Monthly Archives: February 2026

Bronco comes GoPro ready

Posted on by

My new Ford Bronco comes with a dash mount for a GoPro camera. I assume this is a nod to the popularity of the Bronco for off-roading. I charged up the GoPro (it’s been a while) and recorded a minute or so.

The umbrella term for this kind of video is Car Vlogging (eww!) and covers everything from enthusiasts reviewing supercars to lifestyle influencers sharing their “morning thoughts.” Dashboard Confessional is a more colloquial term used by critics to describe videos where the driver treats the camera like a therapist or a captive audience for a rant.

The “Captive” Dynamic: There is a psychological effect where the viewer feels like a passenger. For the creator, the task of driving provides a “natural” distraction that reduces the pressure of looking directly into the lens, often making the speech feel more conversational and unscripted.

1984 Land Rover 90 resurrection

Posted on by

From Land Rover guru John Middleton: Picked up a 1984 Land Rover 90 that was an insurance write off after apparently being in a building fire. It runs and drives. We are resurrecting as a 90 pickup.After cutting out some rot and welding in some new frame sections we installed the replacement rear bed.  It hauled its first load of hay.

The next ‘new’ Bronco at your Ford dealer could be an old one

Posted on by

(From CARBUZZ.COM) Soon, classic SUV fans might be able to go to their local Ford dealer and drive away in a first-generation Bronco restomod. The buyer would even have the choice between having a modern V8 or a dual-motor electric powertrain. The upgraded Bronco builder, Kindred Motorworks, met with potential partner showrooms at the National Automobile Dealers Association conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, to expand the availability of its products.

Kindred Motorworks sells its combustion-powered Bronco restomod starting at $199,000. They come with a Ford Coyote 5.0-liter V8 making 460 horsepower. The engine hooks up to a 10-speed automatic transmission with an Atlas II transfer case, a Dana 44 front differential, and a Ford 9.0-inch rear differential with 35-spline axles. It also has power steering and four-wheel disc brakes.

Inside, there’s hand-stitched leather upholstery, heated front seats, a rearview camera, and a touchscreen infotainment screen that supports Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, and Bluetooth. In short, the old off-roader comes equipped with just about everything you’d find in a new one, save for driver assists.

The body looks just like a classic Bronco but with some modern updates. The upgrades include LED headlights and retractable side steps. The doors are still removable, too. The options include a $15,000 hardtop and $1,200 for ceramic window tint. There’s also a $15,000 Trail Package that includes a Warn winch, different front and rear bumpers, a tow hitch, and a tire carrier.

Ford Bronco

Posted on by

Six weeks ago I ready to buy a 2003 Honda Element. I was pretty jazzed up about this 23 year old car. On the day I was supposed write the check, the seller called to say he couldn’t find the title and it might take months to get a duplicate (?!) Hmm. 

I dropped by the local Honda dealership to see if they could find one. Nothing int he dealer network for Honda Elements (they stopped making them in 2011) but the salesman found one on Facebook Marketplace. I don’t do FB but friends messaged the seller asking him to get in touch. Nothing.

This was my Fuck It moment. The Universe was clearly telling me it was time to turn the page on old, used vehicles. I decided to do the unthinkable. Buy a new car.

To make a long post a little shorter I decided to buy a Ford Bronco and my buddy Paul Bandelier offered to introduce me to Judy, his favorite sales person at the local Ford dealership.

They didn’t have any two-door Broncos (my only must-have) but a nearby dealer had one in a color that Paul loved so we did the deal. It has some off-road features I didn’t think I needed (huge tires) but Paul and Mr. Wolf insisted on.

As I write this, I’ve had the Bronco for less than 48 hours. Can only describe this as a “life changing” experience. As I’ve done with my other vehicles, I’ll share this adventure here in coming months. But this is clearly a turning of the page in my automotive life. I’m selling the Land Rover but keeping the pickup and the Jeep. But the Bronco will be my daily driver, leaving the pickup for hauling big stuff and the Jeep for warm weather fun. 

My last new vehicle was the Mini Cooper in 2011. Twenty-five years ago. So I’ll be in ATS (automotive technology shock) for a while. Picture a New Guinea native who has never seen a white man taking his first ride on a Boeing 777. I am (delightfully) overwhelmed. Watch this space.

I deleted my ChatGPT account today

Posted on by

[click through to post to see comment/update]

I’ve been playing with ChatGPT for more than two years. I’ve shared a bunch (143) of those “conversations” here. Initially, I planned to drop back from the $20 a month Pro plan to the free version. But decided to go nuclear.

I’ve been using Perplexity more and find Google’s Gemini as good or better than ChatGPT. But the tipping point was probably OpenAI’s decision to start selling ads on their low-end plans. The other AI companies might follow suit and I’ll probably ditch them if and when.

Anthropic (the company behind Claude) is having some fun with this in an ad that will run during Sunday’s Super Bowl. (Watch on YouTube)

The company says there are several dangers with including ads in chatbot conversations, including potential bias and incentivizing chatbots to keep users in conversations for longer periods.

Consider a concrete example. A user mentions they’re having trouble sleeping. An assistant without advertising incentives would explore the various potential causes—stress, environment, habits, and so on—based on what might be most insightful to the user. An ad-supported assistant has an additional consideration: whether the conversation presents an opportunity to make a transaction […]

Such ads would also introduce an incentive to optimize for engagement—for the amount of time people spend using Claude and how often they return. These metrics aren’t necessarily aligned with being genuinely helpful. The most useful AI interaction might be a short one, or one that resolves the user’s request without prompting further conversation.

