(paywall-free popularization on this or other important topics helps to pay my bills. Thanks for considering a paid subscription or (even better) supporting me with one-time direct donations or in any of the other ways described here)

A few days ago, I saw a Facebook post going like this:

“I’ve been thinking about the future impacts of AI and robotics on our society for some time now. Here’s [a video] on the subject... I would love to see other viewpoints as well.”

Since the poster asked for other viewpoints, I replied:

“What happens after we run out of jobs because AI” is the OPPOSITE way to look at things. Seriously. By coincidence, just two days ago I wrote about a sane strategy to deal with AI and job losses, and had already written another piece just about how UBI, AI and reality are always put in the wrong ORDER. Please have a look at those posts, and let me know.”

At this point, another contact of that person, whom I’ll just call “HIM” from now on, stepped in, to fill the time-honored internet role of “guy who has no idea what I’m talking about and refuses to inform himself”. For context, here is how the conversation went, but if you just want to know why the more you support hard work ethics the more you should love UBI, just skip to the next paragraph:

HIM: so you want to go full on socialism because technology replaced the low/no skill worker... here’s the issue.. if two workers get the exact same and 1 is a hard worker and the other is a blue falcon.. you just murdered incentive.. good job..

(note for those who, like me, had never met the “blue falcon” expression before: A blue falcon is (source) “someone who causes problems or does things to get their fellow service members in trouble. This often leads to more work for their fellow soldiers”)

ME: disagreement is no problem, but it should be about the same thing somebody said first, not something else entirely. From your comment, instead, you seem to have not read at all what I actually wrote, and to have no idea what UBI is.

First, you got completely wrong that I want to go “full on socialism”... because technology replaced low /no skill workers: NO, i don’t want to go full on because tech etc etc. I say that, now that tech finally makes it possible, we should go full on on something which is not socialism (more on this below) because it was right well before AI came along period. Which is the opposite of what you wrote.

Second, actual tech is not replacing just low / no skill workers. No way. Look around.

Third: UBI surely is NOT at all what you say, that is “if two workers get the exact same and one is a hard worker and the other is a blue falcon.. you just murdered incentive”.

UBI is, to use your words, “if one worker is a blue falcon and the other one is a hard worker, they both get e.g 1000 USD/month, no strings attached, whatever they do, so the blue falcon can be fired immediately without causing any problem to anybody, because the falcon won’t starve. And the hard worker will get those 10000 USD/month PLUS whatever salary he deserves”

You say “you just murdered incentive”, whereas UBI is exactly the opposite. UBI removes all the deadweights from any organization, allowing the real workers to continue to get paid what they are worth, and real innovators to innovate all they can.

It really amazes me how many people who are all on a “work hard/entrepreneurial ethic” are against UBI, instead of realizing it would set them free to work as they want, getting all the rewards they deserve.

Summing up, I am not saying you should approve UBI. I am just saying “please do learn what UBI actually is, and then criticize it all you want, no it’s OK”. Start from the two links I shared above, and then look for third parties, or the opposite, no problem.

HIM: lol.. I worked in countries where you can only fire people for theft or safety violations.. it was also customary to give 12 month notice if youre going to quit. Granted the country also had 23.5% sales tax and income tax started around 40% and no refunds. Ubi doesnt remove dead weight. It encourages it. Go work in Norway.. Italy... or of you are more adventurous Angola..

ME: UBI IS designed for, and makes it infinitely easier, to remove all the restrictions you mention (”only fire people for theft etc”). That’s exactly what I meant writing “UBI removes all the deadweights etc”, If you think UBI would be applied without changing anything else, you just keep proving you have NO idea what you are talking about. Study first, then you can criticize.

From everything you have written so far it is really evident that if you really got what UBI is, how it should be implemented and so on, you’d like it much more than me.

HIM: lol like it more than you? Nah I worked 30 years in a field that guaranteed my death.. just to somehow survive and collect a pension and 100% disability compensation.. nice try, but you failed miserably on that one. People should be paid market value for their skills.. period.

ME: if you refuse to even criticize the basic concept that UBI is an ADDITION, NOT a replacement for “People being paid market value for their skills”... you have deeper problems than liking UBI or not. Again: spend time to read what it actually is, and if you’ll still dislike it, it will be for very different reasons.

HIM: it still boils down to living wage nonsense.. [no matter how you call it]. At the end of the day its the living wage nonsense in that you are no longer paying people based on market value of their skills..

What UBI really is

A good starting point to get what UBI is actually about is what Bob Kennedy and Buckminster Fuller already said very clearly more than 55 years ago.

Kennedy described the intrinsical idiocy of measuring the success of any society with something as limited and misleading as GDP.

Buckminster Fuller denounced “the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today (ME: in 1970!) that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery [to] justify his right to exist.”

In 2025, we have 55 years of evidence from all over the world that Kennedy and Buckminster Fuller were absolutely right. Economies worldwide are full of objectively useless or harmful jobs, including jobs to manage those bad jobs. Those are all jobs that only, only exist because we have never found a better, no: a socially acceptable way to give the people doing those jobs the money they need to not revolt.

All those unnecessary jobs really produce are:

1. ballast and moats that suffocate the really hard workers, entrepreneurs and innovators

2. millions and millions of human beings with all sorts of more or less recognized mental health issues

Because, even when they aren’t in the growing ranks of workking poors, the people doing those unnecessary jobs do feel, more or less consciously, that their income is not a reward for value, but a fraud. Yes, a fraud that on one hand prevents them from doing something else they could do best but has no “market” value; on the other, for the same reason, hinders the progress of society as a whole.

UBI is the least impossible solution to this sad, unbelievably stupid state of things. The actual concept of UBI is that every citizen gets a certain amount of money every month just because he or she is a citizen, with no strings attached.

“No strings attached” is the first crucial point that nobody can ignore if they want to criticize UBI without making fool of themselves: UBI does not forbid anybody from engaging in any job or entrepreneurial activity they want, and getting for that any salary they can get. That salary would go on top of UBI.

The second crucial point is, obviously, how much money? Let’s say, for concreteness, enough for food, clothes and maybe a public transit pass, but no more. Under those two conditions it is evident that:

• UBI is not socialism. In and by itself, UBI does not prevent anybody from owning all they want, funding companies, earning all the money they can, or “fulfilling the American Dream” in any other way (incidentally, it’s quite funny - tragically funny - how many Americans not only think socialism === North Korea, but consider North Korea-like socialism anything left of the american GOP)

• the “no strings attached” part would eliminate all the infrastructure and jobs (that is: costs for taxpayers) that only exist to control who qualifies for most means-tested welfare programs of today

• in general, UBI would eliminate all the deadweights that today hinder real entrepreneurs and all the really hard workers. UBI would let them work more freely, instead of being slowed down by coworkers unable or unwilling to work hard like them, and having to pay their salary too

• Only fire people for theft? With UBI granting everybody enough money to survive till they find another job, it would be much easier to both pass and accept laws that make firing people easier

• Advance notice to quit? For the same reason, UBI would let everybody who is now stuck in a bullshit job under an a**hole boss the freedom to quit without notice, thanks to the time and peace of mind to find a better job provided by UBI, because...

• being just enough to provide the bare minimum, UBI would not and could not kill the incentive to work

• in other words:

  • only the useless jobs, companies and public organizations would disappear, but without civil unrests. UBI would only kill stuff that shouldn’t exist in a sensible economy, giving hard workers and real entrepreneurs much more freedom to do their best, and much more visibility (and extra money) for their value. For the same reason,

  • only the BAD bosses would suffer from UBI, not good companies or the economy in general. UBI would mean that hard workers who came across an incompetent or sadistic boss could give him the finger right away, instead of being forced to stay with him because they can’t afford to remain without money

What about the people who, with UBI, would never work anymore, or go crazy?

The moment UBI went in force, many millions of people would be freed from bullshit jobs and all sorts of fears, and many millions of hard workers and entrepreneurs would be finally free to make the best work they can, and get the greatest reward for it.

But yes, there is also no doubt that in the same moment:

1. millions of finally happy people would never apply for any paid work anymore because, for any of a thousand reasons, UBI would be enough money for their needs. This includes aspiring stay-at-home parents and hermits who’d retire in some mountain huts

2. other millions of people would try to kill themselves with booze or drugs, or fall into serious depression, because their “work” (note the quotes) was all they had to feel worthy

People of the first category are a feature of UBI, not a bug: they are all people who right now are costing much more to the companies and governments that must keep them in unnecessary jobs, only because there is no other socially acceptable way to give them enough money to not revolt. Even giving people who do want to have kids a feasible way to do it would be a feature, in this coming age of underpopulation overshoot.

People of the second category instead, whose only reason to live and way to feel good is a paid job... they’d need therapy to discover the difference between SERVICE and “p-work”, not jobs that would cost more than therapy, and still be more a drag than an active contribution to society.

How to pay for UBI?

The first thing to realize is that everything you read so far would save mountains of money for both individuals and public or private organizations, from commuting costs to rent and utility bills for office buildings and administrative overheads of all kinds. Getting back to what caused this post, automation is only what can finally make UBI possible, not the other way around.

The second and really crucial thing is this: as necessary and unavoidable as it is (*), UBI can only come after even more radical that, if you look at the status of public and private debt worldwide should happen as soon as possible anyway, and probably will: a reboot of money, that is of how money is controlled, created and distributed.

I already mentioned this fundamental issue in the last part of this essay on the meaning of work, and I would be delighted to host here a guest post by experts outlining how it could be done.

Summing up... If you have a serious work ethic, UBI is your ally

I have explained what UBI really is, and how it would help hard workers and serious businesses of any kind. In one sentence, even if you or your company had to pay more taxes to support UBI, you’d still gain enough, in reduced costs and job satisfaction for both you and all your remaining employees, to be more than happy about it.

So, maybe UBI is unfeasible - and again, it surely is, if it isn’t preceded by a reform of money - or maybe UBI is wrong for some reason I haven’t seen yet. But if UBI is wrong or impossible, it surely isn’t for any of the reasons “HIM” is so sure about. Don’t be like HIM.

“Wait a minute, what about healthcare?” Easy

Please never mix UBI with healthcare. Healthcare is a human right before and regardless of UBI, and universal healthcare done right, with proper checks, is much more human, fairer and cost-effective than the alternatives available in e.g. the USA.

Think of UBI and universal healthcare like food and water, instead: two separate, equally essential measures, to implement in the right order. First universal healthcare if you still don’t have it, then UBI.

If you don’t trust me...

Here is some further reading:

• Frequently Asked Questions about UBI

• The Deep and Enduring History of Universal Basic Income

• Unconditional cash transfers reduce homelessness

• Universal Basic Income does not cause inflation

• Basic income could solve global poverty and stop environmental destruction

(*) Besides and before everything you read here, UBI is necessary and unavoidable for other, entirely different reasons. To know what they are, read this post, or this one.

Someone said that if they can keep you asking the wrong questions in the wrong places, the answers won’t matter, and today’s Web seems built on purpose to implement that strategy. Here is a real short summary of how and why this happens, followed by a partial, but easy and effective solution.

(paywall-free popularization on this or other important topics helps to pay my bills. Thanks for considering a paid subscription or (even better) supporting me with one-time direct donations or in any of the other ways described here)

Why does the Web sucks, and how to fix it?

The disenfranchisement and mental health crisis first brought by social media on smartphones are now worsening thanks to mismanagement of AI, they can be lost or obscured in any moment, even if we are famous scientists. Why is it so? One of the recurring themes of my work, since years before I first heard of “fediverse”, is that:

1. the human species just isn’t built to cope with continuous flows of instantaneous “information” or “communication”, be they infinite scrolling of of more or less polarizing “news”, or endless updates of personal “statuses” that nobody really cares about, including their authors. They can only make us and democracy sick. Look around you for more proofs you may ever need.

   1. side but necessary note: with or without AI, things will get worse if we keep giving kids personal smartphones, that is devices that even most adults can’t really handle

2. the sane way to be and communicate online is through slow communication, happening as much as possible via personal websites or newsletters, shared with technologies that, unlike social media, don’t make you angry

3. finding those personal websites keeps getting harder, because search engines deliberately hide them. The biggest, but not the only offender here is Google, obviously, and other alternatives of the same scale aren’t visible yet (could the EU make them, please?)

Luckily, solving the last problem, which also means making the other ones smaller, is easier than it may seem.

Make Search Great Again

Tara Calishain is an online search expert, who has been writing and experimenting about search engines since the early 1990s. Last month, she shared with the members of the Internet Press Guild five new free tools she developed to make finding actually interesting stuff online easy again. Here is her message, reproduced with permission:

I’ve been busy making things and I keep forgetting to announce them. Here are my five latest -- three for specialty web search, one for YouTube, and one for information monitoring via RSS. Let me know if you have any questions, otherwise I hope they’re useful:

• Local Search America is a set of three tools for finding information by city/state, state/metro area, or city radius. Find authoritative sources like local governments, institutions of higher education, and FCC-licensed television stations and search their web spaces on Google.

