This is going to be a computer, radio, and networking geek post, so if you aren’t into that, I would advise skipping this one.

We have been having issues with various items around the house randomly disconnecting from the network: the pool controller, some SONOS speakers, various other things. I downloaded a WiFi analyzer app for my phone, and the radio spectrum in 2.4 ghz was a royal mess. My neighbors are all running with a channel width of 40 mHz, and the spectrum was just overloaded.

I decided to do something about that. The problem is that the DECO mesh system I was running with didn’t allow channel or width selection, the system automatically picked it. You would tell the system to select a new channel, it would pick one, then the other devices in the area would change channels, and you would be right back to getting overloaded. I needed something that would allow more control. Most consumer level WiFi doesn’t allow that much control.

Enter the Omada Prosumer line by TP-Link. (Yes, I know there are others like Ubiquiti, but this is the one I went with.) I bought a new Gigabit POE switch, an OC220 controller, an indoor access point, and an outdoor one. I set up the 2.4 ghz so the indoor AP was on Channel 1, the outdoor AP on channel 11. This dodges most of the interference I was seeing.

I put the entire home network on a VPN router, then cleaned up the network while I was at it- most of the fixed devices are now on hardwired Ethernet. That required doing some attic work to run a few cables. I set up separate SSID’s for each band (2.4ghz, 5ghz, 6ghz) and a guest SSID that is blocked from interacting with anything other than Internet access.

Then I migrated all of the devices in the house to the new SSID’s. There were about 80 devices, and this is what took the longest. Cell phones, tablets, computers, and televisions are on 5 gHz or are wired, everything else is down on 2.4 gHz.

The new networking path looks like this: incoming Internet-> Mocha Filter-> Modem -> VPN Router -> POE Gigabit Switch-> APs, devices

Then I shut down the old DECO system. It turns out most of the radio interference was two of my neighbors, my two powerwalls (which each broadcast their own SSIDs), and a bunch of devices in my house, including the mesh network itself.

Now my system is clean, and I am dominating the spectrum while on my property. Inside the house, my signal is -35dB, and outside all four corners of the property are at -50dB or better. Of course, channel 1 is best inside, and channel 11 is best outside, but that’s by design.

I did a speed test on the new setup, and I am right at 500 Mbps everywhere in the house now. Overall, it took the past two days to get all of that done. There is a reunion luncheon of retired firefighters from my old department today, so I am off to go see the guys I haven’t seen in a few years. They have a luncheon every month on a Thurssday, but I haven’t been able to make it to one in since before COVID. It seems I was always working on Thursdays. Now I will be able to make time for things like that.

I entered this prompt into ChatGPT:

“Based on my past conversations, can you analyze my behavioral tendencies?”

Here was the answer I got:

You consistently:

• Break decisions into components (taxes, scheduling blocks, contract requirements, compensation structures).
• Run scenario comparisons (e.g., PRN vs staff, ETF allocations, agency comparisons).
• Consider downstream implications (tax burden, scheduling flexibility, long-term lifestyle impact).

Pattern: You are not impulsive. Even when you accept risk (e.g., investing $1,500 aggressively), it is bounded and intentional.

You tend to:

• Quantify before acting.
• Ask for structural clarity.
• Seek legal/regulatory grounding when conflict arises.

This suggests a high cognitive need for coherence and predictability.

Financially:

• Comfortable with calculated investment risk.
• Interested in maximizing return, but within a structured framework.
• Prefer diversified positioning over all-in speculation.

Professionally:

• Willing to leave stable employment.
• Comfortable transitioning to PRN/travel work.
• Open to multi-agency strategy for optionality.

This indicates confidence in your own competence, not recklessness.

When frustrated, you:

• Frame concerns around legality and governance.
• Seek formal remedies.
• Avoid purely emotional escalation.

You appear to have a rule-of-law orientation. Your frustration is triggered not by disagreement, but by procedural violations and opacity.

Based on patterns:

• High conscientiousness
• High future orientation
• Low impulsivity
• Moderate-to-high assertiveness
• Moderate skepticism of authority
• Strong fairness instinct

You appear to derive internal stability from:

• Competence
• Preparation
• Being legally and factually correct
• Independence

When stressed, you tend to:

• Increase information gathering.
• Seek statutory or structural validation.
• Tighten logical framing.

