Some March 11th Memories

It was March 11, 2011, and I had interpreted for about two hours for a client located near Tameikesanno Station. The meeting with their overseas attorneys lasted for about two hours, and the attorneys were going to be left in the meeting room for a while after I departed. I imagine they might have had dinner with our shared client in store for them after I left, but what was to happen in just a few minutes would probably interfere with those plans, and I heard later it made them swear that they would not come back to Japan for quite some time. The quake hit while there were none of their hosts around to assure them that they were not going to meet their end during their trip to Japan.

I headed toward the Metro station, reached the platform several floors below ground level, and was waiting for my train.

It was around 2:45 pm, and the tremor that hit was undeniable and frightening, but nobody on the platform could imagine the much greater tragedy unfolding hundreds of kilometers to the north of us.

The platform, of course, shook wildly. The ceiling above the tracks and platform looked like a flimsy dropped ceiling resting on a flimsy matrix-like support, probably serving to hide pipes and cabling. I thought parts of it would come down with all the shaking. One waiting passenger hugged a thick pillar standing in the middle of the platform; others ran for the stairs.

I kept sitting still and looked at my Blackberry (it was 2011, you see), only to see an email reporting that a cement wall near the sender somewhere in the West end of the city had collapsed. A fellow peeking at my display was rather distressed to see this. About 20 minutes after the shaking subsided, no train had arrived, and a voice came over the PA system: “We’re terribly sorry to cause you inconvenience. Train service will be starting again shortly, so please wait a while longer.” I wondered whether the person making the announcement believed that, or was just reading from a prepared text to be used in the event of such a tremor.

The announcement turned out to be quite optimistic. No train was going to arrive, not shortly, and not until the next morning.

After hearing a more-realistic announcement that we should make our way up the stairs to the ground level, we all obediently made our way outside, up what seemed like more flights of stairs than we had descended.

Upon reaching ground level outside, there were numerous people in normal business attire but wearing white helmets who were urging people to “walk this way.” If they had done that in English, I would have been tempted to take them up on their straight line, but my concern over what had happened and just where it had happened stifled my desire for comedy relief, and nobody would have gotten the joke or movie reference anyway.

So what now? Silly me, I thought I could walk to the ANA Hotel to wait for a taxi to go to some station where a train would be operation. It was immediately apparent that things were more seriously disrupted than I had imagined. From the hotel taxi stand, I could see an elevated road with cars stopped bumper-to-bumper, and the sidewalks of the roads beneath that and running past the hotel were filled with people walking in the direction of Shibuya, although who knows where these people were headed. Home, I imagined.

After a wait of about an hour, it was apparent that there were going to be no taxis swerving into the hotel taxi stand to pick people up. I was getting hungry and decided to walk to Devan des PTT, an okonomiyaki place I had been going to for at least three decades. Upon arriving—it was already about 5:30pm—there were already other dinner refugees sitting at the counter. Some had been staying at a nearby hotel that couldn’t serve meals because of the gas supply being cut off.

After enjoying the usual good okonomiyaki served up by the owner, Onyama-san, I headed back to the ANA Hotel, again hoping that things had settled down to the point at which taxis would be picking people up at the taxi stand. No such luck. Several other refugees and I gave up and entered the hotel from the taxi stand. Not surprisingly, there were no rooms available, but I had not intended to get a room, anyway.

I pulled together three or four smallish chairs in one corner of the lobby, unfortunately in a location in which a cold wind would strike me for about 15 seconds each time someone exiting or entering caused the nearby automatic doors to open. That happened about every two minutes, but I managed to fall asleep. I awoke around 2am to find that someone had put a blanket over me, two actually. I don’t think this would have happened in a US hotel.

I slept surprisingly well, and felt so thankful that that I popped for a horribly expensive hotel breakfast for 3000-plus yen. It was worth it. The tables around me were occupied by people in diverse predicaments caused by the earthquake. There were people on business trips to Tokyo, including one from the affected area. Then there was a mother and daughter, in Tokyo for a school entrance exam. Would the exam be delayed? they wondered.

My mobile service was limited, but good enough to learn how tragically things had unfolded to the north of Tokyo.

And here we are, 14 years later, just after a wide-ranging forest fire hit one of the same areas struck by the tsunami that followed the earthquake. That forest fire would be called a wildfire in the US—and was called that in some English reportage of the fire—for sociopolitical reasons that some in Japan would probably claim don’t apply.

Japan is a resilient country with a resilient people living in it. This becomes clear every time a natural disaster occurs, although part of the aftermath of 3-11 earthquake was arguably made worse by lack of forethought by the bureaucrats and their friends running the Fukushima nuclear power plant that experienced a meltdown, a distressing term we tend not to use here in Japan. But I digress.

What LinkedIn Has Become: Taking silly and vapid to a new level.

Years ago I was under the impression that LinkedIn was a platform where people searching for employment could interact with potential employers. Silly me to believe that the platform would not evolve into what it is today.