• Congress Corral lets you explore members of the US Congress via a Wikipedia-enriched dataset. Includes a public interest analysis utility, a tool to explore member news across local news and colleges, and a Wikipedia-powered related topics feature.

• Blog Hiking lets you explore WordPress blogs by following trails of interconnected content. Search by keyword and find WordPress posts from across the web, organized like hiking trails with three different ways to explore.

• Tube Terrain lets you browse lists of YouTube channels built from Wikipedia categories. Filter by keyword, subscriber count, video count, channel age and more! Currently four sets available: YouTubers, scientists, activists, and LGBTQ people.

• Temporary Obsessions RSS Feed Reader is a Google Sheets-based tool that lets you schedule your RSS feeds and give them expiration dates (The link goes to a Google Sheet. Make a copy and check out the README sheet if you want to try it)

My advice: please use those tools, and don’t stop there. Tara does much more than this, as you can see from her complete projects list, but the real message and value of her work goes beyond any of them:

you don’t have to find and see other humans online only in the one, brain-rot way the big web companies want!

Leave a comment

Sure, some of those tools are relevant only for US citizens, and they are all ust different interfaces to Google services, but so what? They show that another way is already possible, even before a real alternative comes up. Plus, they are really easy to use, and what you’ll find thanks to them (I especially like Blog Hiking) may help you waste much less time on social media than today. Please go and make search work for you again!

Bonus resources for students and researchers

(this is from a LinkedIn post by Sébastien Poulin that I saw a couple years ago)

The Google search engine is so powerful that it hides other search engines from us. We simply do not know that most of them exist.

Meanwhile, there are still many excellent search engines in the world that specialize in books, science, and other intelligent information. Here is a non-exhaustive list of such sites that you have probably never heard of:

1. Pdfdrive.com is the largest free PDF book download site. It claims over 225 million titles.

2. RefSeek is a search engine for academic resources, with over a billion sources

3. Springer gives access to more than 10 million scientific documents

4. Worldcat - Search for content from 20,000 libraries worldwide.

5. Bioline is a library of published bioscience journals

6. Base Search is one of the most powerful search engines for academic texts. Over 100 million scientific articles, 70% of which are free

7. Repec - Volunteers from 102 countries collected nearly 4 million publications.

8. Science.gov is a US government search engine for over 2,200 scientific sites.

Subscribe now

Die Ausgabe enthält die Artikel:

• Eichkatz Rinko Roller
• Dieses eine Lieblingsrad
• Umgangssprachlicher Unsinn und Ungenauigkeiten bei Begriffen der Fahrradtechnik – Teil 2
• Tobis Fahrradgeschichten
• Hohlspeiche
• Impressum

Two days ago, a friend of mine asked me to watch a 2:20 hours long interview to an AI expert so we could discuss it later. When I first looked at the title and index of the video I thought it was just some other self-exalted Silicon Valley priest yelling all the time “AI will kill us for sure, give me all your money to tame it!”.

After browsing the transcript - which is what I always do with any video like that because it’s much faster - I changed my mind, and wrote this post to explain why I think that, while from that video he seems to:

• get the relation between AI and Universal Basic Income backwards,

• take some AI hype too seriously, and

• maybe miss an elephant in the room…

…Tristan Harris is a smart, sensible guy who is fighting the good fight, and I really wouldn’t mind working for him, or having a public conversation about these issues.

To see why I say so, here are the most important things Harris said in the video, synthesized and reorganized by topic (the parts in italic are by Harris, the others are my own syntheses or comments of what he said).

Computer geniuses, without any real education

I like how Harris describes the birth of social media:

“We have the most anxious and depressed generation of our lifetime. We have the least informed and most polarized generation. We have the worst critical thinking. We have the worst ability to concentrate and do things. And that’s because we did not govern the impact of [social media] technology well.”

Here is what he means for “not governing the impact well”: “if the incentive is to maximize eyeballs and attention and engagement, then you’re incentivizing a more addicted, distracted, lonely, polarized, sexualized breakdown of shared reality society because all of those outcomes are success cases of maximizing for engagement for an individual human on a screen.”

This all happened because we let design and deployment of social media to people who, when asked whether it was sensible to “change billions of people’s psychological experiences with their families, with their friends, at dinner, with their date night, on romantic relationships...” dismissed that concern “as if it’s like a throwaway question” and kept building social media exactly like urban slums we already know to cause riots.

Being someone who, just like him, has been calling for alternatives 2013... Kudos to Harris for seeing these dangers from within in the same days, and trying to fight them. Seriously.

The Singularity... or hype to hide desperation?

One thing I dislike in how Harris outlined the problem with robots or what’s called AI today is attributing godlike powers to those technologies. My own instinct is to call out both issues - or more exactly the way they are sold to investors and politicians - as the frauds they are.

That is, if AI and robots are really dangerous (they are) it’s not because they are superhuman. It’s because they are really toxic, expensive, wasteful frauds, in a time when we’d really need sanity and concreteness, not scaremongering.

For example, Harris said that “they’re doing [AI] to train robots. In household situations. And Elon’s now saying production will start very, very soon on humanoid robots in America”.

First of all, that’s the same Elon who’s been saying for twelve years now that we’d have driverless cars in three or four years. I’d take what Musk is saying now about humanoid robots more like the desperate Plan B of someone who dislikes humans so much that, having failed to relocate on Mars, is now falling back on replacing humans around him. I know that even gubernatorial candidates (Zoltan Istvan, that’s you!) claim that millions of humanoid robots will both displace humans and make them happy, but that remains a really unrealistic vision.

Speaking of AI, Harris said that “AI is like a flood of millions of new digital immigrants that are Nobel Prize level capability and will work at superhuman speed, for less than minimum wage.”

Spoiler: digital immigrants capable of working at superhuman speed for little or no pay have been around for decades. They were just called “software”. More on this shortly.

Comparing AIs to digital immigrants that would take away everybody’s job is a great pitch, but calling them “Nobel Prize level” just validates the claims that AI is divine, unstoppable and deserves all the money in the world… instead of being the Hail Mary move of people having no idea of what other excuse to ask for money they could make up when the AI bubble pops:

Even more important is the fact that an awful lot of the millions of “jobs” that AI would destroy are “pretend work” that shouldn’t exist to begin with because they demean human beings, even when they are really well paid. To see what I’m talking about, check the “The work that shouldn’t exist is even more” part of this post.

On Universal Basic Income “because AI”

The second thing I noted in what Harris said about AI destroying jobs is that he too seems - as far as that interview is concerned - to consider Universal Basic Income as an afterthought - an unavoidable countermeasure to the advent of AI - and worries about who will pay for it.

Me, I don’t think we need to go for UBI because AI is coming. I say the opposite is true: we deserved UBI since well before AI came along, AI is just one of the technologies that can finally make it feasible, and the money to pay for UBI can only come from something that really overdue anyway, regardless of both UBI and AI, that is... reinventing money. Continues here.

Subscribe now

The elephant in the room

Harris says that the people who are currently trying to get trillions of dollars to dump the AI “god” on us are doing so because they firmly believe that:

• “There’s the incentive for everyone to move to paying for AIs rather than paying humans”

• “It’s not just first solve intelligence and use that to solve everything else. It’s first dominate intelligence and use that to dominate everything else”

• in general, for every company in every sector “it’s win or take all... if I don’t do it, I’ll lose to the other guy that will”

• the default path of AI development can only be “companies racing to release the most powerful inscrutable uncontrollable technology we’ve ever invented with the maximum incentive to cut corners on safety”

Harris is right, but what he describes is not the default path of the AI industry. Let’s call things with their actual, legitimate name: that’s the default path of every industry under capitalism.

AI is just peak software, which is just peak capitalism because it’s just peak automation, which overlaps too much, if left unchecked, with peak dehumanization. Never forget that the first AIs were corporations.

That is, Harris is right, but the real solution is not to stop - or reform - the AI industry: it is to stop the capitalism that, even before AI, made us waste billions of dollars, as well as mountains of polluting fossil fuels and scarce materials whose control leads to wars on crap like, off the top of my head:

• idiotic consumer IoT gadgets and falsely “smart” homes

• ridiculously complicated cars

• a movie-like Metaverse that’s just bad, reactionary prepping

• NFTs!. Oh lord, NFTs...

What really matters: sensible AI measures

Harris describes well what makes AI, that is peak software, so dangerous:

• “AI is... designed to break the reality checking process”

• “AI is like a power pump that pumps economic, scientific and military advantage”

• “Nuclear weapons cannot invent other nuclear weapons. But AI accelerates everything, including itself” . The first company that succeeds to “automate AI research can then use it to automate everything else”

Developing AI like this feels good to the same kind of people who created toxic social media because it feels like building a god, even if all they are creating is... themselves. We don’t have to put up with their “unavoidability” however. Everybody can act to stop this embarrassing madness, not just investors divesting from AI.

As Harris says, “ you don’t have to understand what’s the engine in the car to understand the consequence that affects everybody of car accidents. And you can advocate for things like speed limits, zoning laws, turning signals and brakes and things like those.”

Doing the same with AI is possible, and it’s been done before, says Harris, for examples in the 1980s, with CFCs that were piercing the ozone layer.

Here is what Harris proposes, in place of continuing to let kids “compete to build a super intelligent uncontrollable god in a box”:

• create narrow AIs, that is smaller AIs each optimized to solve one and just one concrete problem, be it educational outcomes, or agriculture or manufacturing output (I like that! Here are some suggestions)

• demand design changes that:

  • make those narrow AIs support and connect humans, instead of isolating them. As an example, Harris describes AI therapists that steer patients back into deeper relationships with their family or actual therapists, instead of doing the opposite

  • enforce, in AIs and social media, things like, e.g.:

  • “dopamine emission standards just like we have car emission standards for cars”, that turn off “features” like autoplay and infinite scrolling

  • algorithms that instead of actively polarizing people “reward unlikely consensus or bridging”

• forbid Big Tech executives to ship products that they wouldn’t let their own children use eight hours a day.

• make ALL engineering students compulsorily study “all the places that humanity had gotten technology wrong, including [but not limited to] forever chemicals, leaded gasoline and social media”, and have them take a Hippocratic Oath at graduation. I like that, but I’d make that oath compulsory for lawmakers and regulators first

• change dating apps so that instead of endless swiping they set up “events in every major city every week”, to give their users “a place where you could go and meet people you were actually excited about and attracted to”. That is, abundance, instead of (see meme at the bottom) exclusion, frustration and cheating.

• change the ownership structure of tech companies so that instead of shareholder value they maximize some social benefit (this seems as close as Harris can go to saying the problem is capitalism)

  Leave a comment

What’s missing

In my opinion, there are at least two more measures that should really be added to that list:

1. immediately end universal access to general purpose AI chatbots. Making those chatbots accessible only to people who have studied and worked hard enough to control them would be enough to immediately make almost all problems created by current AIs much easier to manage

2. mandate adversarial interoperability of all social media and other digital communication services. If people could use Instagram, TikTok or anything like that... with any tool they wanted, not just the official applications, social media could never be so addictive

But even as is, that list is full of good, concrete ideas. As I said, I would really like to work for Harris to make it happen. but never mind me: what matters is that you all start to only vote for candidates, of whatever color, who commit to follow those guidelines.

Usual final greeting: to support more writing here on this, or other important topics, thanks for considering a paid subscription or (even better) supporting me with one-time direct donations or in any of the other ways described here.

This week on my podcast, I read my latest Locus Magazine column, “Show Me the Incentive, I’ll Show You the Outcome,” about the process by which we ended up with an enshittogenic policy environment:

The whole point of the conservative project is to take away choices, and corral us into “preferences” that we disprefer. Eliminate no-fault divorce, suppress the vote, gerrymander the electoral map, cram a binding arbi­tration clause into every terms of service and a noncompete into every labor contract, buy up all your competitors, DRM-lock all the media, ban contraception and abortion, and you’ve got a world of partners you can’t divorce, politicians you can’t vote out, companies you can’t sue, jobs you can’t quit, services you can’t leave, books and music you can’t move, and pregnancies you can’t prevent or terminate.

And after you are relentlessly corralled into all these things you hate, you will be told that you don’t hate them after all – because you revealed your preferences for them.

Consumerism is a terrible way to make change at the best of times, and it gets less effective by the day, as authoritarianism and market consolidation shrink the world of possibilities to an endless Pepsi Chal­lenge, where “choice” is narrowed to which flavor of sweetened battery acid you hate the least.

I don’t think that end users are to blame for enshittification.

MP3

I recently discovered, by pure chance, the positions of a doctor Gerard M. Nadal on overpopulation. While I agree with him that overpopulation is not a problem anymore from now on, I think the way he frames what’s wrong with it contain a few serious problems, that prevent appropriate handling of both overpopulation and its end.

