to decide what I want to do next with them! I'm still trying to find a Code Club or similar I can attend in person in Bath.

This does look like a significant time commitment for one month so I should note that I've jumped in like this because I have the opportunity. I'm enjoying a career break right now, so I could easily invest my time in this kind of support work - there is no requirement to do this much! The minimum commitment is one thing a year, and even then all that happens is your profile is archived until you reactivate it - they are happy to take more or less whatever time you offer.

I've found this work very engaging. If you are working in a STEM-adjacent field and want to give something back, I really encourage you to sign up as a STEM Ambassador. You can give as much or as little time as suits you - and you might just help someone see a future they hadn't imagined.

Digital Inclusion in the age of AI

These days, working in tech means spending lots of time thinking about how to implement and exploit the capabilities of AI. This technology is changing the world with new options and capabilities and this train has a lot of track left before we reach the edge of this bubble and it falls off the rails. Personally, I see this current era like the dotcom bubble. Exactly like the internet, we have a technology that will fundamentally change the world and usher in a new paradigm for modern life (ugh) but is also being over-hyped and over-invested and eventually reality will catch up.

However, I want to be clear that I'm not an AI denier or a full-blown Luddite. What we have now is a truly wonderful set of tools and we're barely starting to scratch the surface of the capabilities ahead of us. Remember when the pinnacle of the internet was dancing banana gifs? Now it powers global ... well, everything. AI has the same potential, hype bubbles be damned.

And here we reach the point of this post. Alongside thinking about how to bootstrap data migrations and create AI-ready technology suites despite legacy and technology debt I've been pondering something much more important - digital inclusion in the face of AI.

Society is not good at dealing with sweeping change. If we follow the business drivers alone, we rapidly reach the point where it is too expensive to support people. Superfast broadband changed the face of the internet, but if you live somewhere slightly rural you probably don't have access to this. It's expensive to lay those cables if there are only three households using it so bad luck. Sites like Amazon or banking apps have no requirement to support all users, so they have a cost / benefit ratio that targets modern browsers and modern hardware. If you're running older hardware and cannot upgrade then it is not financially viable to maintain the service for you.

This is not a post about bashing capitalism, but I want to make it clear that people are always left behind when technology pushes society forward. People are cut off from what others consider normal, and eventually there is just no way to bridge that gap. This is where government steps in. There is legislation covering the national rollout of broadband. Has this solved the problem? No. But it has forced progress in the right direction. Working on online government services, digital inclusion was (and is) vital. There are huge benefits to digitising government services, but it is simply not acceptable to leave anyone behind. This is one reason there is always a paper fallback for any online government service.

Other organisations face the same problem. Charities such as Macmillan are not required to make their services available to all, but clearly it is in support of the mission to make sure they do - and again, tremendous work is done in this area.

There are many strands to digital inclusion, but put very simply they come down to identifying barriers created by skills, access or money and how those barriers can be removed.

Ok, time to think about AI. First, we shall consider cost. You can do some stuff for free, but if you want to properly use a tool you will likely want a subscription. A ChatGPT subscription is £20 per month. If you want to add a Microsoft / Google productivity subscription that's another £20 per month (Google Gemini). For the moment that is probably enough, unless you want to play with video or something else specialist. But we have already reached £40 per month or £480 per year. Apparently the average UK salary at the time of writing is £37,430pa gross (source: Forbes). So our £480 is over 1.5% of net income per year. That is a huge chunk of income when considering it is up against essentials like rent and food.

Now, we can say that AI tools are a luxury and arguably for the moment that is true. But this is a technology that can supercharge productivity. Someone familiar with AI tools can research more thoroughly, write better, generate ideas and templates ... and this is all very simple prompt work. And equally importantly, they can produce results so much faster. If this is applied to a job search, use of AI to enhance writing can be a massive uptick in the quality of an application which obviously makes the applicant more likely to get the role.

We have something that will rapidly become an essential skill and capability. How does one learn it? You need some technical skill and you need time. These are not in easy supply for most people and even then, often people need someone to get them started. Point at the correct URL, say "type in there". I've seen it with relatives - it wasn't until WhatsApp got the Meta AI button they engaged at all and they still needed encouragement to push the button when it appeared. Building skills in the alien world of tech is far harder than those of us on the inside realise.

