Skip to main content
 

Denial

[Jeremy Keith]

Jeremy Keith highlights the hammering that the public service internet is getting from LLM vendors:

"When we talk about the unfair practices and harm done by training large language models, we usually talk about it in the past tense: how they were trained on other people’s creative work without permission. But this is an ongoing problem that’s just getting worse.

The worst of the internet is continuously attacking the best of the internet. This is a distributed denial of service attack on the good parts of the World Wide Web."

This has little to do with the actual technology behind LLMs, although there are real issues there too, of course. Here the issue is vendors being bad actors: creating an enormous amount of traffic for resource-strapped services without any of the benefits they might see from a real user's financial support. It is, in a very real sense, strip-mining the internet.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

What was Quartz?

[Zach Seward]

I first met Zach Seward when he was running Quartz, the news startup with the quippy haiku notifications that had, at the time, captured a lot of the media world's attention. It was really good. This piece, by Zach, is written on the heels of the last writers having been fired by G/O Media, with the empty husk sold on to another buyer for the email list.

"Still, we also hoped to endure on the scale of centuries, just like rival news organizations — in particular, The Financial Times, The Economist, and The Wall Street Journal — that we viewed as our Goliaths. For a stretch in the middle there, it even seemed possible. But Quartz never made money. We grew, between 2012 and 2018, to nearly 250 employees and $35 million in annual revenue. The dismal economics of digital media meant losing more than $40 million over that stretch just to grow unsustainably large."

And so:

"By 2022, we were running short of cash and didn't have anyone willing to put up more money, especially as enthusiasm waned for the entire digital-media sector. We put together a quick M&A process and made clear that preference would go to anyone willing to take on all of the roughly 80 people still working at Quartz."

And then, we already know what happened next.

Quartz isn't the only story that ends this way. It's sad to see a venture that aimed to do good things, hired good people, and took an innovative approach still find itself at the mercy of an uncompromising market.

Left unsaid but felt in the room: Quartz grew with an enormous amount of venture investment but couldn't realize the scale necessary to make good on it. This is the story of almost all venture-funded media. That doesn't mean venture funding is always bad, but I don't think it's a good fit for media companies. Journalism, inherently, does not scale. It requires a different approach which allows it to convene communities, have a more human touch, and, frankly, grow more slowly.

Which doesn't mean that Zach, or David Bradley or anyone else at Quartz are at fault here. It was a good thing that was worth trying. And they made a dent in the universe while they were doing it.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Social Security’s website keeps crashing, as DOGE demands cuts to IT staff

[Lisa Rein, Hannah Natanson and Elizabeth Dwoskin at The Washington Post]

More "efficiency" from DOGE:

"Retirees and disabled people are facing chronic website outages and other access problems as they attempt to log in to their online Social Security accounts, even as they are being directed to do more of their business with the agency online.

[...] The problems come as the Trump administration’s cost-cutting team, led by Elon Musk, has imposed a downsizing that’s led to 7,000 job cuts and is preparing to push out thousands more employees at an agency that serves 73 million Americans. The new demands from Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service include a 50 percent cut to the technology division responsible for the website and other electronic access."

These benefits are much-needed; people depend on them. In gutting the team that helps provide services, Musk and DOGE are putting peoples' lives at risk.

And this is just poor software development practice:

"Many of the network outages appear to be caused by an expanded fraud check system imposed by the DOGE team, current and former officials said. The technology staff did not test the new software against a high volume of users to see if the servers could handle the rush, these officials said."

But, of course, perhaps destroying the actual utility of these services is the point.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

The Tumblr revival is real—and Gen Z is leading the charge

[Eve Upton-Clark at Fast Company]

I love this. Tumblr is so back:

"Thanks to Gen Z, the site has found new life. As of 2025, Gen Z makes up 50% of Tumblr’s active monthly users and accounts for 60% of new sign-ups, according to data shared with Business Insider’s Amanda Hoover, who recently reported on the platform’s resurgence.

[...] Perhaps Tumblr’s greatest strength is that it isn’t TikTok or Facebook. Currently the 10th most popular social platform in the U.S., according to analytics firm Similarweb, Tumblr is dwarfed by giants like Instagram and X. For its users, though, that’s part of the appeal."

This is worth paying attention to: small communities are a huge part of the selling point. That's something that Mastodon also already has built-in, and Bluesky would do well to learn from. (Signs point to them being aware of this; more of this in a later post.) Sometimes not being the public square makes for a far better community culture and safer, more creative dynamics.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

How X Is Benefiting as Musk Advises Trump

[Kate Conger in The New York Times]

Here's one way Elon Musk is gaining from his involvement in the current administration:

"The positioning of X as a powerful government mouthpiece has helped bolster the platform, even as the company continues to struggle."

It's worth remembering that xAI just bought X in an all-stock transaction - he's also gaining by pointing his AI engine directly at federal government information in a supposed effort to make it more efficient.