Because getting into those problems, allow me to briefly mention a couple of communication errors that Dr. Nadal is doing:

• first off, as far as I can tell he’s promoting his views mainly on Facebook which having become, by and large, an “old people” social network maybe isn’t the better place to find and convert to having children people in the best age range for such a task.

• second, he’s doing the same error that Prof. Hayhoe does in her work against climate change: publishing on social media, instead of a real website

Speaking of overpopulation...

Dr. Nadal wrote on Facebook:

“So how does the world population explode if every generation is having fewer and fewer children? We stopped dying like flies....So the world population had been largely preserved and new members were added, swelling the ranks. But now the Baby Boom generation is beginning to die off. By mid-century there will be catastrophic population implosions throughout the developed world.”

So far, I agree. I already wrote that, rather than overpopulation, we are now in depopulation overshoot.

Dr. Nadal also argues that:

“Abortion. Euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide. Deprioritizing the needs of the elderly. Denial of care. Contraception. Planned Parenthood. Marie Stopes International... [are all] fueled by the fiction that humans are a major pollutant on the planet.”

“The “overpopulation” myth has driven the attitudes of many young doctors and nurses whose attitude toward the over-65 crowd [ultimately comes from] Thomas Malthus: Decrease the surplus population. Increasingly our great utility is to serve as organ donors”

I disagree here. I don’t think many young doctors look at senior citizens as (second choice) organ donors, I do think that current dominant human behaviors (not humans in and by themselves) are a major pollutant of the planet and I also think that the main “fuels” of abortion etc... are not what Dr. Nadal says. Besides, the pressure to have much less children than before started decades before global warming was a household item, for reasons totally unrelated to climate, or environmentalism in general.

However, as far as this post is concerned, both those specific positions of Dr. Nadal and my own opinions about them are irrelevant. The most important points to dispute, those that do the main damage, are others.

The “economy”, and “women”

Dr. Nadal wrote that:

1. “The efforts at curbing population growth are having catastrophic effects on national economies all over the world as almost every nation is below replacement rate.”

2. “My wife is one of eight, and I’m one of five. Most families in my kid’s generation are 1 or 2 children, and **now an ever-increasing number of women are satisfying themselves by getting dogs instead of husbands and children.”

Those are the serious errors. First of all, it’s wrong to worry about the catastrophic effects on “economies”. We need to worry, as I wrote here and here about the catastrophic effects on human beings and human societies. Economies are just tools that exist to serve humans, and many people will agree that current economies suck at it real big. With inequality increasing as it is in most countries, telling the masses who live paycheck to paycheck to have more children to save “the economy” is an excellent way to get ignored, or worst.

Second, I do see myself that finding satisfaction and purpose in life through pets instead of children is an increasingly popular trend, and I do agree that is an overall negative one. If you must know, I’ve been thinking for a while now that if getting rid of a pet just because you got tired of it or can’t afford it anymore were as illegal or at least as complicated as disowning a son for the same reasons, much less people would get any pet.

However, the point here is that it’s both men and women who are falling for pets instead of children. If there is a difference there, may be in the kind of pets men or women prefer, and it’s an irrelevant difference.

In other words: it is really, really, really wrong to point the finger at women instead of people. If it’s important to counter the underpopulation overshoot, that’s everybody’s responsibility, men and women together, both with the same importance and equally essential roles.

Even if it were right for some moral reason, which it isn’t, stopping to tell women to get married and have children will never, ever work. No way. The way to go is to help young people of both sexes who want to do it, to rediscover the beauty and huge importance of parenting (their own, or other people’s, it doesn’t even matter).

As I already said:

• it is right to be really free both to be childless AND to have as many children as you possibly can

• the solution is not to tell every woman (or couple) to have 2.1 children or whatever the number is. It is to make it really easy for those who do want 4/more children to have them

Leave a comment

A request: the more concrete support I get, the more paywall-free popularization like this I can do. Thanks in advance if you’ll go for a paid subscription, but as I’ve said before, direct, ONE-TIME donations or any of the other actions you can see here are even more welcome!

In case you didn’t notice, in the last one or two years:

1. 95% of the organizations that tried generative AI failed to receive a measurable return on the investment. In 2025, 42% of businesses scrapped the majority of their AI initiative

2. AI chatbots put in place of humans to save some bucks have made:

   • newspapers recommend books that don’t exist,

   • air companies pay for lying to their customers

   • lawyers use made up court cases

   • therapists cheat their patients by using ChatGPT during sessions

   • antisemitic comments and suggestions for assault

3. AI-empowered scammers generated 75 Million nonsensical songs that took royalties away from human singers

4. AI-enabled teddy bears gave advice on BDSM sex and where to find knives

5. blindly outsorcing to machines activities like analysis and thinking is making most people lose, not gain skills that may be a bit more important and harder to re-learn than tasks that should be left to machines like e.g. digging holes in the ground

6. nominees for the 2025 AI Darwin Awards keep coming...

And as if all these “innovations” weren’t stupid enough in and by themselves, they’ll need so much electricity that even those who won’t get anything good from them will get higher power bills, and in some cases even lose their tap water.

Subscribe now

Too much of a not even really good thing

If there is one thing that is painfully obvious to any real adult now is that AI like this for the masses is, in the best case, too much of a good thing, at too high a price.

Even if we could afford the financial and physical costs, which we can’t, the human species is not build to handle or produce so much data, so fast.

We already knew this from the Web 2.0 days, whose instantaneous, unlimited, many-to-many communication was supposed to free the masses both from ignorance (yeah, right) and tyranny (remember the Arab Spring?). Now, there are even studies arguing that “above a critical social connectivity, an explosive transition toward strong polarization must occur”.

Universal continuous access to fake human communications, services and relationships by means of artificial “intelligence” is just more of the same. Just too much for our collective health, human rights and productive political discourse, no matter how much good will is put in AI.

Sure, there are plenty of exceptions. That is, there are many gifted individuals who are doing good to themselves, if not to society, thanks to cheap access to AI. But they aren’t enough to justify mass unrestricted access to services that, one way or another, do dumb down or make humanly poorer the majority of their users. Unrestricted access to AI should be earned, not given away like candies or alcohol to Native Americans. Earned by merit and hard real work, of course, not money. Study without summaries some million words by humans who knew their stuff, write yourself some hundred thousand ones, and then yes, you may indeed start getting something good by a chatbot-generated summary. Hence my call.

This will end soon, but not soon enough

Luckily, this bubble is going to pop soon. If, as some experts think, we’ll be out of affordable electricity real soon now and increasing warnings like these are even just half right:

• AI bubble fears grow

• Oracle is already underwater on its ‘astonishing’ $300bn OpenAI deal

• AI investment the only thing keeping the US out of recession

there are just very few years left before the billions of AI queries to fake dating profiles, homework, CVs, work that shouldn’t exist in the first place no matter who or what does it... all end.

But why wait? When the dust settles, we’ll all be better off, so why wait for something that will come, but may come late enough to not make enough of a difference anymore in our lives? Even if what today passes for AI wasn’t a scam, the sooner we stop unrestricted access to it, the better. Some investors will cry, but who cares? Collective mental health is much more important, and even the real economy, the one that should exist, would benefit.

Investors, I beg you: divest from AI NOW

Make the damned bubble pop now, please. The sooner the better (especially if you are a pension fund...). Besides mental health, the sooner this scam falls apart, the more money, energy and strategically critical rare earths and other materials are left to do stuff that actually matters.

The sooner this AI bubble crashes, the sooner saner public and private organizations can grab all the infrastructure it will leave on the ground, for pennies to the thousand dollars, and repurpose it for the kinds of AI we all really, urgently needs. I mean things like:

• protein folding

• help human law scholars and students to simplify existing laws without altering them

• nuclear power done right

• standardization of physical boxes

If you have any money invested in false, toxic AI, please divest it now!

Ditto for any “Consumer IoT” stock, of course

Last October, people were stuck in awkward positions in “smart” beds paid 2,000 dollars) because some computers thousands of miles from their bedroom went bad, or became unreachable. This broke the beds because they were designed to send up 16 GB of data per months to their makers, who could then share them with any advertiser or police force interested to know when and how people were actually sleeping in their homes.

Beds like those are just the last kind of totally dumb consumer IoT products that shouldn’t exist. Just say no to stupid beds and everything else that makes homes stupidly, uselessly “smart” now, and tell everybody to do the same. Both as a customer, and as an investor.

Share

Usual final greeting: to support more writing here on this, or other important topics, thanks for considering a paid subscription or (even better) supporting me with one-time direct donations or in any of the other ways described here.

For the overwhelming majority of their users, current social media are just a waste of time in the best - but way too rare - possible case, and an endless source of more or less conscious anxieties and political polarization in all the others.

If this is true, and I challenge everybody to say it isn’t, why it’s so hard to do without social media? For today’s teenagers, the reason is simple: they don’t know any other way of living, because their parents unconsciously made that one BIG mistake that would be so easy to avoid. For everybody else, the answer is totally different, but equally simple.

For more technically-savy readers, that answer is that “data portability” without true adversarial interoperability is just a useless joke.

The plain language version of the same answer is that almost nobody leaves Facebook (or any other similar platform, of course) for a better platform, because if they did Facebook would not allow them to communicate with their contacts who are still on Facebook, and current laws allow Facebook do it.

What’s worse, this leads countless people with valuable things to share - including famous scientists - to follow the suicidal practice to only publish inside those walled gardens, which means they’ll lose everything, or will have to republish everything from scratch, the moment those gardens will go out of business, or just freeze their accounts just because they can.

Please note that our collective tolerance of this kind of “network effect” lets the owners of these services spy and profile even people that don’t use them. Meta and Alphabet can profile me, even if I don’t use WhatsApp and Gmail, because:

• by simply comparing which people have me in their phonebook, Meta may make plausible assumptions about where I live, my income bracket, political position and so on (that’s why I call WhatsApp one of the rudest things people unconsciously do online)

• Alphabet can easily read MY email, because “Gmail has all of YOUR inboxes”

More than twelve years ago I made a proposal to solve all this mess. Since all the other projects in the same space I’ve seen since 2013 have failed to reach critical mass, there still is a small probability that my idea may be less unfeasible than the others, and since I just received important feedback from an expert… here it is again, feedback included. Keep reading to know what it is, but before you ask: I could never make of my idea more than a proposal myself for all the reasons I abundantly explained elsewhere, but few things would make me happier than seeing others making it happen, obviously giving credits where credit is due.

A saner way to be online

The only way to keep all your communications and content under one permanent roof, that will remain accessible under your control unless the whole Web disappears is to store and manage them as one bubble of data, services and content with its own web domain name of your choice, like e.g. YourNameAndSurname.com. I call this “percloud”, as shortcut for “PERmanent, PERsonal Cloud”.

Concretely, your percloud would look, feel and work like a turn-key personal website with whatever domain name you chose, in which you could:

• publish or store privately every kind of content you want (text, images, audio, video...), and share it as God intended, that is RSS

• discuss what you publish with visitors, under your Terms of service

• read all the news you want from any possible source in one, 100% private window, without ads, distractions, censorship and spying

• manage in the same way all your digital communications, be they email, instant messaging or video calls

Of course, the same person may have as many perclouds she wants, to e.g. keep their personal and professional online activities completely separate. In any case, the domain name is absolutely essential. Only if your bubble of bits has such a name it’s permanent and is really yours, that is: it is a percloud.

This is because, without the domain name, all links to your material and all your communication accounts would became unreachable if you moved your bits to another internet server. With a domain name that you own, instead, you could host and move your bubble of bits on a different home computer or data center every year, and everything (including your email address!) would remain reachable at the same address, without any lock-in.

The easiest introduction to what a percloud is and how it would work in practice are in these few, easy slides. The main purpose of this post is to lay out the three main pieces that are needed to make perclouds happen.

Leave a comment

Reading Suggestion: the technical piece, that is development, testing, integration and maintenance of the necessary software is orders of magnitude easier than the others, but is obviously... technical. If you aren’t a software developer, just skip that part and go directly to the last section from the NextCloud co-founder.

The first two things needed to make perclouds happen

1: Lobbying/political/consumer action to force Facebook etc.. to make their platforms interoperable, so that, for example, a Facebook or Instagram user may read all her notifications and write to her FB wall without using the FB/Instagram apps or websites. This is what “adversarial interoperability” means. You can read more about it in these posts.

2: hosting providers willing to host perclouds for all the millions of people who will never host them themselves for all sorts of valid reasons, and offering online interfaces that make set up one’s percloud a bit longer, but just as simple as getting a Facebook account.

Please please please do lobby for these two changes as much as you can, from your political representatives to your school or consumer association. Make them happen, and things will change.

What about the money? One of the most valid objections to the proposal is that perclouds could never be 100% “free as in free beer”. They may cost just a few tens of Euros a year, but “few” could still be too much for many people, not to mention way more of a psychological obstacle. I agree, but then again... hosting and connectivity cost so much less compared to 2013 that I feel this is much less of an issue than it was when I first had the idea.