So, you ask, are you going to stop using LLM’s all together? Doubtful. They’re just too useful. And the technology is going to be everywhere. (see my previous post on The Agentic iPhone)

If these AI tools had been around in 2002 when I started this blog, it would be a very different creature today. They know more and they write better. Maybe it’s like long division or cursive writing. I worked to hard to learn those skills and I’d hate to lose them. Don’t want some AI writing my blog even if it’s better at it. And, yes, Gemini and Perplexity get mentioned here frequently so torching ChatGPT is mostly symbolic.

The agentic iPhone

Posted on by

Last month Apple announced a partnership with Google that will mark a fundamental shift in the iPhone architecture. The integration of Gemini into iOS means the system is pivoting from a collection of apps to an agentic operating system. It turns the iPhone into a more powerful cognitive lever, but it demands you trust the “black box” more than ever before. I prompted Gemini to show me what that might look like. Excerpts below, the full thread here)

I asked how a new, more powerful iPhone might change the way I write or research my blog posts:

When the operating system moves from being a “file cabinet” to an “active participant,” the boundary between your thoughts and the machine’s suggestions begins to blur.

  • The Loss of Serendipity: When the AI “fetches” the exact answer, you miss the accidental discovery of a different, unrelated factoid in the “wrong” folder. The “digital twin” optimizes for efficiency, but creativity often thrives on inefficiency.
  • The Echo Chamber of One: If Gemini is trained on your “Personal Context,” it will get very good at sounding like you. There is a real risk that your blog posts will start to feel like they’ve been “laundered” through an AI that is simply reflecting your own style back at you, stripping away the rough edges of original thought.
  • The “Privacy vs. Utility” Trap: To get these benefits, you have to let the “Campos” agent index your “private thoughts.” You’re essentially trading the sanctity of your “unrecorded” mind for a more powerful cognitive lever.

I’m sure I’ll find some uses for the new iOS but writing my blog posts won’t be one of them. Near the end of the thread Gemini gives specific instructions for how to disable some of these features.

Gemini analysis of my taste in movies

Posted on by

(Gemini) MovieLens.org is a non-commercial movie recommendation engine and research platform operated by the GroupLens Research lab at the University of Minnesota. Since its launch in 1997, it has served a dual purpose: providing users with high-accuracy personalized film suggestions and serving as a critical “living laboratory” for the study of collaborative filtering and human-computer interaction.

Unlike commercial alternatives like IMDb or Letterboxd, MovieLens is entirely free of advertisements and corporate sponsorship. Its primary output is academic insight. The site is famous for pioneering early collaborative filtering algorithms which predict how you will rate a film based on your historical behavior and the behavior of similar users.

Last year I spent a few hours on MovieLens.org rating 435 movies I had watched. I think my criteria was “would I watch this movie again?” I uploaded those those movies and my ratings and asked Gemini for an analysis.

Based on your 435 ratings, I’ve performed a skeptical audit of your cinematic preferences. I’ve bypassed the “predictive recommendations” fluff to look at where your taste actually diverges from the consensus.

1. The “Lebowski” Anomaly (Contrarian Profile) -You are significantly more critical than the average MovieLens user. While the site average is ~3.72, your mean rating is 3.41. You are most “contrarian” when it comes to established cult classics and high-concept stylistic films.

  • The Big Lebowski (1998): You gave this a 1.0, while the average is 3.99. This is a massive 3-point delta.
  • The Hateful Eight (2015): You gave it a 1.0 (Avg: 3.89).
  • The Abyss (1989): You gave it a 1.0 (Avg: 3.68).
  • Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010): You gave it a 1.5 (Avg: 3.77).

Analysis: You appear to have a low tolerance for “quirk” or indulgent stylistic flourishes that others label as “genius.”

2. The “Maverick” Picks (Guilty Pleasures or Hidden Gems?) – Conversely, you value certain films far higher than the general public. Your “Maverick” score is highest for:

  • Duets (2000): You gave it a 5.0 (Avg: 2.85). This is your largest positive divergence (+2.15).
  • World War Z (2013): You gave it a 5.0 (Avg: 3.30).
  • The Bourne Legacy (2012): You gave it a 5.0 (Avg: 3.43).
  • Mosul (2019): You gave it a 5.0 (Avg: 3.52).

Analysis: You seem to favor competence and high-stakes procedural/action narratives (Mosul, Bourne, Sicario) over “vibe-based” cinema.

3. Historical Bias (Decade Analysis) – Despite your skeptical leanings, you have a soft spot for the mid-century.

  • 1950s: Your highest-rated decade (Avg: 3.80).
  • 2010s: Your most critical decade (Avg: 3.30).
  • 1990s: Where you spent the most time (100 movies rated).

4. Interest Alignment: Radio & Mechanics – Given your interest in radio history and mechanical vehicles:

  • Radio: You gave Broadcast News (1987) a perfect 5.0. You seem to appreciate the “transmission” of truth or the mechanics of the medium.
  • Mechanical/Procedural: You rated Sicario (2015) a 5.0, which aligns with your preference for technical precision and unsentimental realism.
  • Consciousness/Mind: You gave A Beautiful Mind (2001) a 2.0, suggesting a skepticism toward Hollywood’s “glossy” portrayal of cognitive struggles.

You are a Pragmatic Realist. You reward movies that execute a specific function well (thrillers, procedurals, mid-century classics) and punitively down-rate movies that rely on irony, surrealism, or “cult” status to earn their keep.

Hmm. Not sure I agree but I guess the data doesn’t lie.