But even the social media endorsement is a big deal. In some ways buying advertising on X is akin to would-be political influencers buying extravagant stays at Trump hotels:

"Conservatives have found that X is a direct pipeline to Mr. Musk, allowing them to influence federal policy. He has responded to viral complaints about the government on the platform, and his cost-cutting initiative has marked users’ concerns as “fixed.”"

It makes real the idea that the social media site isn't about building a business in itself, but about creating a new instrument of power. The comparisons between Elon's strategy and William Randolph Hearst are obvious; it's just, he's far, far dumber.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Gumroad’s Interestingly Timed “Open-Source” Play

[Ernie Smith at Tedium]

Ernie Smith points out the creator-economy platform Gumroad open sourced its platform at a surprising time:

"But if that’s all Gumroad was doing, I wouldn’t feel compelled to say anything. The reason I’m speaking up is because of this Wired story, released on the very same day Gumroad announced its “open source” license, which may have had the effect of minimizing the story’s viral impact.

[...] It’s not even the central point of the piece, but the fact is, if you’re supporting Gumroad—a tool that, notably, has survived as long as it did because of a high-profile crowdfunding campaign—you’re allowing its CEO the financial freedom to work in the Department of Veterans Affairs, at the behest of DOGE, for free."

Leave aside that Gumroad's "open sourcing" is nothing really of the sort (it's source-available until you start making real revenue). Its founder is part of the DOGE mess, having replaced most of his employees with AI, with plans to do the same thing at the VA.

When this is all over, let's not forget that he did that.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Doctor Who is the best show ever made. Here's why.

Ncuti Gatwa and Varada Sethu in press images for the latest season

The world is full of darkness. So much is going wrong. Experts agree that America has succumbed to right-wing authoritarianism; call it fascism or something else, these are extraordinarily difficult times.

This post is a break from all of that. At least kind of.

In this piece, I will try and convince you that Doctor Who is the best TV show ever made, explain to you why it matters, and why it’s particularly important in our current context. In a time when cruelty and fear dominate headlines, it’s worth celebrating a show that insists on the power of kindness, intellect, and hope.

Bear with me. Let’s go.

First, a primer: what is Doctor Who?

You’ve probably heard of Doctor Who, but you might not have watched much or any of it. That’s okay.

The core of every story is this: there is a problem, somewhere in time and space. There might be vampires in Venice in 1580; a plot afoot to steal the Mona Lisa in modern-day Paris in order to fund time travel experiments; a society of pacifists on a far-away planet locked in a generations-long war with warlike, genocidal racists. The Doctor, a strange traveler who carries no weapons, helps solve the problem using intelligence and empathy. They bring along friends who are our “in” to the story, but who also remind the Doctor what it means to be human.

There’s a lot of backstory, but unlike other science fiction shows, it doesn’t matter all that much. There’s canon and history, but it’s constantly evolving. And because it’s squarely aimed at a whole-family audience, and is almost but not quite an anthology show, it’s accessible, fun, and very diverse in its approach. One story might be incredibly silly; the next might be a tense thriller. If you don’t like the tone of the one you’re watching, the next one might be a better fit.

There are a few more constants, but not many: The Doctor’s time and space machine, the TARDIS (Time And Relative Dimension In Space), is stuck as a 1963-era British police box on the outside, and is radically bigger on the inside; every time they die they are “regenerated” in a new body; they stole the TARDIS and fled their people.

Oh, and it’s been running since November 23, 1963: 62 years and counting. It’s the longest-running science fiction show in the world — which makes its accessibility and freshness all the more remarkable. In its original run, it launched the career of authors like Douglas Adams. And in its most recent incarnation, it’s been an early career-launcher for actors like Andrew Garfield, Daniel Kaluuya, Carey Mulligan, Felicity Jones, and Karen Gillan.

Okay, fine. So that’s what the show is. Why does it matter?

Subversive from day one

In 1963, the world was only eighteen years out from the end of World War II. The end of the Holocaust and the closing of the camps was as close as the release of Spider-Man 3 is to us now. Enoch Powell, who would later give the notoriously noxious “rivers of blood” anti-immigrant speech, was the Minister for Health. Homosexuality was illegal.

Waris Hussein, a gay, immigrant director, helmed An Unearthly Child, a story about a teenage girl who obviously didn’t fit in and the teachers who were worried about her. (If the subtext to this story isn’t intentional in the writing, it certainly emerges in the direction.) In the end, her grandfather turned out to be a time traveler who lived in a police box that was more than meets the eye, and the rest is history.

The very next story was about a society of pacifists, the Thals, who were locked in a struggle with a race of genocidal maniacs, the Daleks. It’s a more complicated story than you might expect: in the end, the Doctor and companions help the Thals win by teaching them that sometimes you need to use violence to defeat fascism. The morality of it isn’t straightforward, but it’s an approach that was deeply rooted in recent memories of defeating the Nazis, and that had a lot to say about a Britain that was already seeing the resurgence of nationalism. In a show for the whole family!

When the main actor, William Hartnell, fell into ill health, the show could have come to an end. Instead, the writers built in a contrivance, regeneration, that allowed the Doctor to change actors when one left. In turn, the show itself was allowed to evolve. It was created by necessity rather than as some grand plan, but in retrospect laid the groundwork for Doctor Who to remain relevant for generations.