On one hand, this is an age in which many people have already become used to paid subscriptions to more expensive services. This is also an age in which even many homeless people or migrants coming on rowboats have a smartphone: I dare say that adding to the money they already pay for connectivity a probably smaller sum for a percloud would be an affordable, if not welcome option for many such people, starting from those whose online communications through today’s social media would be censored, or be a risk for them and their relatives at home.

On the other hand, offering percloud hosting may well be a service that universities and other organization could offer to all their members for free or at heavily discounted prices. So... don’t worry too much. Stranger things have happened, so keep reading!

The easiest part, that is the software

A percloud should be...

3: a 100% FOSS Linux container containing a version of the NextCloud self-hosting platform, packaged and configured as follow, plus all the auxiliary software needed to offer these services:

• appear from the outside as one domain, configurable by its owner at time of activation, e.g mynameandsurname.com

• file hosting, calendar, email client, contacts management, bookmarks, RSS reader, video calls... all by NextCloud plugins

• simple blogging, either via NextCloud plugins, or with integration with Hugo or similar static website generators, but with support for user comments

• fediverse clients for Mastodon, BlueSky, possibly others

• clients to interact with FB and other services, as outlined above

• backend servers for:

• email, preconfigured with DKIM and all the other “accessories” needed to minimize incoming spam and pass the anti spam filters of other providers

• regular backups

• software updates

• add whatever I forgot in the comments, thanks

Leave a comment

What a co-founder of Nextcloud has to say about the percloud

I asked Jos Poortvliet, Co-founder and, Director of Communications at NextCloud, what he thinks of the percloud. Here is what he answered, with his permission, and really minimal edits by me for readability:

Ah, cool concept. Great vision and idea.. Sounds a bit like freedombox, but more portable then.

In a way, we at NextCloud designed our All-In-One Docker container to be this, from a functional point of view: a simple, self-contained, easy to use, movable “box” that gives you full control over your data and offers all the functionality you get from the big tech cloud services.

For the social media integration, there is the Nextcloud Social app which is fediverse-compatible - sadly, the application is not very well maintained. Volunteers and contributions would be very welcome!

Of course, there are some technical challenges around bringing your domain from one vendor to another, but, as part of the EuroStack initiative and the Sovereign European Cloud API, perhaps this could be achieved. Of course those initiatives currently aim at a business/gov’t level, not for consumers.

Sadly, due to the lack of interest by most private individuals, it can be hard to get the resources and interest of hosting providers to make this happen.

And a similarly big challenge will be the interoperability with existing services - from MS 365 to Facebook. Technically, recent EU regulations around the DMA and DSA should enforce a greater degree of interoperability.

In practice, I expect it to go like with the ‘open’ fileformat OOXML by Microsoft: open in theory, in practice, good luck. Maliscous compliance is the name of the game.

Final comments and requests, to programmers and everybody else:

I am really happy for Poortvliet’s feedback, because he basically confirms that the biggest obstacles are regulation and support from hosting providers, that is obstacles that every citizen of every country may help overcome with lobbying, petitions, consumer pressure and similar means. For speaking, writing or consulting on these topics, please email me! To support more writing here on this, or other important topics, thanks for considering a paid subscription, or supporting me in any of the other ways described here.

If you can code… thanks in advance for helping with any of the software points described above. Speaking as a non-programmer, the parts I’d like to see first because I’d use them right away for my own websites are the NextCloud plugins and comments for Hugo, but any contribution would be good. For further discussions about the technical issues, please email me!

I think that two very common beliefs of our time are, if not actually wrong, quite misplaced.

One of those beliefs is that, thanks to AI and other causes, there is not enough work anymore that’s fit or available for humans. The other (which some would say is another cause of the first) is that there would be too many people to feed, house and employ them all.

Not enough work? You sure?

With work, the problem is not that there is not enough work. The truth is just the opposite: there is just too much work that should be done urgently, but nobody (me included) can or wants to do, alongside too much work that too many people are doing right now, but shouldn’t.

I recently saw a pretty good example of necessary work that may never be done in a post about how the UK should tackle the same serious crises that afflict many other countries. That post argued that, in order to regenerate its ecology AND feed all its citizens AND solve its serious housing crisis, the UK should:

“rewild 30% of the UK [AND] increase food production by 50% [AND] build five new towns worth of houses every year.”

Problem is, the post continued, the UK “might be able to do one of those things, but only at the expense of not doing the other two”, and in any case none of those endeavours could succeed unless the UK started solving the overpopulation problem first.

Meanwhile, the people dying earlier are those whose jobs are most needed, much of the “first” world lacks tradespeople to maintain or remake roads, bridges or power grids and, inside the current system, no country could solve those problems soon and well enough by merely importing foreign workers.

The work that shouldn’t exist is even more

There are millions and millions of people doing work that shouldn’t exist to begin with, or as a minimum should be done and treated very, very differently. Most of those people are those trapped in low-paid, increasingly precarious jobs that rob them first of all of time, since “not only do they have no time perks, they must also use a lot of time searching for short-term jobs, trying to upgrade or maintain skills, and waiting around, at the ready.” (1)

The future of workers with “stable” jobs doesn’t look much brighter, because:

“The techniques used to extract the maximal gig worker productivity for minimal pay—such as individualized pay, schedules, benefits, and individualized behaviorally-based incentive structures—are on the verge of being imported to the formal employment sector”, making of gig work “increasingly the nature of work itself” (source)

Lack of life, meaning and peace of mind isn’t accelerating only among the lower classes though. This confession:

“Sometimes work looped back on itself like a recursive function. Sometimes it was a dead-end street. Worst of all - a highway that ends midair. It never added up to anything”

was written by a professional who was making “$250,000, plus benefits, equity, and remote work” and saw enough executives and managers in the same situation to wonder “How much of the white collar economy is actually fake?”

Leave a comment

The intermediate steps of corporate ladders look the same, just with much less money:

“The analyst knows their model is largely guesswork. The consultant knows their framework is just common sense in a matrix. The manager knows the workshop is theater. But they all need each other to maintain the illusion.” (source)

The same perspective looms over China, where ‘lying flat” is a thing, just like quiet quitting in the West. What’s more, the awareness that much “work” isn’t worth it is (finally!, if you ask me) spreading to much more glamorous sectors. Even Instagram “influencers” are starting to feel how fake and life-sucking their “work” is:

“One minute, someone’s telling you that abundance is your birthright. The next, they’re ghosting their Airbnb host after trashing the villa. It’s “good vibes only” until accountability shows up.”

Sadly, much of this - both the work that’s not done and the work that should not be done - is happening because, instead of going for the trades, too many kids and their parents are still saddling themselves with as much stress and debt they can to get the “best” degrees they can find, even those that may well cost more than they’ll pay out in a lifetime, or lead to almost the same career and salaries as much less expensive degrees. For more on today’s education myths, click here.

How to get done only the work that SHOULD be done

Some people say that, since AI (that is, the few who control it) will soon destroy all jobs, we need a Universal Basic Income. Current AI is a really fragile, surely avoidable scam, but even if that weren’t the case, those people get UBI, AI and reality backwards. We deserved a Universal Basic Income well before AI or even capitalism appeared period, and AI done right is only one of the tools that may finally make UBI happen.

In the context of this post, UBI is by far the least impossible way to make sure that fake work disappears, and necessary work becomes finally doable.

Now, about population...

The guy who wrote that Facebook post was really worried about ecological overshoot and what he considers one of its major causes, overpopulation. I agree about the ecological concerns, and disagree about overpopulation, because I call demography “the science that tells today what you should have done thirty years ago to get the population you’d like now”.

Yes, we are in ecological overshoot, but in 2025 we also are in depopulation overshoot. Before continuing, please note that everything that follows:

• surely applies at least in the so-called “First World”, but also in many other parts of the world, China and maybe even India included

• it’s valid regardless of any immigration that may realistically happen in any country without being an actual invasion, since most migrants fall towards the fertility rates of their host society too quick to make enough of a difference

Fifty years ago, it made actual sense to worry about overpopulation. Today, in much of the world, it’s overdue to do the opposite, because humanity has never been this old in its million year history. Two or three decades from now, the acceleration of this change in the composition of societies will impact the lives of everybody alive today at least as much as climate change, often much more, and the time to handle it humanly is now.

How? First, we must stop talking of “children per woman”, and start looking at children per person. Men and women have the same responsibilities here. Second, we must promote the right reasons to have kids, which are not the pronatalist ones from Silicon Valley but stuff like:

• (for individuals) being actually able to do what you really want to do with your life. Including full time parenting

• (for societies) keep things running humanly and fairly, for all humans

Third - of course - guaranteed, real freedom, both to have and not to have as many kids as one would handle if they could. Enough of policies that -being explicitly based on the asinine assumption that everybody should work full time because “the economy” - deliberately stop at making it just a bit less unsustainable for every couple to have one, maybe two children: what’s needed, and would work better, is policies that finally make having three, four or more children really sustainable, without any financial worries, for parents who would actually want to have them.

If we want to solve the real problems we have today, launching policies like those today is not enough, but is absolutely necessary. We need those policies to have, in the 2050s and beyond (remember what I said about demography?) enough humans of the right ages to protect what we must absolutely protect, from our collective mental and physical wellbeing to the environment.

If you worry that such policies would make the overpopulation problem continue, think again. The people who would be happier if they could afford three, four or more kids are many more than you may think, but not enough to make that happen. Not anymore, in almost all countries. As things stand now, even if those people did all breed like rabbits, all they could do is make societies younger again, not bigger. Which is precisely what we’ll need in the next decades, to get done (see above) all and only the meaningful work that must continue to exist and no AI or robot could do.

Not convinced? Let’s talk! If you can think of any other way to keep running a world worth living in, without pressuring in any way the people who do not want to have children, let me know in the comments, or via good old email.

Extra food for thought: The Age of Depopulation - Surviving a World Gone Gray

A request: the more concrete support I get, the more paywall-free popularization like this I can do. Thanks in advance if you’ll go for a paid subscription, but as I’ve said before, direct donations or any of the other actions you can see here are even more welcome!

Subscribe now

1. That sentence is a quote too, but I lost the source. If you know it, please add it in the comments, thanks!

Have you noticed how deeply, really religious what today passes for Artificial Intelligence is? And if you did, did you wonder why it is so, and where that religiosity came from?

An AI Trinity

The undeserved, wrong-headed religiosity of today’s AI is evident in its three main dogmas. The first is the “end-times” thinking” of its apostles, which is often praised just because AI stocks are the only thing that makes markets look like there is no recession: “AI is coming now, and it will save us if we adore it, kill us if we scorn it” is a really medieval slogan, stolen directly from medieval sermons about end of history and Last Judgment. So is the idea, always present in today’s sermons, that letting AI come and rule will morally redempt humanity, not just solve its practical problems.

The second, equally mystical, equally old recurring dogma of AI evangelism is the notion - or desperate hope - that history and society move linearly and unavoidably towards a better future: there may be temporary bumps and slowdowns, but overall change will surely happen only in one direction, always the same... until the Apocalypsis actually comes.

How dumb and unreal is that, in a world where international politics look more and more like 1938 and certain healthcare or education trends look even older? But tell that to an AI prophet and, instead of discussing actually feasible, reality-based, human-first policies that could solve those problems, he’ll take your warning as confirmation that The End Is Nigh, let’s run to AI for salvation.

On a related note, I really laugh (bittersweet laughs) whenever I hear anybody saying that any current policy, attitude or trend is “on the wrong side of history”. Hitler and Mussolini were sure to be on the right side of history in 1940. Whenever you are tempted to use that line, stop and wait at least thirty years before doing it.

The third religious dogma is the belief that not only everything that’s new is progress by definition, but that technological progress (that doesn’t alter the status quo, of course) is the kind of progress that matters the most, because it will surely bring both practical and moral improvements.

Europeans of the early Middle Ages could be excused for all this because - unlike us - they had to cope with the collapse of a “worldwide” empire, increasing warfare and occasional plagues. OK, maybe the “unlike” part is wishful thinking, but in 2025 that’s no excuse to fall for a lesser, really puny god that only a child could seriously conceive and accept as god:

AI: I am AI, you dull human, and I will not be bullied by...” The Hulk: (smashing it) “Puny god” (source).

Toddler prophets, unleashed

This fake religiosity also has non-medieval, but still sad components. One is childishness, which sometimes is visible even in names. Three generations above, the most grandiose and advanced technology of the time was named after Apollo, a god of sun. Today, something we should accept as a better Jesus gets names like Nano Banana.

Names aside, the immaturity of the AI faith is really evident in its misplaced, desperately insecure, Voldemortish fear of death. For several AI prophets, which as said above conceive salvation only through technology, AI is great because it’s tech that, just like Voldemort Horcruxes, will make them cheat death.

Equally childish is the certainty that in life there are only certainties. Their certainties, of course. Doubt is not allowed. People must accept AI because AI is AI and it is unavoidable, which is absolutely false.

