Ask A Genius 1429: Rick Rosner Breaks 12-Year Instagram Embargo to Share Micromosaics and AI-Nuclear Novel Ideas
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/19
Rick Rosner ended a twelve-year Instagram ban imposed by his family, resuming posts to showcase his passion for restoring micromosaics. Frustrated by limited podcast reach and disillusioned with Twitter, he is experimenting with Instagram again. He also discusses his novel exploring AI governance and accidental nuclear war risk in unstable political systems.
Rick Rosner: I have been under an Instagram embargo for twelve years, maybe longer.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What does that mean?
Rosner: It means my wife and kid told me I was not allowed to post on Instagram because they did not want Peter Perez to see anything. Never mind that for now — the point is, today, I broke the embargo. I started posting again. I love collecting micromosaics — tiny, intricate artworks made from small pieces of glass. I often buy damaged or dirty ones, restore them, and give them to Carol, who used to post them on her Instagram account dedicated to these pieces.
However, now she does not want me dealing with micromosaics anymore. I apologize — this story jumps around a bit. About a hundred and thirty weeks ago, I posted a picture of my gross toe with our dog. Since then, I have added two more posts.
Jacobsen: So now you are back on Instagram?
Rosner: Yes. I enjoy restoring old, damaged micromosaics — transforming something flawed into something beautiful. Carol has stopped posting them, though, so there is a massive backlog in my office of restored mosaics waiting to be shown. I cannot clear them out until they get posted, so I have started posting them myself.
The most recent post includes a micromosaic that is part of a pin spelling out the word “micromosaic” in rhinestones. It is amusing — you can order these custom rhinestone pins from China for next to nothing. You can have a pin spell out anything you want — “evil motherfucker,” “Mister Grinch” — whatever. If you are willing to pay approximately 80 cents per word and wait three weeks, you can get a custom pin that says precisely what you want.
So I did a meta piece: I took an actual micromosaic and attached it to a rhinestone pin that spells out “micromosaic.” It is fun — maybe too fun, according to my wife.
Jacobsen: Anything else on that topic?
Rosner: Yes. What plays on Instagram is, unsurprisingly, thirst traps. Let us see if I start posting old-guy thirst traps. I am not most people’s cup of tea, but who knows?
Jacobsen: Why did your wife and daughter lift your Instagram embargo in the first place?
Rosner: Well, technically, they did not. My wife sees that so far, I am just up to harmless micromosaic content, so she is okay with it — for now. I just decided to break the embargo myself because I got frustrated.
A couple of weeks ago, JD and I got invited to record a pilot for a podcast about the intersection of AI and Hollywood. There was even a chance we might get paid for it — unlike what you and I do here, where we do not get paid at all.
Also, our kid had her wallet stolen, so we were waiting for a replacement credit card — which finally arrived today. Anyway, JD and I put much effort into that pilot. However, the production arm of the news service behind it — headed by a former movie studio chief — rejected it immediately without any feedback. I even offered to redo the pilot, which is a common practice in this business, as first attempts often require refinement. However, he did not even respond. It felt pretty contemptuous, and it stung because you and I have been collaborating for a decade — closer to eleven years — and I have been doing podcasts, TV, and YouTube for about nine years now.
However, all this has generated no money. Sure, we get some views, but not in the thousands — certainly not millions. For comparison, Rogan averages about 11 million views per episode, and Call Her Daddy gets about 5 million. We are not even a thousandth of that, yet we are not a thousand times worse than they are. So, I am frustrated.
Part of the value is just leaving a record in case someone in the future finds it worthwhile — but at some point, you want people to be interested now as a sign that it matters later. Lately, I have been feeling disheartened by the lack of progress. If I am going to expand my reach, I am probably way past the Instagram era — I should be on TikTok instead. However, I have to do somethingbecause Twitter — or X — is now just a swamp of hate and idiots.
All the smart people I used to interact with — the ones who generated meaningful viewership for my content — have, quite reasonably, left Twitter since Elon Musk took over. Now, it is just an echo chamber of angry MAGA trolls and a handful of people like me, staying behind mainly to express contempt for them. It is no place to be anymore. The reach on my posts has dropped by about 97% compared to what it was before Musk bought it. So now, I am trying anything — at least Instagram for now.