By the 1980s, the show was still going strong — and still slyly subversive. In The Happiness Patrol, the Doctor faces off against a villainous regime obsessed with mandatory cheerfulness, clearly modeled on Margaret Thatcher’s Britain. The episode includes thinly veiled references to the miners’ strike and the inequality many Britons faced under her leadership.

It also didn’t shy away from queerness. One male character leaves the main antagonist for another man, and at one point, the TARDIS is painted pink.

Eventually, it was canceled, in part because the BBC controller at the time, Conservative-leaning Michael Grade, hated it. (The Thatcher thing, and that Colin Baker, one of the last actors to play the Doctor in the classic run, was in a romantic relationship with Grade’s ex-wife, probably didn’t help.)

When it came off the air in 1989, scriptwriters and fans alike began to write novels under a Virgin Books New Adventures banner that took the subtext of the show and made it text. They told complex stories that could never have been televised — they weren’t as family-friendly, and didn’t fit within a 1980s BBC budget. But they collectively expanded the lore and the breadth of the show.

Subversive on its return

One of those New Adventures authors was Russell T Davies, a TV writer who had started with children’s shows like Dark Season, Why Don’t You?, and Children’s Ward, and moved on to creating adult fare like Queer as Folk and The Second Coming, a tale about the second coming of Christ that happened to feature up-and-coming film star Christopher Ecclestone. He spent years lobbying the BBC to bring Doctor Who back, and in 2005, they acquiesced. There had been one other attempt at a revival — and American co-production with Fox — which had understood the letter but not the spirit of the show.

From the start, the reboot was vital and contemporary. The human companion, Rose, was a teenager from an unapologetically working class family; a major theme of the show was that everyone was special, and that openness, inclusivity, and empathy, rather than wealth and status, were prerequisites for living a good life. This was a theme that would later be revisited to great effect with Catherine Tate’s Donna Noble: that ordinary people become extraordinary not because they’ve been chosen, but because they care.

In 2005, the Iraq War was underway; there was an increase in state surveillance and a stepped-up fear of immigration in the wake of 9/11. America in particular was under the helm of a right-wing theocratic administration. In contrast, Doctor Who stood up to say that everyone was beautiful, our differences were to be celebrated. Christopher Ecclestone’s Doctor had been through an unseen war and was scarred, traumatized, and determined that everyone should live.

The new series was able to play with sexuality and gender norms. Captain Jack, a pansexual time traveler, slotted right into the narrative. Characters casually mentioned changing genders or having same-sex spouses without it being the subject of the episode. In every episode, alongside the exciting story of the week, the show normalized and celebrated diversity.

It was unashamedly political. In one of my favorite episodes, Turn Left, the Doctor is missing and Britain is suffering in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster. England becomes “only for the English”; Donna Noble watches in horror as her neighbors are taken away to a labor camp. “That’s what they called them the last time,” her grandfather ruefully notes. It was an important callback in 2008, at the tail end of the second Bush administration, and it’s only grown in importance now.

Again: this is a family show.

Anchored in good, accessible storytelling

You might be forgiving for thinking, based on my argument so far, that Doctor Who is a heavy-handed, ideology-first show. What a bore. The good news is that this couldn’t be further from the truth: it’s a genuinely fun, accessible romp with award-winning storytelling that ranks among the best of science fiction. It rules.

At the time of writing, it’s received 163 awards and been nominated for 411. That includes BAFTA awards (the British Oscars); Hugos (the annual literary award for best science fiction works of the year); National Television Awards; Nebula Awards; and so on. It’s well-regarded as some of the best writing, anywhere.

And, of course, it’s also deeply weird, in the best ways. There are haunted libraries with flesh-eating shadows. Star whales ferrying orphaned humanity across the galaxy. A sentient sun. A race of aliens that live in television signals. Some episodes are space operas; others are bottle dramas; some are screwball comedies with robot Santas. Occasionally, it’ll make you cry over a character who appeared for five minutes and then died nobly to save a moon that turned out to be an egg.

At its best, Doctor Who manages to be profoundly silly and heartbreakingly sincere in the same breath. It lets you believe that logic and love can coexist. That monsters are sometimes just scared people. That sometimes scared people can become monsters — and that they can still be saved.

There have been missteps, of course, as you’d expect from anything this experimental. Some come from changing expectations; there are certainly some racial stereotypes in the 1960s/70s episodes that did not age well. More recently, there was an era of the show where Rosa Parks was robbed of agency as an activist. In the same season, an apparent critique of Amazon-style capitalism led into a bizarre statement from the Doctor, who announced: “The systems aren't the problem. How people use and exploit the system, that's the problem.” And writers made queer people and people of color expendable.

It wasn’t the best, to be honest, but the show has ably course corrected. More recently, trans and non-binary characters have become central — all while expanding the narrative canvas of the show under a refreshed budget and a focus on new viewers. Ncuti Gatwa as the first openly queer Doctor is a revelation, full of joy and life. It’s as brilliant as it ever was.