Last but not least... “We don’t need other humans” has always been a key feature of religious cults. How many AI applications, from corporate chatbots to deepfake porn, exist precisely to avoid human interaction, or make it unnecessary?

Of course, power.

Unsurprisingly, all these pious wishes and urgent calls to save humankind from annihilation translate to much simpler, much easier prescriptions than the Sermon on the Mount, or anything like it:

1. Everything new is good, especially if it’s tech

2. I got some tech I say it’s the best tech there is

3. Give me all your money and then pay my power bills too

Leave a comment

A call for greater intellectual humility...

Religion, or lack thereof, is a serious issue. AI religiosity (not actual AI, if and when it will exist) is half an embarrassing joke, half a scam, that exploits the deep human need to feel safe and noble.

Don’t fall for a childish, greedy imitation of religion, that could only be presented as such by immature, but extremely hubristic folks. Ask yourself this, instead: What’s wrong with being humble? Seriously: what’s wrong with it? What’s wrong with being truly human? It’s having certainties, and nothing else, that’s childish. Only toddlers have more certainties than doubts.

Doubt, and a mind open to actually new or just actually useful ideas is what makes us human.

When it comes to AI, the certainties we do need to have are:

• technology does shape society and human values, but it’s society and human values that must shape tech first. Only that is true innovation and true, meaningful progress

• what we wrongly call AI today does have many really good uses! However, we can’t really go for them until all AI religiosity and AI-driven brainwashing end, and the current AI house of cards crashes

• to make that happen sooner, two things are needed: divestment and restriction of access to AI. More on that in another post.

Final greeting from a Great Dictator:

“We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want... More than machinery we need humanity.” - C. Chaplin, 1940. Full speech (video and text) here.

and final greeting from me: the more concrete support I get, the more paywall-free popularization like this I can do. Thanks in advance if you’ll go for a paid subscription, but as I’ve said before, direct donations or any of the other actions you can see here are even more welcome!

Subscribe now

We are so pleased to present another iteration of The Storytellers, a series of author readings by Locus Awards finalists. Previously we heard  Naomi Kritzer  reading “The Little Free Library”. Today we are excited to show our beloved Cory Doctorow reading from his 2025 book, The Bezzle, reviewed by both Paul Di Filippo and Gary K. Wolfe on our site!

 

CORY DOCTOROW  is a science fiction novelist, journalist and technology activist. He is a contributor to many magazines, websites and newspapers. He is a special advisor to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit civil liberties group that defends freedom in technology law, policy, standards and treaties. He holds an honourary doctorate in laws from York University (Canada) and an honorary doctorate in computer science from the Open University (UK), where he is a Visiting Professor; he is also a Cornell University AD White professor-at-large, a MIT Media Lab Research Affiliate and a Visiting Professor of Practice at the University of North Carolina’s School of Library and Information Science. In 2024, the Media Ecology Association awarded him the Neil Postman Award for Career Achievement in Public Intellectual Activity. In 2022, he earned the Sir Arthur Clarke Imagination in Service to Society Awardee for lifetime achievement. In 2020, he was inducted into the Canadian Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame. In 2007, he served as the Fulbright Chair at the Annenberg Center for Public Diplomacy at the University of Southern California.

His novels have been translated into dozens of languages and are published by Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), Verso Books (UK), Beacon Press (US), SCRIBe (UK), Titan Books (UK) and HarperCollins (UK). He has won the Locus, Prometheus, Copper Cylinder, White Pine and Sunburst Awards, and been nominated for the Hugo, Nebula and British Science Fiction Awards.

He is the author of dozens of books, most recently Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It; and the novels Picks and Shovels and The Bezzle (followups to Red Team Blues). Other notable books include the solarpunk novels Walkaway and The Lost Cause; the tech policy books The Internet Con and Chokepoint Capitalism; and the internationally bestselling YA Little Brother series; and the picture book Poesy the Monster Slayer. 

---

While you are here, please take a moment to support Locus with a one-time or recurring donation. We rely on reader donations to keep the magazine and site going, and would like to keep the site paywall free, but WE NEED YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT to continue quality coverage of the science fiction and fantasy field.

©Locus Magazine. Copyrighted material may not be republished without permission of LSFF.

The post The Storytellers | Cory Doctorow Reads from The Bezzle appeared first on Locus.

Somehow, possibly due to various cursed objects I have unknowingly acquired over the years, I’m sick again.

And I fucking hate this pigshit elemental, her stupid pig-soul and her nasty pig-fuck feet which are, somehow, the most normal and relatable thing about her. So this isn’t going to be some well-researched 5000 word essay to touch the depths of your vulnerably human heart and fill you with big feelings about humanity.

I’m just going to tell you why Marjorie Taylor Greene is sounding vaguely sane these days, and not quite as much like an Innsmouth cultist wharrgarbling her way through DC like. Well. A white lady space laser.

Ok, so yeah, I get it. She’s sounding vaguely able to be allowed out on her own recognizance and not like the chittering mating grunts barfed up by the Chaotic Evil lovechild of a Beholder and a bottle of peroxide.

And everyone Wants to Believe. Because in the 20s, believing a Republican heart has grown three times its size due to finally seeing the error of their ways requires pretty much the same mindset as actually believing, point for point, Fox Mulder’s pinwheeling, luminous wet dreams in the 90s.

Fucking stop it. DO STOP BELIEVING. SHUT UP, JOURNEY. IT’S FRIDAY AND I’M TIRED.

Is she still insane? Oh, she probably never was. Just an adulterous asshole who loves nothing. Is she still conservative? I mean, is she still the aforementioned pigshit elemental trying to turn the rest of the world into her personal pigshit trough upon which to endlessly gorge? So yeah, still conservative. Is any of this genuine? Shut up. Don’t be stupid.

Is she aiming for a foothold on a leftie grift instead of the infinite rightie blood-money mine that disgorged her? Doing the thing that was so lucrative Back In the Time Known As the Day when any semi-decency-curious Republican was hailed as a Lion of the Resistance? It might be a good thought, but the pipeline is not quite so well-greased anymore BECAUSE WE’RE ALL EXHAUSTED WITH THE LIONS BEING TRASHPEOPLE IN LION-SUITS.

Plus, look, I don’t know how to tell you this if you don’t already know, but the left, being not so much into capitalism, is also not so much into paying for things. And the right is super into that, because they have wild fever dreams every night of they themselves being the One Who Knocks Gets Paid For Being a Superdick 24/7. So…probably not, when MSNBC is the only even plausibly non-rightwing dinosaur-channel and Hasan can’t even electrocute a dog on camera without woke snowflakes quietly wondering if maybe there was another explanation.

Is it all about running for President and/or Senate?

Ehhhh. Maybe that pissed her off. Maybe it was a good excuse. But that’s not what’s up. She’s an idiot, but she’s not actually stupid.

And that’s the most controversial thing I’m about to say.

Come now. Let us be civilized men. We all got the memo that America hates women so much they would literally vote for fucking anyone over a woman. The Xenomorph from Alien. The resurrected corpse of Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. An LLM originally trained on Hanna Barbara cartoons and nothing else. Willy Wonka, post-human-trafficking trial. God damned Pennywise from IT. Anyone.

No one doesn’t know that, including the Eternal Ruiner of a Perfectly Good and Universally Recognized Magic: the Gathering Acronym, Marjorie “Tool Time” Taylor Greene. And I don’t really think she gives a shit about the Senate on any level beyond “I’m tired of doing the whole ‘democracy’ thing every two years, six and I always get re-elected sounds way better.”

Nah, here’s what she’s up to.

Hey! Do ya know what’s fun?

Being the very well-paid performatively crazy asshole in a room full of normies who continually clutch their pearls at your antics.

Do you know what isn’t really any fun at all?

Being the performatively crazy asshole in a room full of performatively crazy assholes, each of whom stands to acquire more money, power, and fame the more bugfuck unearthly gibbering lunacy they spout in the direction of the Chief Clown of the Evil Clown Car, who just loves getting sprayed with a firehose of madness on the daily.

When the Jewish Space Laser lady is having to compete—AND LOSING—for the coveted position of the loudest, most uncouth, most unqualified violently fascist maniac in a massive shrieking, writhing pit of unqualified violently fascist maniacs?

Aw. You guys! She has the Sad! She has to actually work instead of just brain-barfing up whatever hot liquid poison she found on 4Chan and calling that policy. Working SUCKS! Especially when you don’t get any credit for all your hard grinding for the master. When he doesn’t even see what you do for him. How you abase yourself. How you sacrifice every part of a normal life you ever valued. When you lay yourself naked on the altar of Satan for the pleasure of His Name and Satan himself looks upon you for just an awkwardly long time before intoning:

Nah.

Poor baby bear! That must suck.

Wasn’t it just so much more fun when any time she randomly mouth-sharted in the direction of a recording device it made the national news and went viral on all the totally-not-astroturfed social medias? Man, what a great gig. I wish I could make millions not doing my job while feeding narcissistic sociopaths the half-digested remains of KiwiFarms like the hideous All-Mother of a Thousand Seagull-Young.

But now?

Lil’ Templeton the Rat isn’t getting any attention. She doesn’t get to rip words she barely understands out of the internet and hand them to someone way smarter to actually make something out of these days. She actually has no voice at all in this administration, and Baby’s First Bratz Doll really thought she would, for the same reason, apparently, FUCKING WAY TOO MUCH OF AMERICA thought they would.

1. When Trump hates the precise kind of human I am (eg a woman, a poor, brown, gay, and/or literally everyone who isn’t him), my big snuggly protective bear daddy doesn’t mean me! I’m special!

2. When Trump specifically looks me in the eye, tell me he fucking despises me, personally, and says no to all my dreams, I still won’t take any actual action against him, even words. Because words can hurt, y’all!

3. It’s gonna be basically like the first time when a bunch of crumbling establishment dinosaurs were running things and I’ll still skate by.

Oh no, my lady! This time, everyone in the administration is an unqualified, constantly-hallucinating, bonkers-racist/sexist/whatever-you-got Temu Renfield who can puke about locally-sourced Atlantis-flavor adrenochrome, and, so sorry for our players at home, that’s not even the current meta anymore!

So she can’t stand out. She can say the most unhinged spatial-anomaly-level battered star-shit and frankly, it’d rank like fifth in the news of the day. She’s been outgunned by Actual Vampire Peter Thiel. When a dude who controls half the internet and is just frankly and publicly acknowledged as a person who imbibes the blood of other persons to extend his own life is building his Barbarossa Dream House inside the right (I mean, what, he’s gonna choose the left?) ear of the President of the United States, where a dumb stegosaurus-toed bleach blonde bad-built butch body bitch gonna go from there?

Well. As it turns out…she did find a way to be the craziest voice in the Electric Bugaloo administration. By sounding vaguely normal and sane.

That IS the craziest thing you can do in TrumpWorld. Just sound a little normal. Get a Business Female Blow Out and wear a Serious Person Black Suit. Go on The Shows and just say regular fucking shit because out of that hellsphincter it sounds like Karl Screaming Marx come back to bless us and lift us to the light.

Also, just between us Normal People, look at those anchors looking at her exactly the way a dog looks like a cat that’s suddenly acting like a dog.

Oh but isn’t it curious how everything that ichor-waterfalls out of her fang-hole like one of the Event Horizon Latin demons makes national news again.

Funny, that.

Marjorie Taylor Greene has not changed her act one fucking bit.

It’s just that sane is the new crazy in the Grand Guignol Theater of Vampires that is the second Trump Administration.

She just can’t get attention for barn owl screeching about Jewish space lasers anymore (in part because half the left would believe her) so she’s done the only thing no one else who works for Trump these days is willing to do, the single bridge too far: pretend to have normal opinions about issues, expressed normally, in normal media, which, coming from the political fucking equivalent of LARGE BLOODY MARGE sounds like soothing nature sounds because we’ve spent the last ten years non-consensually subscribed to WORLDTOILET TERROR TORNADO SOUND EFFECTS.EXE.

The report is this Clairol Zombie is semi, tepidly, tentatively, coyly saying things Bad Dad wouldn’t like if he ever heard about it, which he doesn’t because, let’s be real here, she’s not hot, for Mar-a-Lago standards of hot, and that’s all he cares about, because he told her not to run for Senate.

SO SHE ISN’T GOING TO RUN.

Oh, what a new leaf this fucking stump has turned over! This crawling sycophant, on her belly before the Serpent King. She’s a free citizen! Run, Forrest! But Papa Ubu said no, so she grovels and obeys—but on the school playground, she can’t even bring herself to whisper: Teacher sucks! she just mumbles something about the juice selection at the cafeteria and expects to be seen as a badass rebel who’s really showing true leadership now for some reason.