It ties into something else I have been thinking about. In the context of the near-future novel I am writing, I am exploring the idea that a world governed by a coalition of AIs and humans would still be fundamentally incompetent at preventing accidental nuclear exchanges.
The United States and Russia each have roughly 1,700 to 1,800 nuclear warheads on high alert. Some might be in poor condition or not fully launch-ready. However, even if only 10% were operational, that is still catastrophic.
It is probably more than that anyway — I just read today that our submarines alone carry between 720 and 960 warheads, and about half of our nuclear deterrent is submarine-based because subs are much harder to track than fixed land-based missile silos. Russia and China know precisely where our silos are but not where our subs are lurking under the ocean.
So, every year, there is a non-zero probability of an accidental or unauthorized launch. In my novel, I set that annual risk at about 12% — which is very high to make the narrative dramatic. Realistically, I hope it is well below 1%. Still, even 1.5% per year would be intolerable because, over 60 years, that risk compounds to near certainty of an exchange eventually happening.
In the story, I explore how a coalition of AIs would conclude that no human authority can be trusted to maintain perfect nuclear safety indefinitely. So this leads to “Nuke Day,” when the AIs reveal that they have gained access to and disabled a large number of nuclear warheads — and also taken control of them to ensure they cannot be launched. It is a drastic move to prevent human error or reckless leadership from destroying civilization.
Thoughts on that whole scenario — not in particular at the moment. However, it ties into much of what we discuss. The whole situation is a cliché at this point — even Mission: Impossible 8 — Dead Reckoning is about AI and nukes.
It comes up all the time — whenever people frame AIs as an existential threat in fiction, it is usually about them gaining control of nuclear weapons. In most movies, that is the scenario. My book flips that a bit: In my story, the AIs — along with the humans who agree with them — are actively trying to eliminate nukes.
Jacobsen: So basically, if you think of humanity as Superman, then nukes are the Kryptonite, and the AIs are trying to take that Kryptonite away. It is the same dramatic setup, just inverted. Is that going to be a significant part of the novel?
Rosner: Not a huge chunk, but it has to be addressed because AIs are destabilizing — and the system was never all that stable to begin with.
Jacobsen: What about the broader stability of political and economic systems as AI comes online?
Rosner: That is the core issue. Everything is becoming more unstable, and governments will struggle to keep up. Cory Doctorow has talked about this a lot — he argues that government competence will keep lagging further behind and that people will have to develop other collaborative structures to meet their needs. He explores this in his novel Walkaway, which ironically got co-opted by MAGA types and maybe some Canadian MAGA folks, too. They used “walk away from the government” for their reactionary reasons. At the same time, Doctorow’s version is much more humane and constructive.
Jacobsen: Doctorow mentioned this in a recent interview with Amy Goodman — within the last couple of months. He described how figures like Musk and Thiel, among others, have appropriated cyberpunk and futurist literature but have done so in a superficial manner. They fixated on ideas like seasteading and techno-monarchy, completely ignoring the deeper, collective, liberatory themes those works intended.
So, instead of using these stories as inspiration for more equitable and empowered communities, they twisted them into blueprints for private fiefdoms and unchecked power. It is as if they missed the entire moral point.
Rosner: That rings true. Unfortunately, a lot of MAGA types — not all, but many — fit the pattern of “smart stupids”: people who might be competent in one area but believe they are smart in all areas, even as they age and decline in judgment. You see it in the credentials they boast about online — plenty of former professionals. Still, many are well past their prime and way out of their depth on modern issues.
Exactly. So, yes — I am glad I was not completely off-base in thinking that Doctorow’s point was solid. It was indeed hijacked and misunderstood by people who used it for shallow, self-serving narratives.
Jacobsen: There is also a third category beyond those two: the vicarious triumphalists. These are people who attach themselves to figures they see as champions of their cause — the so-called Christian values crowd, the tech bros, the “ortho bros.” It ties directly into the certification of politics: you pick a team, and then it is your team, right or wrong, no matter what they do. You invent excuses for them, rationalize anything, and that is precisely what we are seeing play out.
Politically, I disagree with the right when they claim Trump is a great businessman — I do not think he is. I do not believe he is a great statesman, either. However, I do agree with the right on one point: he is a highly effective politician in the media age. He is arguably one of the most quintessentially American products of the 21st century, perfectly shaped by America’s hyperdrive advertising industry.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 