Why it matters now

The world hasn’t gotten any less terrifying since Doctor Who first aired in 1963. If anything, the monsters feel closer, less metaphorical. They’re holding office. Writing curriculum. Rewriting history.

But that’s exactly why this show endures.

Because Doctor Who doesn’t promise us a perfect future — it promises us people who will fight for one. It shows us a universe where the best tool you can carry is your mind, your heart, and your ability to listen. Where change is baked into the story, and where survival requires transformation.

It’s a story that insists on second chances. That redemption is possible. That the most powerful force in the universe might just be compassion.

And in a world that tells us to numb out, shut down, or look away — Doctor Who dares to say: be curious. Be brave. Try to be nice, but always be kind.

It’s great television.

But also, maybe that’s how we save each other.

Get started

If you’re Who-curious, here are a few places to start:

Blink (2007). A gripping, self-contained episode with an innovative narrative loop that happens to star Carey Mulligan.

Rose (2005). The first episode of the revived show. Why not begin at the beginning?

The Eleventh Hour (2010). Matt Smith’s first story as the Doctor. Guest stars include Olivia Coleman as a barking alien. Positively cinematic.

· Posts · Share this post

 

Climate crisis on track to destroy capitalism, warns top insurer

[Damian Carrington in The Guardian]

Quite a headline!

"The world is fast approaching temperature levels where insurers will no longer be able to offer cover for many climate risks, said Günther Thallinger, on the board of Allianz SE, one of the world’s biggest insurance companies. He said that without insurance, which is already being pulled in some places, many other financial services become unviable, from mortgages to investments."

Entire regions are becoming uninsurable - for example, the piece highlights home insurance in many parts of California becoming hard to obtain. Much of finance depends on insurance underwriting, so as these effects spread, so do the knock-on impacts on financial markets.

"At 3C of global heating, climate damage cannot be insured against, covered by governments, or adapted to, Thallinger said: “That means no more mortgages, no new real estate development, no long-term investment, no financial stability. The financial sector as we know it ceases to function. And with it, capitalism as we know it ceases to be viable.”"

De-risking the climate crisis is becoming more and more important - and this has been an imperative for decades. The call here to put sustainability goals on the same level as financial goals is smart. But we're in an era where we're turning our backs against this sort of thinking - and towards unadulterated greed, consequences be damned. Getting out of the climate mess means first getting out of this other mess that we're all in.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Facing the Looming Threat of A.I., Publishers Turn to Decentralized Platforms

[John Markoff in The New York Times]

A lovely piece about Mike McCue, who, through Flipboard, Surf, and his general activities through the community, has become one of the open social web's most important figures.

"Three decades ago, as vice president of technology at the groundbreaking tech company Netscape, Mr. McCue helped democratize information access through the World Wide Web. Now, he’s positioning his company’s new Surf browser as part of a growing community of so-called decentralized social media options, alongside emerging platforms like Bluesky and Mastodon."

Of course, Surf is different to Bluesky and Mastodon: it sits across them, rather than an alternative to them, and demonstrates the power of the open social web by treating them both as just part of a single, connected experience. This is the point that A New Social is making too: it's not about picking a protocol, because the protocols can easily be joined together. It's about an open social web that we all own together versus a series of closed, corporate silos with private ownership.

It's gaining momentum:

"In addition to Meta’s decision to base Threads on ActivityPub, news organizations like Bloomberg and the BBC have begun experimenting with the technology, as have blogging platforms such as Medium, WordPress and Ghost."

The piece goes on to describe the enthusiasm among early adopters as being similar to the first few years of the web itself. I was there for both things, and I agree. And let me tell you: I am beyond enthusiastic.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

How to leak to a journalist

[Laura Hazard Owen at Nieman Journalism Lab]

A good introduction to leaking to a journalist:

"I spoke with eight journalists about how to leak in a safe, smart way. Disclaimer you probably knew was coming: No method of leaking is 100% secure, and the tips here reduce risk but cannot eliminate it completely. “I know it’s appealing to be instrumental in helping a reporter break a story, and god knows reporters love breaking stories,” says Marisa Kabas, an independent reporter and writer of The Handbasket who’s been breaking one scoop after another about DOGE and the Trump administration. “But in almost all cases, your safety and physical and mental health should come first.”"

A lot depends on Signal, although some newsrooms (including my employer) also advertise SecureDrop, which is a very sophisticated tool for large, anonymous leaks.

The complete list is worth your time. If you're a source, consider using these tools. If you're a funder, consider investing in these tools. If you're a newsroom, make sure you know how to use these tools. They've become the currency of privately-sourced stories in the current era.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Keep moving

[Mandy Brown]

A good reminder here from Mandy Brown.

"Among the people I’ve witnessed working through crises in their work and lives, the one pattern that comes up over and over again is making art. Art brings us back to ourselves, helps us root in our own agency and creative power, makes space for the joy of craft and play, and reminds us of our purpose in the world. On dark days, it’s easy to think that there’s no room for art, because the work of survival is so demanding. But art doesn’t merely take time—it gives time and energy back. It renews our spirits and the spirits of everyone who sees or hears or experiences the art, who receives the art as it’s intended: as a gift."