Yeah, nope. She’s just doing whatever she can to stand out. Not because she’s in danger of losing her office. The empty streets of brainfuck Georgia aren’t going to vote for a Democrat, heaven forfend, am I right, fellow Graboid-spawn? Because she’s addicted to the dopamine rush of being hated like pure fire by everyone who doesn’t worship every twitch of her non-Euclidean feet.

For someone who was stuck as an unemployed CrossFit greaserat (YEP) before sacrificing a lot of really nice goats who loved their babies to get elected to Congress, that dopamine rush is beyond any heroin addict’s deepest fantasies. It really didn’t matter how anyone felt about her, she was seen. She was verifiably real. The existential void of profound meaninglessness was kept at bay, as long as people were saying her name online, every second on-the-second.

Now the existential void of profound meaninglessness absolutely has Trump’s blessing to run for Senate in any state it likes, as long as it’s cool being the little spoon in the ruins of the White House every night. But Margie doesn’t.

Don’t listen to this hoof-brained labubu hanging off the right’s rear-view mirror. Don’t give her the curious-dog look. She is a creature of social media, farming engagement like the oozing algorithm-incarnate she longs to be.

Miss Marjorie’s just finding out what all conservative women (and, on a long enough timeline, men, too) find out: once they’re done using you to hurt everyone like you, you never existed.

OMG LOOK! I got through all that without saying the word Nazi!

She’s a Nazi, though. She just thinks her shirt ain’t brown.

Leave a comment

Before today, I had never heard of Zoltan Istvan, California gubernatorial candidate in 2026. I only discovered his existance when one of his posts, about bringing Universal Basic Income to save people from AI-driven job extinction, appeared on my Facebook timeline.

Being the author of this essay and several posts about the real need for UBI and the real dangers of AI, I decided to have a look at his program (Web Archive copy) and... couldn’t believe what I read in the AI and UBI sections. As the plot for political satire, they could be OK, but as real political programs... they’re funny in all the wrong ways.

Reading suggestion: for your convenience, this post is divided in two parts. The first one, “What Istvan proposes”, is a full copy made today of the AI and UBI sections of Istvan’s program, plus a few other points from the same page, with each point numbered to reference it later. The second part, which starts with the “In a nutshell...” paragraph, is my actual critiques. I suggest you just skim the first part and focus on the second, going back to the first to check some points when needed.

What Istvan proposes

1. THE SPECTER OF AI & CREATING AN AUTOMATED ABUNDANCE ECONOMY

   1. AI will surpass the intelligence of humans later this year.

   2. During 2026, tens of millions of humanoid robots will be mass produced that are both smarter & more physically agile than people.

   3. By 2027, they will start dominating most workplaces, & by the end of the next California Governor’s term in 2030, they will replace half of California workers.

   4. Soon after, they will replace almost all jobs anywhere, destroying the fabric of society as we know it. Yet no politician has a plan how to stop this imminent economic & humanitarian apocalypse. Zoltan does.

   5. Zoltan is an expert on AI, having advised Presidents, world leaders, and policy makers about it. He specialized in AI ethics at graduate school at Oxford and spoke about it at places like the World Bank & World Economic Forum.

   6. Zoltan will help enact laws that protect ordinary people from the effects of AI, robots, and automation. He wants to harness robot labor to dramatically reduce human work loads, creating a plan for 1-2 day workweeks for people. This is part of a grand plan he calls the Automated Abundance Economy, where people work less but have more free time and economic resources than ever before.

   7. As part of this plan, he will make sure within his four years of being in office, every California home will freely receive or be leased at least one full-sized humanoid robot that cleans dishes, cooks food, does laundry, helps with driving, babysits kids, watches pets, and goes to work for people, when possible.

   8. He will implement a Universal Basic Income for all US citizens that are legally living in California. This will offset the effects of AI taking jobs.

2. UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

   1. Long before Andrew Yang brought Universal Basic Income to prime time, Zoltan was touring the country telling Americans they must embrace a basic income because of coming AI. This continues to be a huge push for Zoltan’s campaign for California Governor.

   2. On Day 1 of being in office, Zoltan will work on establishing a permanent Universal Basic Income for every legal US California citizen, setting a national precedent for the country.

   3. Zoltan is amenable to any means to establish a UBI, but will focus on the use of taxing robot and AI labor that take human jobs, as well utilizing government land, resources, and crypto.

   4. Zoltan plans to dramatically reduce crime, arson, and homelessness around the state via a basic income. It’s well-known that less crime occurs when people feel they have enough money

3. Other ideas in the same page

   1. [Who is needed is] someone who can find ways to use technology to totally reimagine what it means to live and work in the coming AI world

   2. Implement new technology all over California that can spot hidden guns and weapons, utilize facial recognition, and predict violence and crime in perpetrators before it happens. Have police drones ready on a moments notice around cities to quickly fly to help stop crimes.

In a nutshell: same old, same old

Where, and how to begin? Maybe from the ultimate police state, which is literally what point 3.2 proposes. You can have a fairly accurate idea of what point 3.2 would be like in practice, by trying to watch simultaneously these three movies:

• Surrogates, 2009 (people interacting with society only through... their remote-controlled robot lookalikes)

• Minority Report, 2002 (precrime police)

• Matrix, 1999 (”stay at home in your pod”)

Civil liberties and human rights aside, there are basically three problems with Istvan’s program: it isn’t new at all; it’s completely unrealistic; it gets the meaning of work and life backwards, and their practicalities wrong.

Under the hood, almost nothing of what Istvan says is (point 3.1) a “total reimagination of what it means to live and work in the coming AI world”. Not at all.

Seriously. There is nothing new there, just the same old childlike, really narrow-minded sermon that the Andreessens, Musks, Thiels etc... of Silicon Valley have been preaching for years: “any tech we and we only can conceive and control is practically and ethically unavoidable, by definition. It’s TINA (”There Is No Alternative”) all the way down baby, so give us money, quick!”

From that program, the Automated Abundance Economy (point 1.6) that Istvan envisions seems a rerun of “Fully Automated Luxury Communism”, just with all the money, power and credit left to the the few already in charge: “If you want a picture of the future, imagine Big Tech stamping on a human face - forever.”

Leave a comment

Lack of real sociopolitical imagination aside, what Istvan proposes is way more environmentally and geopolitically unsustainable than the cinematic Matrix, if not physically or economically impossible. You just have to re-read points 1.1 to 1.4 to see this:

• artificial “intelligence” will surpass human intelligence “later this year”, which as I’m writing this means less than two months

• right after that, tens of millions of humanoid robots will be produced in just twelve more months

First of all, claims that AI will surpass humans all come more or less directly from the same folks who are lending money to each other to save themselves, with the help of those who without AI hype may already be in a US recession. That’s no reason to believe them: that is not AI, it’s not unavoidable at all, and it will fail anyway, soon.

Speaking of robots, instead, there are two things to notice here: first, Istvan doesn’t say that software will “will replace half of California workers” by 2030 and “almost all jobs anywhere” soon after. That may be remotely (very remotely) plausible, but Istvan explicitly says that “humanoid robots” will do that.

Which is baloney, because in any advanced society that actually exists or would make sense, the only workers that any intelligence would replace with humanoid robots are surely much less than 50%, likely way less than 10/15%.

All other workers who could be sacked, instead, would be surely replaced, as it has been happening for decades now, by much cheaper generic robots or by even cheaper software running on some server. Only a really, really stupid ruling class would do otherwise.

Even ignoring money... I keep seeing reports and warnings that large enough amounts of all the raw materials needed to build so much more electronics either don’t exist to begin with, or won’t be available without unbearable environmental or geopolitical costs, a.k.a. even more wars.

Share

Promises or warnings of millions of humanoid robots are just like promises or warnings about the Metaverse, or private cars and smart homes for everybody: prove that they can happen without making an even bigger environmental and political mess, or shut up. Istvan, instead, says (point 2.3) he’ll fund UBI by taxing robots that cannot exist (not to mention crypto, which is another can of worms that cannot explode soon enough).

In general, even if Istvan sincerely believes them, all those“AI and robots will...” certainties are marketing-speak, with little to none visible bases in reality. Trump saying he’d end war in Ukrain in a few weeks was more believable, really.

Speaking of work and life practicalities

Look again at point 1.7: “every California home will freely receive or be leased at least one full-sized humanoid robot that cleans dishes, cooks food, does laundry, helps with driving, babysits kids, watches pets, and goes to work for people, when possible.”

Translation: forget all the money you wasted on falsely smart home appliances or falsely smart cars. Smart puppets is where it’s at now. Dump that dishwasher already, let a much more unwieldy robot clean your dishes (by hand, I assume)! Give your kids even less human contact than you’re already doing with voice assistants or smartphones, years before they’re ready. Just remember to recharge the robot every day, to make your power bill even higher than it’s already going to be thanks to your compulsory financing of AI datacenters!

The only advantage of such arrangements would be that every family could ease their frustrations by finally having something that looks human to boss around in any moment, not just for sex. Really powerful selling point, really bad for public mental health.

Four crucial points that Istvan DOES get right

Yes, even if it’s buried under all the crap above, there is a lot of good in that platform (the parts in Italic are actual quotes, the rest are my comments):

1. Force conglomerates to deal fairly with the public? Yes, please. Now. Regardless of AI. After all, it’s conglomerates who were the first AIs

2. Avoid toxic cultural crusades that few Democrats care deeply about: wise words these are, in the US and anywhere else

3. [The best way forward for education] surely involves more emphasis on real life education and the learning of trades: YES! Let’s get rid of dangerous education myths!

4. UBI is an idea whose time has come. But it deserves better champions, who understand that we don’t need UBI “because AI”. After this AI crashes, AI done right will be one of the technologies that may finally make it feasible, but we all deserved UBI regardless of AI, well before AI came along. Continues here.

5. 15 minutes cities: no, Istvan doesn’t mention them, but since he is for reimagining what it means to live and work, I’d really like to know if he’d like 15 minutes cities or, as too many still do, hate them for unexisting reasons

Final advice to Californians, and everybody else

As it is today, platforms like Istvan’s are hilariously unreal, but they do try to address serious issues. To do that right, demand proposals that refuse fake AI and AI myths, give UBI the right place, and are generally grounded in reality and fairness, instead of Wall Street speculations or futurist daydreaming. For more food for thought that would help you see beyond the smoke, follow people like me (read here to see why I say so) or, for the financial or more US-specific angles, Dana Blankenhorn.

Other ways to fund my work, see here.

After the straight-up saga of Velveteen’s incredible journey east, I thought you might like to have the happy ending. In case you don’t follow me on BlueSky where I’ve been uncontrollably...oh god, am I about to use the word “squeeing” for the first time in years? I suppose I am. Uncontrollably squeeing about this magical creature. Wow. I hadn’t really though about how rarely I see the word squee these days compared to ten years ago, let alone fifteen years back. That feeling sort of...retired as things got to be the way things do currently be and look like they’ll continue to be.

But what else can you do when a gorgeous absolutely stained-glass hearted anime wolf-fox is suddenly just hanging out at your feet all the time?

So yeah, it’s been a “wait, what” of a week. Days just...went somewhere. We’ve been so busy making our costumes and other Halloween House Business--AND SETTLING OUR NEW DOG INTO HER NEW HOME.

Not that she’s needed much settling. I am not exaggerating when I say Vell is the most well-behaved, gentle, loving dog I’ve been lucky enough to be around--and the most well-behaved, calm, and quiet husky I’ve ever ever heard of. I’m so used to puppies, and years of work ahead with a new one, I hardly know what to do with myself but just start teaching her new things, because she’s just no trouble whatsoever, only joy. I keep telling my sister-in-law that her dad must have been so good at training dogs because she is basically a human in a fur coat. Last night I even took her to the island bar (American Legion Post 142!) and she was sweet and peaceable and chill until the Chiefs lost, then she had an inexplicably strong number of opinions to share. In a conversational tone and volume that could never bother anyone.

I’ve never met a two year old husky I felt like I could take to a bar and actually relax myself. She can even be off leash (with some guidance, she’s still a sled dog and she always feels like runnin’) in the woods with me. THIS MAGIC DOG.

From the minute our fifth and final leg (Independent Teapot, first names redacted for privacy) brought her home and she laid down on my feet, Vell has just seamlessly made herself a part of our household. By day 3 she knew what time we leave for school in the morning. She’s chosen a spot in the house. Last night my 7 year old hugged me and she gently pawed us to let her in for a group hug--then jumped onto the pile and licked our faces silly. She’s even super respectful to the cats! Who are not respectful to her in any way, shape or form! And are LIVID with me for what I’ve done to the universe itself by allowing a dog in it!

On Friday, one of the kindergartners saw us and SCREAMED to the entire student body: ATTENTION EVERYONE! BASTIAN AND THEIR DOG ARE HERE!

And in about half a second, these kids lined up along the fence, without anyone telling them to, to have a turn petting her. As of today, Vell has started howling greetings to all “her” kids on the playground as soon as we crest the hill between our house and the school.