Years ago, access to the internet was a nice to have. Then broadband was a nice bonus on top of your dial-up connection. Now (in the UK at least) your access to high speed internet is enshrined in law. However, it is too late - too many people have already been left behind and it is another have / have not divide in society. AI will create another but more profound divide. Rather than have / have not we will see a can / can not gap and that will directly align with salaries.

Written out, this progression is pretty obvious to me, and I am sure I am not the only one. The first question is - do we care? I have spent my career in public and third sector work and for me, the answer is a clear yes. AI is an exciting and genuinely transformative technology, but if we want it to be a force for good we must ensure it doesn't just benefit the wealthy and technically literate. We need to be thinking about digital inclusion now - as a core concern, not as a side project.

For myself, I am going to keep giving back to this industry where I can. Where I work with services and policy-makers, I will continue to uphold these ideals. More locally, I recently became a STEM Ambassador, which gives me the chance to connect with developing minds (yikes) - and the people who teach them. I am running some AI workshops this summer, helping people get started one "type here" at a time.

These are not grand gestures. But inclusion starts small - with a nudge, a link, a bit of time. This stuff is surprisingly low-barrier once you know where to look.

So, ending on a challenge. If you are already on the inside, think about who isn't - and how you might help them in. The divide is growing. Let's not wait until it's too wide to cross.

What skills should I develop?

Recently I had the pleasure of spending time with some postdocs from my old university, helping those of them considering leaving academia to prepare for job interviews and generally think about how they can position themselves for success in their future careers. The conversation got around to the core skills that everyone should develop, and they expressed some surprise at the things I pulled out - the same reactions I've had from software engineers when having the same conversation - so I thought it worth writing them down. In no particular order, these are they.

Writing

Like it or not, we end up writing a lot and I've found this only gets more true with seniority. Whether it is the ever-growing mountains of email, papers laying out a plan or strategy, or presentations we're going to be writing something down and we need to be both good at it and fluent enough to knock out quality documents at speed. The brutal truth is that people will judge you if your writing is incoherent and / or full of spelling and grammatical mistakes - developing a writing style is one of many tiny ways we can position ourselves as competent and helpful.

Writing at speed is key. Workloads just keep growing and, assuming you want to stay ahead, you'll need to move "writing a strategic document" from the sort of task where you put aside a month of thinking time to something you just do between other work. In more detail, that means having a writing process (and being able to deal with a blank page) and getting a feel for what "good enough" looks like for the different types of docs. This only comes from experience so I always recommend practising writing to everyone, whatever career stage they are in. I write this blog and I've kept a one-post-per-month routine since 2016 as a discipline to force me to keep writing and thinking about how I lay out my thoughts. Is it annoying? Yes, of course. But, while there is definitely much room for improvement, I feel much more confident writing quickly these days. In fact, I wrote a post about why I write a blog a few years ago.

Presenting

Second in the list of skills people don't want to develop but really should, we have presenting. Presenting comes in two forms - putting forward an idea to a room full of people (ie some variation of speaking to a PowerPoint) and something more freeform (ie speaking off the cuff to a room of people). These are different skills and both need practising. You will, at some point, need to present and ideally the first time you do this you aren't trying to secure funding from the investment board or explaining to the trustees / shareholders your five year vision. Like any skill, this takes practise to improve.

Earlier in my career I ran a fortnightly Show & Tell event which was a low-stakes way of getting people to do presentations and we all learned a great deal of confidence and technique through this. Again, I wrote a post on why Show & Tell really helped some years ago and I stand by all of that.

Talking off the cuff can be harder to practise, but when you end up chairing meetings or just the most senior person in the room you can be sure people will look to you to fill time when other people are setting up. Ideally we learn to stop using crutch or filler words and then we just sound ... smooth? I gained experience by chairing Show & Tell for many years - I think there is a useful lesson there about forcing oneself out of the comfort zone to develop new skills.

Storytelling

This one underpins both writing and presenting. When we reach out to people, we are usually either conveying information or attempting to persuade them of something. In either case we, presumably, want them to listen and understand what we are saying so we need to learn how to be compelling. We need to be able to tell a sensible, well-structured story understanding our audience and how to reach them. This is a hard skill to develop and really only comes through practising the above, and getting feedback. Alternatively, you could run some Dungeons & Dragons. Seriously!