I sometimes have to remind myself that it's not frivolous; that it doesn't matter that it's not productive in a work sense. But it's not frivolous. It's living. It's being alive. And we all have the right to be alive.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Support Werd I/O

It’s time to try something new.

Starting today, you can support my writing on Patreon. I’ll never put up a paywall for my blog or newsletter; in effect, by supporting, you’re helping to continue to make it available for everyone.

Here’s what you’ll get:

  • At $5/month or more, your name will be listed as a “thank you” on a supporters page on my website.
  • At $25/month or more, your name will also link to your website from the supporters page, and you’ll receive a linked “thank you” credit at the bottom of each newsletter.
  • At $100/month or more, you’ll get a linked name and static logo at the top of every newsletter, and a linked “thank you” at the bottom of every page on my website. (I’ve limited the number of supporters at this tier.)

The site you link to must be yours, safe, legal, and not an affiliate page. I won’t allow gambling, adult sites, or anything designed to abuse the trust of the reader.

This is an experiment! If it doesn’t work out, I’ll remove the Patreon but ensure that everybody receives the acknowledgment they’ve paid for.

Here’s what I like about this model: there are no paywalls and there’s no user tracking involved, and there are no penalties for people who don’t have the means to support. It helps me with my server costs, but otherwise, everything stays the same.

But if you have concerns, I’d love to hear them. As always, you can shoot me an email at ben@werd.io.

· Posts · Share this post

 

ProPublica wanted to find more sources in the federal government. So it brought a truck.

[Nell Dhanesha at Nieman Journalism Lab]

This was fun to watch unfold in real time:

"The truck’s journey to that spot had begun a few days earlier, as an email with the subject line “guerilla marketing for sources” in the inbox of Ariana Tobin, editor of ProPublica’s crowdsourcing and engagement team. It came from reporter Brett Murphy, who was covering the destruction of USAID with his reporting partner Anna Maria Barry-Jester. They’d been tipped off about the desk cleanouts; was there any chance, they asked Tobin, that they could send a billboard truck out on the morning of the 27th?"

And this quote quietly implies what a significant chunk of my job has become more recently:

"“We’re basically treating any conversation we’re having with someone who works for or used to work for the federal government as a maximum-security tip,” Tobin said. “That, frankly, is not what we used to do.”"

Perhaps we'll write more about that in the future. For now, speaking of tips, if you want to send ProPublica a tip, we now have a number of options.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

China Miéville says we shouldn't blame science fiction for its bad readers

[Anthony Ha at TechCrunch]

China Miéville, who is one of the great contemporary science fiction and fantasy authors, is right on the money about Silicon Valley's tendency to create the Torment Nexus.

This is exactly why I think science fiction is so important, and why it has a lot to contribute:

"To Miéville, it’s a mistake to read science fiction as if it’s really about the future: “It’s always about now. It’s always a reflection. It’s a kind of fever dream, and it’s always about its own sociological context.”

He added that there’s a “societal and personal derangement” at work when the rich and powerful “are more interested in settling Mars than sorting out the world” — but ultimately, it’s not science fiction that’s responsible."

To me, the point and excitement of science fiction is to talk about today through the lens of analogy and extrapolation: not necessarily to warn or celebrate, but to explore. Of course, there's a broad spectrum of stories under that umbrella, and not all of them fit that mold as well as others, but that's what drives me as a reader and a writer. It's up to the reader to decide what to take from that.

I think a lot about Starship Troopers. (Really! I do. Some people think about the Roman Empire. I think about Heinlein.) The original book was, at the very least, fascist-adjacent. The movie adaptation was, at least for me, and in intent by its director, a very funny satire at the expense of those ideas. But, of course, some people took away the top-line plot and either decried the fascism or, more worryingly, freaking loved it. See also: Fight Club, which a certain kind of incel adjacent maladjusted man-child has taken on as something to model, rather than a satirical novel that pokes at them and the country they inhabit.

The reader makes their own interpretation. And if that happens to be a sociopathic world-view bent on world domination, that's on them.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

How Each Pillar of the 1st Amendment is Under Attack

[Brian Krebs]

Sobering roundup from Brian Krebs about how each of the five pillars of the First Amendment - speech, religion, the media, the right to assembly, and the right to petition the government and seek redress for wrongs - has been attacked during the first few months of the Trump Administration.

It's a laundry list - and we're only a few months in.

"Where is President Trump going with all these blatant attacks on the First Amendment? The president has made no secret of his affection for autocratic leaders and “strongmen” around the world, and he is particularly enamored with Hungary’s far-right Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort twice in the past year."