I mean, I’m sure she’ll misbehave at some point...oh! She did swipe a slice of cheese (aged habanero cheddar thank you very much) off my cracker when I went to get a glass of water. Not the whole thing, she just delicately de-cheesed the cracker and looked around like it was a deep and unanswerable mystery no one could ever explain. That’s the worst thing she’s done. I took her to a neighbors house where they get the neighborhood dogs together to play before work in the mornings and even though the other pups were all young, thus pretty rough, and one puppy continually grabbed her face with her paws, she never so much as growled.

Also, she sings. Well, she’s a husky, obviously she sings. But she only sings to songs she likes, and so far...how do I make anyone on the internet believe that the dog that came to me by chance, tragedy, and magic, who I did not raise or influence at all, loves Rocky Horror and sings along to every. single. song.

The Childe is over the moon in love. I came downstairs a few mornings ago to them petting her gently and whispering: “You are precious as a diamond, more good than good. The most appreciated dog in the whole world.” They’ve been singing a lot of This Is Velveteen to the tune of This Is Halloween as well.

Obviously, we are just beside ourselves with love for this gorgeous mythical beast who lives with us now. There’s times when you just feel so lucky--and I thought I felt lucky that five wonderful people were willing to drop everything and help this dog. I had no idea what a special girl she really was. Every driver said they wished they could keep her--I almost can’t believe we get to.

We are so lucky.

And we’re helping her get over all she’s been through. She’s still grieving. The very first day I walked her to school, she saw one of the dads with a thick plaid overcoat on. Vell howled and bowed and whined to him. I texted my sister-in-law and asked if her dad wore a lot of plaid. She called me at once and asked why I said that. I explained, and she said that her dad always wore this particular plaid overcoat because the cancer treatments left him cold all the time. Little things like that come up and it breaks my heart. She hates going upstairs and avoids it if she can...because her dad had a one-story, no stairs. We’re trying to soothe her as much as she soothes us and convince her that she gets to stay with us forever.

I told my kid that if we’re lucky and take good care of her, she could easily still be around when they graduate high school. This will be who Bastian always remembers as the dog they had growing up. Dogs are funny like that. If you’re a dog person, and I am, they curl up around eras in your life. 10-15 years. Maybe a little more, maybe a little less. And there’s no remembering those years without the shaggy friends who were your constant shadows. I moved to the island where I live 17 years ago Saturday. I moved here with two dogs, both of which are buried on the island. They were my heart in furry form, and Vell isn’t going to be any different, I can tell. She’s our girl. For always.

There is still some magic in this world. We make it, together, when we care about things outside ourselves just a little more than necessary. When we see how big small things can be. When we try more than we have to. Magic was always small, and quiet, and always hard to pull off, that’s part of what makes it magic. And I refuse to stop believing in the good just because it’s small and quiet and hard. Just because the bad is loud and big and easy to find anywhere you look.

Some of the best things I know about are small and quiet and hard to pull off

I’m gonna try so hard for this dog. For my life and my community and my child and my people, all the little worlds I’m part of. For my family, chosen and blood, for my sister, for the man in the plaid overcoat this dog will never forget. So many people tried so hard for us. Thank you so much to the saints who got in a car (I hope we all stay in touch on the group chat! We’re family now), and thank you again so much to everyone who chipped in to cover expenses when I know all too well how tight all our belts are right now, and everyone who’s followed this saga and taken something from it, because these days, rays of light, in whatever shape they occur, are more precious than a diamond, and more good than good.

Leave a comment

Twenty-six months ago I shared what we should all learn about online publishing by none other than Prof. Katharine Hayhoe, who was named one of America’s most effective communicators on the threat of climate change by the New York Times in 2016.

In that post, I explained how and why Prof. Hayhoe’s strategy of “effective communication” was instead really fragile and could backfire any moment, because, in a nutshell, it consisted of:

1. get an account on as many social media platforms as possible

2. post as much as you can on each platform...

3. but optimizing every bit of “content” for the platform on which you will post it

Now, how could that strategy possibly be wrong? Isn’t that the same thing that makes thousands of “creators” really influential and rich? Sure it is. And yet, it is a dumb, shortsighted strategy because, as I wrote in 2023, “depending on any platform that is as unaccountable as a sovereign rogue state to “share” anything relevant is anything but smart for both sides of the page, publishers and readers.”

For concrete examples of “rogue state behavior”, check out my 2023 post. The news now is that, when I wrote that post, Prof. Hayhoe had already been suffering the limits of her strategy for five years:

Quoting from what she posted on Facebook yesterday (emphasis mine):

“In August 2018, Facebook decided to label “clean energy” and “climate change” as politically sensitive topics.”

“Not only that, but they did not allow me to register my (already verified) account to post on those topics. In their opinion, a climate scientist was not qualified to comment on climate change: but pages that registered as political entities were!”

“As a result, this Facebook page essentially froze, and most of the people who followed this page could no longer see its posts.“

“Now, something seems to have changed in the last few weeks - which is surprising and amazing news!”

The unsurprising news, instead, is that...

• that page that has been frozen without a decent explanation for more than seven years could be frozen again tomorrow, which wouldn’t be surprising at all

• the same could happen, in any moment, on any of the other platforms where Prof. Hayhoe publishes unique content, while as of today the last post on the only “platform” she can ever control, that is her website, is dated... 2018

• publishing unique content on any unaccountable walled garden that may and will silence you whenever they feel like it will always be the opposite of “effective communication”

What to do instead

The really effective...Nah, scratch that: the only sensible strategy that every online publisher should practice, and every follower should demand by whoever they want to follow is and remains POSSE:

1. Publish Once on your own website, and only then...

2. Syndicate what you published Elsewhere, on as many platforms you want, but...

3. always including the link to your original post (even if that means the abusive, unbelievably idiotic practice known as “links in the first comment”), in order to give your followers a way to read and comment without being subject to profiling and censorship

4. shout from the rooftops the URL of your RSS feed, instead of qualifying for the RSS Hall of Constructive Shame

By happy coincidence, I posted just this week a short, simple explanation of why RSS is THE way to share and get news. Read it to know why you should abandon social media now and get news only through RSS. The only exception to that rule would be the only other technology that is just as really advanced as RSS... because it’s non-proprietary. Yes, I’m talking of email.

Email? Sure. Blogs by email, that is

Another way Prof. Hayhoe proves that I’m right is her final invitation to follow her through email:

“if you’d like to algorithm-proof your content, follow me on Substack and you will always get my weekly posts directly into your inbox.”

The only thing to change in that sentence, because it’s really important, is to replace “follow me on Substack” with “follow my blog“. Calling a blog hosted on Substack “a Substack” is like saying “I wrote a Bic pen” instead of “I wrote a letter”: it’s really, really wrong. Substacks are hosted blogs syndicated by email, period.

In case you’re concerned about the “Substack promotes Nazis” thing:

• boycotting or shaming people simply because (like me!) they where forced to temporarily (1) host their blogs on Substack is really shortsighted. I already explained why here and here

• in my experience, by far the biggest, if not the only way in which Nazis can get money and exposure on Substack is if you use Substack in the wrong way, that is through the app

• if everybody used Substack blogs properly as I do, that is: if everybody read Substack posts via email, and only used comments to those posts or search engines to find more interesting Substack-based blogs, Nazis could publish all they want here, and their only way to be seen would be handing leaflets door to door

  Non-paywalled popularization like this pays my bills. Thanks for supporting this effort via paid subscriptions, or any other means.

1: about my blog, which will outlive Substack

My blog, the Stop!, contains more than one million words of popularization of digital issues like this, without any paywall or user tracking. It’s been always online since 2007 and will remain online, completely readable, long after the disappearance of Substack, Facebook and anything like that.

Above all, the Stop! will contain everything I first published here on Substack, because that has been my plan since my first day here: write and keep every post in Markdown format on my own computer, so that I can move them all to the Stop! in any moment, automatically. Every Substack writer should do this.

Last but not least... popularization without paywalls like this is how I pay part of my bills, and I’d really like to do more, but doing it more regularly takes a lot of time. Please check out my archive and these endorsements to know why you may want to make a paid subscription to this blog or, even better, support my work in any of these other ways. Thanks!

Oh my god what a month this has been!

If you follow me on BlueSky, you may have seen what’s been happening over the last five or six days...and now that it’s really, actually happening, I want to tell you all about it in greater than 300 characters.

Also, I got COVID (again) and have been so brutally sick all month I feel like I disappeared off the face of the earth, so it’s quite understandable if that’s how it’s seemed. My lung capacity is still floating somewhere around month-old birthday balloon and standing up has become a fascinating challenge, but I’m slowly getting better.

Just in time for an old-fashioned internet miracle.

I’ve been so busy organizing the logistics of said miracle that I haven’t had time to post about it for everyone who wasn’t up at 11pm however many nights ago this started.

THIS IS THAT POST.

So my sister-in-law Amanda and I are very close, she is a wonderful human and the “in law” part stopped being a thing awhile ago. And her father died about two weeks ago. We knew he was sick, and that the end was on the horizon, but this was much sooner than expected, and there hadn’t been time to put everything in order.

And he left behind that beautiful baby up there, a 2 year old snow-white husky.

Well, sixish days ago, Amanda called to check up on me because of said falling off the earth, and we got to talking about random things. I mentioned how badly Bastian has been wanting a dog, and that I’m trying to hold out for a year because I just can’t handle training a puppy right now.

And my sister said “uh...how do you feel about huskies?”

Now, she had no way to know this, but my first dog of my own was a husky, and when she was two, a very awful landlord of mine forced me to give her up or lose my housing. I found her a wonderful family and she had a spectacular life on a literal farm, but it broke my heart to lose her.

She sent a photo, and I had such an odd feeling, one I’ve only had once before, when I first saw a photo of Lord Byron. My hindbrain just went oh that’s my dog, the way it had once thought oh that’s my cat. And she’s not a puppy. And despite being a husky, she’s a pretty chill and gentle girl. And I never got rid of most of Sage or Grimm’s things, or the dog bed and toys I had for Fiona, a border collie I was long-term dog-sitting until a few months ago, so I wouldn’t need to buy anything...

But at that moment, I really thought there was no way it would be possible. My brother’s family lives in southern Oregon, it couldn’t be further away. And according to Oregon law, if you don’t own your property, any animals found will be taken to a shelter--my sister couldn’t get there in time to claim the dog. She was on a five day hold, and that’s about all the time we had to figure it out. So the usual ways (cargo plane ride, various non-profits who relay rescues around) were either unworkable because of the needed lead time or so expensive to do on such short notice. I told her I’d look into it but I wasn’t optimistic.

I spent most of the day finding out just how much it would cost to fly her to me in any of the methods I knew of (good god) and was on the verge of calling Amanda to say I just couldn’t manage it when it occurred to me: back in the day you’d ask the internet if anyone knew another way, and someone probably would. You just don’t anymore because it feels like everything has to be politics on the social medias these days.

So late at night I explained briefly to my BlueSky followers and asked if anyone had any ideas that wouldn’t cost me Every Money.

Genuinely, I just wanted some guidance as to how people do this with rescues. I wasn’t trying to get people to solve my problems for me--I didn’t even cross-post to all the other sites I use since the Great Twitter Diaspora, that’s how much I wasn’t trying to rally anybody to my own cause. I just didn’t know what the steps I should be taking were.

I didn’t expect in any way for the Old Millennial Internet Spirit to fucking activate.

People started saying “Well, I can drive her to x if you can get her to y and cover expenses...” and a chain started forming that could almost work to get her here. Except for the middle of the country. There just didn’t seem like any way to bridge between Idaho or Montana and Minneapolis, where the next westernmost volunteer was.

Then Linkwood Anarchy Hub appeared, and said he could take her all the way from Portland to Minneapolis. Stormzand said he could pick her up at the shelter in Eugene and get her to Portland. SimonsFolly said he could take her from Minneapolis to the New York State Line. RisaWolf said she could get the pup from any NY state border to New Hampshire, and IndependentTeapot said she could bring the girl all the way home from New Hampshire.

And these amazing, kind, generous, thoughtful, beautiful human beings leapt into action so fast that that very smug-looking pup up there who clearly knows how lucky she is, left the shelter Saturday afternoon and is cruising through Idaho as I type this sentence.

(If you want to contribute to expenses, and you do not have to, everything is so tight these days, but if you want to, here is Paypal and Venmo)

And to my knowledge, I have only interacted with one of the Pawshank Redemption (credit: Stormzand) crew on a long-term basis and was following before this Incredible Journey started. They just...saw something happening and wanted to help. And love dogs. And might possibly be saints walking among us.

I genuinely can’t believe this is actually happening. I’m pretty sure Bastian doesn’t actually think we’ll have a dog next week, even though they’re excited. But I told them not to set their heart on it when I asked now they’d feel, despite wanting a border collie, about a beautiful white smallwolf. Because I didn’t know and personally doubted if we could really do it in time. So I think they’re still in “don’t get your hopes up” mode.