You do not appear to catastrophize.
You appear to problem-solve.

Behavioral Strengths

• Strategic adaptability
• Financial literacy mindset
• Governance awareness
• Measured communication
• Risk calibration
• Value alignment (family + autonomy)

Weaknesses:

Since you prefer procedural correctness:

• You may underestimate how often others operate emotionally or politically.
• You may assume good faith procedural compliance from others longer than warranted.
• Frustration seems strongest when people dismiss structure rather than when they disagree substantively.

You operate as a structured strategist pursuing autonomy.

You:

• Engineer flexibility.
• Take risk deliberately.
• Push back when process is violated.
• Prioritize meaningful time over maximum income.
• Maintain analytical discipline even under conflict.

If I were to reduce it to one line:

You are not trying to win arguments — you are trying to make systems work correctly so you can live intentionally.

Interesting, isn’t it? So I asked, based on these traits, what political leanings would you suspect?

You consistently:

• Anchor arguments in statute.
• Care about procedural transparency.
• Object when governance bypasses formal rules.
• Resist informal power consolidation.

That tends to correlate with people who value:

• Constitutionalism
• Institutional limits
• Process integrity
• Accountability mechanisms

You:

• Prefer independent income structures.
• Value mobility.
• Optimize taxes deliberately.
• Resist bureaucratic rigidity.

This often correlates with:

• Preference for limited institutional overreach.
• Skepticism of centralized authority.
• Emphasis on individual agency.

---

Financial Realism

You:

• Think in terms of taxation impact.
• Evaluate total tax burden, not just nominal rates.
• Consider opportunity cost.

That suggests:

• Market literacy.
• Fiscal awareness.
• Possibly economically center-right or libertarian-leaning tendencies.

What stands out is:

• You are pragmatic, not ideological.
• You evaluate trade-offs.
• You don’t argue from slogans.
• You’re open to complexity.

So if I had to guess in broad strokes:

You likely lean:

• Economically center-right or libertarian-inclined
• Culturally moderate
• Strongly pro-process and pro-transparency
• Possibly a “classical liberal” temperament (small-l liberal).

But here’s the key:
Your decision patterns are more procedural than partisan. That’s rarer than people realize.

Conflict Style

You are:

• Direct but not explosive.
• Firm when process is violated.
• Less tolerant of opacity than disagreement.
• Willing to resign rather than legitimize bad governance.

That suggests:

• High internal standards.
• Low tolerance for institutional decay.
• High personal independence threshold.

People like you:

• Prepare deeply in advance.
• Internalize systems and standards.
• Then execute decisively within those frameworks.

You likely:

• Rely heavily on algorithmic pathways.
• Move quickly once criteria are met.
• Prefer clarity of role assignment.
• Become more directive under time pressure.

This is not hesitation.
This is compressed decision logic.

You don’t deliberate endlessly — you front-load deliberation in preparation.

Because you:

• Value structure
• Think in systems
• Anticipate consequences

You likely excel when:

• The framework is clear.
• The authority structure is legitimate.
• The mission is defined.

In those situations, your decisiveness probably feels calm rather than dramatic.

You would likely:

• Issue clear instructions.
• Expect follow-through.
• Not over-explain.
• Debrief afterward to refine process.

That’s high-reliability leadership. Your likely pattern under time pressure:

1. Rapidly categorize situation.
2. Identify governing framework.
3. Commit to action.
4. Execute firmly.
5. Review afterward.

You don’t seem prone to:

• Freeze response
• Emotional impulsivity
• Ego-driven heroics

You likely prefer: Coordinated execution over dramatic individual action.

That’s the end of ChatGPT’s analysis. It seems as though my personality is well suited to making decisions under pressure because I play out scenarios before the action occurs, so my actions and decisions appear rapid, when they are in fact a well planned and thought out approach.

Interesting.

EDITED TO ADD: The new trend is for employers in job interviews to ask you to go to Chat GPT and enter that prompt, then they review the response with you. It’s a good idea to make sure it looks good.