The piece concludes with a warning that Trump is following a similar playbook to Orbán by consolidating control over the courts and decimating the free press. It played out there; we will see what happens here.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Hundreds of international students wake up to an email asking them to self deport for campus activism

[Lubna Kably in The Times of India]

Worrying stuff being reported by the Times of India (and, at the time of writing, under-reported in the domestic US press). AI is being used to flag international students because of their social media activity, among other signals, who are now being sent emails asking them to "self-deport":

"Hundreds of international students in the US are getting an email from the US Department of State (DOS) asking them to self-deport owing to campus activism. Immigration attorneys’ contacted by TOI affirmed this development and added a few Indian students may also be at the receiving end of such emails – for something as innocuous as sharing a social media post.

It is not just international students who physically participated in campus activism but also those who shared or liked ‘anti-national’ posts that are the target of these emails, said an immigration attorney."

Axios previously reported on how this was going to be done:

"Secretary of State Marco Rubio is launching an AI-fueled "Catch and Revoke" effort to cancel the visas of foreign nationals who appear to support Hamas or other designated terror groups"

From that article:

""This should concern all Americans. This is a First Amendment and freedom of speech issue and the administration will overplay its hand," said Abed Ayoub, head of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee."

It's a clear First Amendment issue. Whether they've overplayed their hand unfortunately remains to be seen.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Apple’s AI isn’t a letdown. AI is the letdown

[Allison Morrow at CNN]

It's refreshing to see this kind of AI skepticism in a major outlet:

"Apple, like every other big player in tech, is scrambling to find ways to inject AI into its products. Why? Well, it’s the future! What problems is it solving? Well, so far that’s not clear! Are customers demanding it? LOL, no. In fact, last year the backlash against one of Apple’s early ads for its AI was so hostile the company had to pull the commercial.

[...] Large language models are fascinating science. They are an academic wonder with huge potential and some early commercial successes, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Anthropic’s Claude. But a bot that’s 80% accurate [...] isn’t a very useful consumer product."

I'm more than ready for the hype cycle to come to its conclusion. Are there some interesting use cases for AI? Sure. Should the ethical, functional, environmental, and contextual issues with current AI vendors give us all pause at the very least? Absolutely.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

DOGE Plans to Rebuild SSA Code Base in Months, Risking Benefits and System Collapse

[Makena Kelly at WIRED]

If you know anything about building software, you know that this is an absurd idea:

"The so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is starting to put together a team to migrate the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) computer systems entirely off one of its oldest programming languages in a matter of months, potentially putting the integrity of the system—and the benefits on which tens of millions of Americans rely—at risk."

Moving a 60 million line COBOL codebase to another language (be it Java or anything else) is not a small undertaking, and the SSA underpins necessary benefits for millions of Americans. Doing it in months likely requires using something like an LLM - and anyone who's used an LLM to code will tell you that the output is riddled with mistakes and inefficiencies. It's not a workable plan.

Or, as Dan Hon puts it in the piece:

“If you weren't worried about a whole bunch of people not getting benefits or getting the wrong benefits, or getting the wrong entitlements, or having to wait ages, then sure go ahead.”

A project like this should take years. Most of that isn't coding time: it's analysis, writing the tests, rearchitecting, and putting protections in place to ensure that nobody goes without the benefits they need to live. Doing it as a rush job isn't just incompetence; it's indifference to the lives of some of our most vulnerable neighbors. Which, let's face it, is in keeping with everything else going on.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

How Elon Musk’s SpaceX Secretly Allows Investment From China

[Joshua Kaplan and Justin Elliott at ProPublica]

I bet this practice is more common than anyone might think, and certainly isn't limited to China. As always, follow the money:

"In December, [SpaceX investor] Kahlon testified that SpaceX prefers to avoid investors from China because it is a defense contractor. There is a major exception though, he said: SpaceX finds it “acceptable” for Chinese investors to buy into the company through offshore vehicles.

“The primary mechanism is that those investors would come through intermediate entities that they would create or others would create,” Kahlon said. “Typically they would set up BVI structures or Cayman structures or Hong Kong structures and various other ones,” he added, using the acronym for the British Virgin Islands. Offshore vehicles are often used to keep investors anonymous."

The key point here is not that the Chinese investments are illegal - they probably aren't - or that anyone thinks SpaceX is being directed by the Chinese government. What's odd is that the company prefers the obfuscation: it sounds like they don't accept Chinese investment unless it's being channeled through an offshore vehicle designed to hide their involvement from regulatory scrutiny. That obfuscation is particularly important given that Elon Musk is now a part of the US government.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Careless People: Facebook insider’s memoir reveals more in what it omits

[Sabhanaz Rashid Diya at Rest of World]

Like the author, I read Careless People, Sarah Wynn-Williams' account of her time as a director for global public policy at Facebook during a period when the company transitioned from a largely-domestic social network to a worldwide powerhouse that ultimately enabled a genocide. It's written with a kind of ironic detachment that seeks to minimize the Wynn-Williams' own culpability, and while it's an engaging, jaw-dropping read, there are clear omissions:

"In recounting events, the author glosses over her own indifference to repeated warnings from policymakers, civil society, and internal teams outside the U.S. that ultimately led to serious harm to communities.