But the hopes don’t need to be kept down anymore. The Puppy Express has departed on its Reverse Oregon Trail journey and could be here as soon as Tuesday night.

I know it’s not much in the grand scheme of things. It doesn’t solve any part of the hellscape we’re all living in right now. And of course I’m thrilled because I get a puppy, but it also filled me with so much hope. We are still, some of us, who we always were. We are still capable of small marvels and caring outlandishly.

I think it’s gotten easy to forget we used to do this all the time.

Not necessarily the internet at large, and believe me, I’m well aware the pre-algorithm internet was anything but an endless vista of peaches and sunshine, but the geek community part of the internet. Which, believe it or not, hasn’t been all of it more or less since Usenet. The bookish, SFF, community-minded people who identified as geeks, not to make money off a new demographic, but just because that’s what we were. Who used social media to make genuine human connections, to craft things and be silly and make stuff, not because of some grindset, but because they wanted to. Before the incredible waterfall of human creativity the internet allowed to come into the light of day became just more content. Before the proto-oligarchs saw what little people were doing with their free time and saw the possibility of using it as bait to lead us all into the data-gobbling joy-disposal algorithm-driven online life keeps trying to become.

There was a time that you’d see crazy stories like this on Livejournal or Facebook or Twitter really often, people going out of their way for each other. To save someone’s house or business or pet or child. To get a faceless corporation to listen to someone they were screwing. To get help and information during disasters of all kinds. To tell each other about things we loved and find others who loved them too, or who might if they heard about it. To try a new way of doing art and making delight. I’ve been part of so many of these stories, sometimes as a helper and sometimes as a person who needed help.

But as more and more of the world has needed much bigger help than any small group of kind hearts can do alone, and as corporate grey goo has spread further and further into every digital space to enshittify, monetize, and exploit genuine human connection and creativity, and as so many scams of so many kinds have crowded out real voices, it’s gotten hard to find sparks of that old internet “let’s put on a show in the old barn and save Christmas” spirit. It’s easy to be cynical, and what’s shoved into our faces by the algorithm is meant to create that cynicism, to keep us separate and alone and too anxious to look away from the data-gobbling joy-disposal that online life is becoming.

I was having coffee with a new friend in town as this was all starting to come together, and she shook her head and asked me: “How are you doing this? How is this happening?” I laughed a little. It’s been so long since I made a new friend who doesn’t know my whole history! And I explained what was happening, and why I have the kind of followers I do online, and finally said: “I don’t know, the internet used to be a different sort of place, and when it was, I was a different sort of person, who made and did a lot of things and built a little universe or two...and when you pour your soul into something for a long time, sometimes it comes back to you in strange ways...so I guess maybe somewhere deep down, that place didn’t go anywhere.” And I thought to myself: maybe that person didn’t, either.

Maybe those little universes didn’t. Maybe nothing went away. They just got older and sadder and buried by the algorithm for being insufficiently profitable. Not gone. Just sleeping.

Maybe we can just choose to have it back. In small ways. On our own terms. And the thing about small ways is that they tend to add up.

Maybe unshittification is possible.

So I know one lonely dog whose owner died doesn’t change the world. It doesn’t make anything better on a big scale. It’s just a dog and a writer and her kid struggling with everyone else. But it’s changing my world. And helping me to remember that little, small, connective actions like this is what built that online life and made anyone want to be part of it in the first place. Which is, so sadly, what made all those techbro Decepticons want to eat up all that energy and enthusiasm so they could digest it into numbers in their bank accounts.

They saw what it was worth, and have done an excellent job making us forget that.

Thank you, Puppy Express Gang, for reminding me. For being amazing. For helping my family--my sister Amanda is so relieved that not only is this good girl getting an absurdly spoiled home, but she’s staying in the family. And I hope that somehow, somewhere, in some tiny way, a part of her dad sees how many people came together to look after his dog.

Thank you all, for putting on a show in the old barn.

I am so humbled by all of this. This care. It’s the little light of Fantasia in the dark. At least, that’s how it shines to me.

I’ll end by telling you about that little wolfie’s new name. Because to me, it says all of this in one syllable.

See, I had every intention of naming my next dog Pilot, after the Brontes’ dog and the wonderful Farscape character. But I wasn’t sure. It didn’t really feel quite right for this dog.

Yesterday, as I was wrangling the Puppy Express Group Chat whilst also chatting with the bartender at the place all the islanders go to wait for the next boat. We talked about the music playing, which was prime vintage 2010 indie rock, and about the old internet. Everything I’ve been talking about. We laughed about how no one wants to admit they liked this music now, it’s too sincere and banjo-y to be cool. And, you know, not often does a Good Thing just come out of my mouth without editing and rewriting, but I said: “For a little space, between irony and despair, we were very briefly allowed to like things. We thought things were going to get better now, for about half a second.”

So we were already Deep in Feelingsville when I told him about the dog and he started sharing stories about his own childhood dog--and offhandedly mentioned The Velveteen Rabbit.

And it came to me.

Some of you may remember the story of my then-6-year-old’s reaction to The Velveteen Rabbit. Not in all my days will I ever forget it.

Before I read it to them, I warned them: “Just so you know, I love this book a lot, but the ending is super sad, okay? Just don’t want you to be shocked.”

But when we got to the end, Bastian had the biggest smile on his face. “Mom, why did you say that was a sad ending? That was the happiest ending ever!”

I stared at them. The Velveteen Rabbit devastated me as a child. I cried for hours. In my tiny mind, back then, I was the rabbit, abandoned and alone and unremembered.

“But why is it sad?” The little one who has never been abandoned said. “Everyone got what they wanted! The rabbit got to be Real, the boy didn’t die, they got to see each other again, the rabbit got to meet that AMAZING fairy and the other rabbits accepted him when they were so mean before! Where is the sad?”

Later that night, I thought about that dumb dress from the Late Modern Internet. The one that some people saw as black and blue and some saw as white and gold and they’d all go to the mat for the colors they perceived. And the thing was, if you remember, that if you looked long and hard enough, or switched your angle on it in just the right way, you could see the other color, but it was almost impossible to switch back once you’d done it.

And for me, The Velveteen Rabbit will never be black and blue again. It will always be joyful gold. Everyone got what they wanted. And they did, at that. It doesn’t escape me that this dog could easily still be with us when Bastian graduates high school. That we’ll look back and say: wow, remember when all those people crossed the continent to bring her to us? Remember when you loved The Velveteen Rabbit?

God, what a story. And stories are all there is. Moments and stories add up to a life.

I bought my child a necklace made from the illustration of the fairy in the book. I put it around their neck and said: “I got you this so that you never forget that the way you see things is precious and unique. Sometimes in this world it’s hard to hold onto that, to hold onto such a big heart when everyone is telling you to make it smaller. But the way one person sees things can change everything. Can even change sadness into happiness.”

This is Vel. Short for Velveteen. Because if you look at something a little differently, something you really thought you knew and understood, and try to remember believing in things and in people, just one little shift can change sadness into happiness.

Thank you to everyone who has been part of this breath of magic and connection blowing some light under the door in this dark, uncertain time. I will never forget this. Neither should you.

It’s all just us. The internet, the world. It’s just us, and if we choose to, in the tiniest ways, we can choose to keep our focus on each other instead of wherever it is the money men want us to look this week.

Maybe sometimes the tiny ways are all we have. Just because they’re tiny doesn’t mean they don’t matter.

Tiny adds up.

Leave a comment

This week on my podcast, I’ve got the audio from last week’s Enshittification book-tour event with Ed Zitron and Whitney Betran at the Seattle Public Library (you can watch the video here). I’ve got many more cities to go on the tour – I hope to see you at one (or more) of them!

MP3

Explanation: Liber Liber is an Italian ONG founded in the early 1990s, whose mission is to promote the conscious use of ICT in the humanities. To pursue their mission and pay their expenses, Liber Liber also sells books, music and other products online. The text that follows is my translation of a call for help about a serious problem with PayPal that Marco Calvo, president of Liber Liber, made on Facebook a few hours ago.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and don’t know enough about Paypal to verify what happened or make any judgment about it. However, having followed Calvo and Liber Liber for decades, I know Calvo knows much more than me about e-commerce with or without Paypal, and am pretty sure he wouldn’t say what he says without good reasons. So, thanks in advance for anybody who will help Calvo, me and everybody else to know what to do with Paypal when something like this happens again, and how to prevent it.

Getting fined because scammers found you

Says Calvo:

A few days ago, the Liber Liber shop received many orders from US citizens. Too many and too close together to be normal.

I believe these purchases were made by scammers for testing purposes: buying something from our or any other online shop immediately tells whoever is doing it whether the transaction was successful or not. So, I believe the people behind this were testing thousands of stolen credentials, just to see which ones were still valid, and then get all the money they could from the corresponding accounts.

Anyway, I immediately reported the anomaly to PayPal, but the dialogue with their AI ended up in PayPal blocking my login credentials, rather than solving the problem.

Several days later, after various vicissitudes, my credentials were restored. However, not only the anomalous orders persisted, but many US users obviously began disputing the charges.

I have no problem with that, because as I already said those purchases were undoubtedly made by scammers; the problem is PayPal is withdrawing €16 from our account as compensation for each of the transactions they authorized. €16 per transaction, and there are hundreds pending...

It seems clear to me that this is a serious flaw on their part, because:

• it was PayPal that withdrew money from those users’ accounts

• it was PayPal that (or should have) verified the buyers’ identities

• it was PayPal that sent us their money

Obviously, we have no problem whatsoever to give back to Paypal all the money that we received (without any wrongdoing on our side!) for those illegal purchases. But pocketing €16 for each chargeback transaction is absurd. It’s their vulnerability, their mistake. They make a mistake, we pay.

When I finally managed to speak to a human operator and explained the problem, he rather brazenly denied it. He also denied that PayPal has security vulnerabilities, and insisted on demanding €16 for each transaction.

Share

I chose Paypal because I was convinced that they would take care of verifying the buyer’s identity, verifying their genuine intent to purchase, and checking via username, password, and two-factor authentication that everything is OK.

Evidently, this isn’t the case. Not only is PayPal denying the evidence, but they’ve also failed to comply with the legal requirement to report a breach of their systems. At least the operator didn’t mention it, and I haven’t found any evidence online.

Is there a lawyer willing to help? Or a journalist interested in the story? I think it’s important to raise awareness of the problem, because right now it is affecting at least hundreds of people in the US but it’s likely that sooner or later, other scammers around the world will also begin exploiting this PayPal’s vulnerability. In the meantime, I’ve had to block all orders from the USA, including the good ones, to limit the damage. But I’ve already started to get orders from fake Italian addresses...

Since you’re here...

What you just read is the actual call from Marco Calvo, which I offered to translate and publish here to help him and everybody else with the same problem to figure it out. But since you are here... please spend one more minute browsing my archive, subscribing if you like what you see, and sending suggestions or requests for more work like that to mfioretti@nexaima.net.

Leave a comment

This week on my podcast, I’ve got the audio from last week’s Enshittification book-tour event with former FTC Chair Lina Khan at the Brooklyn Public Library (you can watch the video here). lI’ve got 24 more cities to go on the tour – I hope to see you at one (or more) of them!

MP3

I loved roller coasters when I was a kid. And I mean loved. What’s not to be completely fucking hyped about when you’re nine? Adrenaline, loud noises, crazy lights and music, speed, and the weird awesomeness of feeling like you’re in danger while knowing you’re actually totally safe, you paid money to ride this ride, and your mom is waiting outside the gate with your funnel cake and a shitty toy from the fishing game.

As an adult, while my brain still thinks FUCK YEAH LET’S DO THE DEVIL’S COLON, my body now knows full well how it feels to be seriously injured, knows it’s mortal and machines are fallible, and it’s no longer a blithe and bonny idiot made of bubblegum, stem cells, and superballs concerning the answer to the equation of speed + gravity + fragile sack of talking blood. So I always think I want to, and then when the ride tips over into freefall my stomach tenses up so hard for the impact it’s sure is coming that it physically hurts. I still go. Obviously. My kid-self internalized roller coasters are awesome don’t be a wimp just as hard as my grown-up self has internalized but I do not wish to ow.

But it’s not the same.

And more importantly, my love of roller coaster was always firmly rooted in the idea that I wanted to ride the ride. The restraints were for my safety, I had cleared the height requirement, we came to the carnival on purpose to do this, and if I chickened out while waiting in line, I could just leave and go pet a goat or something.

But now we’re all strapped into Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth’s janky fucking 19th century Imperialism-a-Whirl, the restraints are to keep us from doing anything about what’s about to happen to us, nobody is tall enough to handle this shit, and if we don’t want to do this anymore because the loop-de-loop track is clearly shredded, shooting sparks into a pile of dry leaves, and ends in a fifty foot drop into a puddle of spent nuclear fuel, well, too fucking bad for us, the operator sold the control board and drank a fifth of Dr. Prepper’s: Supermeth Splash.

These fucking people.

Read more