Trying ideas on for size

It’s clear, with the popularity of tools like OpenClaw, that people are yearning for a digital assistant. Even with the risks—prompt injection, accidental deletion of important documents, or potential data leaks—many are still willing to roll the dice if it helps them navigate the digital clutter we’ve created. In some ways, it feels like the wild west of the early internet all over again.

Back then, the promise was that digital would make everything better. I’m not convinced it has. Yes, there have been real breakthroughs—like having GPS in your pocket. Life is certainly more convenient. But I’m not sure it’s better because of the internet.

Other innovations, like email, didn’t simplify communication; they turned it into something instant, 24/7, with no real off switch.

The incoming is constant now.

So we skim. We scan quickly through the next item on the agenda and sort it into piles: here’s something I should pay attention to, here’s something I can delete, here’s a stack of things for “later,” and so on.

Over time, though, that kind of sorting can wear on our psyches. We start filing information in ways that only reinforce how we already see the world. Anything that contradicts our beliefs gets filtered out or quietly ignored. Social media amplifies this, building echo chambers around our preferences. Spotify algorithm preferences. Netflix suggestions. Google reviews. You get the picture.

There is another option: we can try new information on for size.

Instead of instantly rejecting ideas that conflict with our worldview, we can sit with them for a moment. We can ask, “What if this were true? What would that make possible?” Sometimes that posture opens doors we didn’t even know existed.

And if it doesn’t work—if the new idea proves unhelpful or wrong—you can always go back. The point isn’t to abandon what you know; it’s to stay open to what you don’t know yet.