[...] Her delayed reckoning underscores how Facebook’s leadership remains largely detached from real-world consequences of their decisions until they become impossible to ignore. Perhaps because everyone wants to be a hero of their own story, Wynn-Williams frames her opposition to leadership decisions as isolated; in reality, powerful resistance had long existed within what Wynn-Williams describes as Facebook’s “lower-level employees.”"

The author has personal experience working for Facebook as part of the global teams Wynn-Williams presided over, cleaning up the messes that she and her colleagues created.

As such, the author sees the gaps clearly, and her review cuts to the core of the problem with the book. That doesn't mean it's valueless, and in some ways it's strongest when detailing the personalities of people like Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, and contrasting the public face of Lean In with her experiences of being a mother while working alongside them.

The fact that Facebook is attempting to suppress the book inherently makes it worth reading, in my view, and I think it should be read by everyone in the tech industry. Not only because it’s a cautionary tale in itself, but because the personalities described here are rife in the industry.

I’ve never spoken to Mark or Sheryl or Joel or most of the rest of them, but I’ve met people like them, with those same sensibilities, and they are every bit as shallow and driven by power as is laid out here. These are the people to avoid. These are the people who will lead us into hell. These are the people who, in very real ways, through genocides, swung elections, and the violence of indifference to real human suffering, already are.

The thing is, Sarah Wynn-Williams was one of them.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

No, we’re not a startup — and that’s fine

Turn ideas into reality

Inadvertently, the other day, I became one of those people.

My team and I were sitting together as part of a week-long summit; some attendees were in New York City, while others attended remotely. I was taking them through the principles that I believe are important for developing software for our newsroom: a laser focus on the needs of a real user, building the smallest thing we can and then testing and iterating from there, shortening feedback loops, and focusing on the most targeted work we can that will meaningfully make progress towards our goals.

And then I said it:

“I see our team as a startup.”

Oof. It wasn’t even the first time the words had left my mouth. Or the second or the third.

One of my colleagues very kindly gave me feedback in a smaller session afterwards. She pointed out that this has become a cliché in larger organizations: a manager will say “we act like a startup” but then will do nothing of the sort. In fact, almost nobody in these settings can agree on what a startup even is.

And even if they did, the environment doesn’t allow it. Big companies don’t magically “act like a startup”. The layers of approval, organizational commitments, and big-org company culture are all inevitably still intact — how could they not be? — and the team is supposed to nebulously “be innovative” as a kind of thin corporate aspiration rather than an achievable, concrete practice. The definitions, resources, culture, and permission to act differently from the rest of the organization simply aren’t there. At best it’s naivety; at worst it’s a purposeful, backhanded call for longer hours and worse working conditions.

But when I said those words, I wasn’t thinking about corporate culture. I was remembering something else entirely.

I often think back to a conference I attended in Edinburgh — the Association for Learning Technology’s annual shindig, which that year was held on the self-contained campus of Heriot-Watt University. There, I made the mistake of criticizing RDF, a technology that was the darling of educational technologists at the time. That was why a well-regarded national figure in the space stood up and yelled at me at the top of his voice: “Why should anyone listen to you? You’re two guys in a shed!”

The thing is, we were two guys in a shed. With no money at all. And, at the time, I was loving it.

A few years earlier, I quit my job because I was certain that social networking platforms were a huge part of the future of how people would learn from each other and about the world. My co-founder and I didn’t raise funding: instead, we found customers early on and gave ourselves more time by earning revenue. Neither one of us was a businessman; we didn’t know what we were doing. We had to invent the future of our company — and do it with no money. It felt like we were willing it into existence, and we were doing it on our own terms. Nobody could tell us what to do; there was nobody to greenlight our ideas except our customers. It was thrilling. I’ve never felt more empowered in my career.

There is no way to recapture that inside of a larger organization. And nobody should want to.

The most important difference is that we owned the business. Each of us held a 50% share. Yes, we worked weird hours, pulled feats of technical gymnastics, and were working under the constant fear of running out of money, but that was a choice we made for ourselves — and if the business worked, we’d see the upside. That’s not true for anyone who can be described as an “employee” rather than a “founder”. Even if employees hold stock in the company, the stake is always orders of magnitude smaller; their ability to set the direction of the company, smaller still.

Another truth is that almost nobody has done this. If you’ve worked in larger institutions for most of your career, you’ve never felt the same urgency. If you’ve never bootstrapped a startup, the word might conjure up memories of two million dollar raises and offices in SoMA. Maybe a Series C company with hundreds of people on staff. Or Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Network, backstabbing his way to riches. In each case, the goal is to grow the company, make your way to an IPO or an exit, and be a good steward of investor value. In places like San Francisco, that’s probably a more common startup story than mine. But it’s an entirely different adventure.

So instead of using the word “startup” and somehow expecting people to innately connect with my lived experience on a wholesale basis, what do I actually want to convey? What do I think is important?