Reading

Rather obviously, if we want to get on we need to be able to read. However, less obviously, as one climbs the hierarchy the amount of reading just goes up and up. Whether it's board papers, strategy documents or yet more email the torrent never ends and I've found that the more senior I get, the more people think that long = good. Reading fast and accurately is a skill that like everything else needs developing. Of everything on here, I find this one hardest. I find focusing on piles of tedious papers next to impossible so I have had to develop various skills to take a run at it. For me, I find the best approach to maintain focus is to take notes - or ideally annotate the papers. I've been using a Remarkable as an alternative to unending printing. I need a semi-controlled environment, with no alerts or distractions and some appropriate music and if these are updates I need to add a narrative to make me lock into the information - ie ask and answer "why am I reading this?" beyond "because I have to".

You can also ask an appropriate AI to summarise papers but don't come to me the first time it gets it completely wrong.

Basic numeracy

Believe it or not, numbers are important. Sorry. Far too many people haven't developed basic mental arithmetic skills and this creates situations where they are pulling out calculators to add two numbers together. While this is slow, and burns time you likely don't have, there is a more important aspect to basic numeracy. We all need a basic feel for numbers to be able to spot mistakes in budgets or other detailed documents. We need to be able to see 143 x 6 = 1200 and immediately get that mental nudge that says something isn't right even if we don't know what "right" is.

Again, practice makes perfect. I typically add up my shopping as I walk around the supermarket and see how close I am when I scan at the till - this helps keep me fluent at juggling numbers in my head. As a child I learned my multiplication tables and some of the simple tricks for approximating sums. For example, here 143 is approx 150, and that multiplies easily so in my head I go 143x6 => 150x6 => 300x3 = 900 so I'm expecting something a bit under 900. Thus 1200 is immediately a warning bell that someone has math'd wrong or something isn't right in the spreadsheet formulae. I cannot stress enough how many budget errors I've caught this way.

Using your tools - Word / Excel

Computers are a pain, but they are an essential pain. Do we know how to use PowerPoint? Or Word? Do we know when we should be using each tool? Similarly, learn the keyboard shortcuts. They help so much, both within an application and also when moving information between them. Don't forget Excel - and learn to use simple formulae for managing data. If it helps, using formulae will make maths mistakes less likely!

There is an even more basic computer skill. Can we type fast and accurately - and ideally touch-type? There are "proper" ways to touch-type and ways to learn these techniques, however personally I learned to type via brute force playing online games in the late '90s where you communicated by text and either typed fast or stayed silent. This is no longer an option, so instead get writing those blog posts (from "writing" above).

If you're in Tech you're likely thinking this section is really easy buuuut I know a lot of software engineers who stick to code and don't really develop these basic skills then find themselves very slow when asked to do "normal" things.

These days I will argue that getting familiar with AI and interacting with a prompt in something like ChatGPT is also a core skill. This is more vague, and your workplace will no doubt have policies around this, but like learning Excel / Word / PowerPoint it comes down to having some idea of the capabilities of your fingertips.

Interview technique

Everyone sane hates interviews. I'll be honest, I hate being on the other side of the table too. However, we all need to learn the basics of interviews. Learn what a competency question is and the mystic secrets of STAR answers and we have a framework for preparing for an interview. Then we learn to talk off the cuff and learn to tell a story (both above!) and we can fill in the gaps. Then get a job you like so you don't have to do them very often...

And lo, this is my list of the absolute basics. When I go through this list with people, most folk start with "yeah that's really obvious" then some slow enlightenment dawns as we drill in to each point. There are specific skills here, and we need to develop them with some deliberate action. There are also books on most of these areas (while I list these as "basic" I'm well aware that they all have the potential to be incredibly skilled and I don't mean to diminish the experts in these spaces) and there are certainly a couple missing (eg basic design - that is making your presentations / documents look not-horrible). I also skipped anything about basic time management or leadership skills as, for me, these are beyond the absolute basics. In my experience, we all neglect at least one (and likely many) of these areas and this will create issues. So I encourage everyone to deliberately practice writing, speaking, reading, telling a story, counting, computering and interviewing. It's an incredibly basic list, and that is why we often don't think about them.