Today, the platform is awash with self-congratulatory posts from people who are likely desperate to find their next “role.” This makes me wonder just it was when a job became a role. I guess the term position needed to be “elevated,” and I think it was some time after problems became issues and considerably after the personnel department was rebirthed to HR. But I digress.

Another annoyance that LinkedIn provides is the countless self-styled coaches, many selling advice on how to “succeed on LinkedIn.” My guess is that many are themselves desperate to succeed and are working the aisles of other desperate LinkedIn users.

Then there are the AI evangelicals, promoting collections of computer code running in silicon-based entities as the answer to all the problems…uh, issues…faced by carbon-based entities.

Quite central to most of these vapid posts is the use of a blinding variety of buzzwords and buzzphrases, devoid of any identifiable substance, but trendy nonetheless.

It appears that substance takes a backseat to fluff on LinkedIn, which is rapidly coming to rival all other social media platforms, although perhaps without the same level of criminal activity (yet, anyway), and no single identifiable Trumpic sycophant at the helm.

Be careful, because we’ve had a bomb threat.

One day at the start of a deposition interpreting assignment in the US Embassy in Tokyo, an Embassy official came in and asked us to be careful, because there had been a bomb threat, and we had heard about it, right?

Right. I imagine he was just following instructions from his boss, but perhaps he didn’t realize the questions that left.

How are we to “be careful?” I asked. No meaningful response was forthcoming.

Were we to walk around looking for the bomb? Except for brief toilet breaks, people in depositions are essentially confined to the deposition room, and there didn’t seem to be any bombs in the deposition room or the toilet.

Did he mean we should be ready to run away really quickly if we heard a blast? That doesn’t sound like being careful, but more like being terrified and wanting to be able to interpret in the deposition the next day.

It turned out that we were to be herded out the Embassy shortly thereafter and made to wait outside for about 45 minutes, standing around with the huddled masses yearning to breathe free with the visa they were applying for—such people form the core clientele of the Embassy—until the Embassy people were convinced that it was a hoax.

Pass the puke bucket: Microsoft’s LinkedIn rolls along as a platform for charlatans.

[I posted the following to LinkedIn yesterday, March 3, 2025, and it was quickly shadow-banned by Microsoft.]

This morning Microsoft’s LinkedIn algorithm thought (although it can’t think) I would be interested in a post (an ad, actually) from a self-styled LinkedIn ghostwriter claiming to have clients paying him 1000s of dollars a month to “grow their LinkedIn accounts” (totally meaningless, of course), saying he got thousands of connections for himself using an AI ghostwriting tool he developed. He claims that not only does the AI tool write viral, engaging posts for you on LinkedIn, it also generates ideas about what to post based on your business. It sounds like it tells you what to write.

This type of tool is best used by people who have nothing say and don’t know how to say it. Professionals know what they need to say and can say it.

This nonsense demonstrates quite well what Microsoft’s LinkedIn platform has become, a tool for charlatans working the aisles of desperate people who believe that LinkedIn “success” will save them.

I’m not surprised that this ad got hundreds of comments requesting the AI tool freebie trial. The wretched masses are yearning to get connections. Go for it. 

In case people are wondering, the ghostwriter is young and has a profile that doesn’t indicate any qualifications or experience; no education shown and no experience in organizations other than the business he runs, and its website doesn’t have a physical address and doesn’t even name him. You need to be really dumb to not realize what that suggests.

Charlatans selling to the huddled masses yearning to have connections and have “LinkedIn success” have become the norm on Microsoft’s LinkedIn platform.

And I guess the blocking of this garbage from your LinkedIn feed is left up to the unfortunate recipients.

LinkedIn has become pretty much meaningless, unless you are working the aisles of desperate users or you can’t resist the opportunity to say that you are excited, thrilled, or honored to announce something.

For my part, I am annoyed to announce that Microsoft has effectively removed any value from its LinkedIn platform.

Will the Czech interpreter raise their right hand?

One day interpreting in a deposition in which a deponent from a Japanese company was to be examined by a US attorney, the US official came into the room to administer the oaths as is the normal practice. We were all introducing ourselves and, when my turn came, I indicated that I was the “check interpreter.” It is customary (and almost always the case) that a Japanese/English interpreted deposition is attended by a lead interpreter and a check interpreter, the lead interpreter doing just what the position indicates, and the check interpreter listening to the interpreting and offering any corrections that they feel necessary.

When it was my turn to be sworn in, the Embassy official, whom I had never had the occasion to meet, reading partially from his cheat sheet and apparently filling in as he thought necessary, turned to me and said:

“Do you solemnly swear that you know the English and the Czech languages, and that you will faithfully interpret the questions in English into the Czech language, and that further you wil…”

It turned out that he was new on the job. It was a bit of comedy relief before a stressful day of interpreting between two people, one who wanted to ask questions and the other who was not necessarily cooperative.