I think it’s these things:

  • Experiment-driven: The team has autonomy to conceive of, design, run, and execute on the results of repeated, small, measurable experiments.
  • Human-centered: The team has their “customers” (their exact users) in mind and is trying to solve their real problems as quickly as possible. Nobody is building a bubble and spending a year “scratching their own itch” without knowing if their user will “buy” it.
  • Low-budget: The team is conscious about cost, scope, and complexity. There’s no assumption of infinite time, money, or attention. That constraint is a feature, not a bug.
  • Time-bound: The team is focused on quick wins that move the needle quickly, not larger projects with far-off deadlines (or no deadline at all).
  • Outcome-driven: The point is to help the user, not to spend our time doing one activity or sticking to a known area of expertise. If buying off the shelf fits the budget and gets us there faster, then that’s what we do. If it turns out that the user needs something different, then that’s what we build. Quickly.

That’s what I was trying to say. Not that we’re a startup — but that we can and should work in a way that’s fast, focused, and grounded in real human needs. We don’t need the mythology or the branded T-shirts. We just need the mindset — and the permission.

· Posts · Share this post

 

Baby's first blog post

1 min read

Fp9ootron

ABCXXZXCFDSESW4ZXDAWEQ!QWZ

fwwqqqqwwQsxXSQWSASXC XDΩSXEDRTY7U8I9

 

Editor's note: does toddler input have sufficient entropy to be used as a random number generator?

· Asides · Share this post

 

Is it safe to travel to the United States with your phone right now?

[Gaby Del Valle at The Verge]

I appreciated this deep-dive on whether it's safe to travel through US borders with your phone. Journalists and anyone who's made overt political statements should take particular note.

"The government maintains that it doesn’t need a warrant to conduct “basic” searches of the contents of a person’s phone. During these searches, Hussain explained, agents are supposed to put your phone on airplane mode and can only look at what is accessible offline — but that can still be a lot of information, including any cloud data that’s currently synced."

The EFF maintains a pretty great pocket guide that is also worth checking out.

The constitutionality of searches is "still an open question" - but that doesn't matter in the moment. My advice at this stage is to sign out of important apps (like your work email and encrypted messaging apps like Signal), turn off biometric logins like Face ID, and switch your phone off. That does mean you need to print out your boarding card, for example, and do a little pre-work to make sure your data is backed up. Clearly, this is a pain. But if you deal with any sensitive information, or have any vulnerable people in your family or community, you need to change your security stance to be a good steward of their safety.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Time to ditch US tech services, says Dutch parliament

[Brandon Vigliarolo at The Register]

In the wake of the French and German governments joining forces to build an alternative to Notion and Google Docs, the Dutch government has passed eight motions to avoid US software and move to a home-grown stack.

""With each IT service our government moves to American tech giants, we become dumber and weaker," Dutch MP Barbara Kathmann, author of four of the motions, told The Register. "If we continue outsourcing all of our digital infrastructure to billionaires that would rather escape Earth by building space rockets, there will be no Dutch expertise left."

Kathmann's measures specifically call on the government to stop the migration of Dutch information and communications technology to American cloud services, the creation of a Dutch national cloud, the repatriation of the .nl top-level domain to systems operating within the Netherlands, and for the preparation of risk analyses and exit strategies for all government systems hosted by US tech giants."

Inevitably, these will be open source solutions that offer stronger privacy (with GDPR compliance from the beginning rather than as an afterthought) and fewer dependencies on third party centralized services. I see this as a very strongly good thing: everyone will see the benefit of such tools, and if you have values like "software shouldn't spy on you" and "you should have full control over your data", there will be more options for you to choose from.

The context is important:

"The motions passed by the Dutch parliament come as the Trump administration ratchets up tensions with a number of US allies – the EU among them. Nearly 100 EU-based tech companies and lobbyists sent an open letter to the European Commission this week asking it to find a way to divest the bloc from systems managed by US companies due to "the stark geopolitical reality Europe is now facing.""

It's sensible. I agree. This is what Europe should be doing.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

 

Vivian Jenna Wilson on Being Elon Musk’s Estranged Daughter, Protecting Trans Youth and Taking on the Right Online

[Ella Yurman in Teen Vogue]

This interview with Musk's daughter Vivian Wilson is everything.

"The Nazi salute sht was insane. Honey, we're going to call a fig a fig, and we're going to call a Nazi salute what it was. That sht was definitely a Nazi salute. The crowd is equally to blame, and I feel like people are not talking about that. That crowd should be denounced.

But other than that, I don't give a f**k about him. I really don't."

Wilson is a refreshing, no-nonsense voice on Threads, and that same no-BS attitude comes through here like an avalanche.

And this, of course, is vitally important:

"As a trans woman, I am terrified of losing access to guaranteed medical care. If I didn't medically transition at the age I did, I don't know what would've happened. I don't feel like people realize that being trans is not a choice. I'm so sorry to break it to you.

Transitioning as a minor was something that was medically necessary for me to do in order to be not suicidal, and it is really important that we protect access to trans care for trans youth."

Wilson is an example of someone this healthcare not only saved but helped thrive. It's exciting to see her use her insightful, attentive, sometimes hilariously-sharp voice.

[Link]

· Links · Share this post

Email me: ben@werd.io

Signal me: benwerd.01

Werd I/O © Ben Werdmuller. The text (without images) of this site is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.