#nerd harder

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Greenwashing set Canada on fire

On September 22, I'm (virtually) presenting at the DIG Festival in Modena, Italy. On September 27, I'll be at Chevalier's Books in Los Angeles with Brian Merchant for a joint launch for my new book The Internet Con and his new book, Blood in the Machine.

As a teenager growing up in Ontario, I always envied the kids who spent their summers tree planting; they'd come back from the bush in September, insect-chewed and leathery, with new muscle, incredible stories, thousands of dollars, and a glow imparted by the knowledge that they'd made a new forest with their own blistered hands.

I was too unathletic to follow them into the bush, but I spent my summers doing my bit, ringing doorbells for Greenpeace to get my neighbours fired up about the Canadian pulp-and-paper industry, which wasn't merely clear-cutting our old-growth forests – it was also poisoning the Great Lakes system with PCBs, threatening us all.

At the time, I thought of tree-planting as a small victory – sure, our homegrown, rapacious, extractive industry was able to pollute with impunity, but at least the government had reined them in on forests, forcing them to pay my pals to spend their summers replacing the forests they'd fed into their mills.

I was wrong. Last summer's Canadian wildfires blanketed the whole east coast and midwest in choking smoke as millions of trees burned and millions of tons of CO2 were sent into the atmosphere. Those wildfires weren't just an effect of the climate emergency: they were made far worse by all those trees planted by my pals in the eighties and nineties.

Writing in the New York Times, novelist Claire Cameron describes her own teen years working in the bush, planting row after row of black spruces, precisely spaced at six-foot intervals:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/15/opinion/wildfires-treeplanting-timebomb.html

Cameron's summer job was funded by the logging industry, whose self-pegulated, self-assigned "penalty" for clearcutting diverse forests of spruce, pine and aspen was to pay teenagers to create a tree farm, at nine cents per sapling (minus camp costs).

Black spruces are made to burn, filled with flammable sap and equipped with resin-filled cones that rely on fire, only opening and dropping seeds when they're heated. They're so flammable that firefighters call them "gas on a stick."

Cameron and her friends planted under brutal conditions: working long hours in blowlamp heat and dripping wet bulb humidity, amidst clouds of stinging insects, fingers blistered and muscles aching. But when they hit rock bottom and were ready to quit, they'd encourage one another with a rallying cry: "Let's go make a forest!"

Planting neat rows of black spruces was great for the logging industry: the even spacing guaranteed that when the trees matured, they could be easily reaped, with ample space between each near-identical tree for massive shears to operate. But that same monocropped, evenly spaced "forest" was also optimized to burn.

It burned.

The climate emergency's frequent droughts turn black spruces into "something closer to a blowtorch." The "pines in lines" approach to reforesting was an act of sabotage, not remediation. Black spruces are thirsty, and they absorb the water that moss needs to thrive, producing "kindling in the place of fire retardant."

Cameron's column concludes with this heartbreaking line: "Now when I think of that summer, I don’t think that I was planting trees at all. I was planting thousands of blowtorches a day."

The logging industry committed a triple crime. First, they stole our old-growth forests. Next, they (literally) planted a time-bomb across Ontario's north. Finally, they stole the idealism of people who genuinely cared about the environment. They taught a generation that resistance is futile, that anything you do to make a better future is a scam, and you're a sucker for falling for it. They planted nihilism with every tree.

That scam never ended. Today, we're sold carbon offsets, a modern Papal indulgence. We are told that if we pay the finance sector, they can absolve us for our climate sins. Carbon offsets are a scam, a market for lemons. The "offset" you buy might be a generated by a fake charity like the Nature Conservancy, who use well-intentioned donations to buy up wildlife reserves that can't be logged, which are then converted into carbon credits by promising not to log them:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/12/fairy-use-tale/#greenwashing

The credit-card company that promises to plant trees every time you use your card? They combine false promises, deceptive advertising, and legal threats against critics to convince you that you're saving the planet by shopping:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/17/do-well-do-good-do-nothing/#greenwashing

The carbon offset world is full of scams. The carbon offset that made the thing you bought into a "net zero" product? It might be a forest that already burned:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/11/a-market-for-flaming-lemons/#money-for-nothing

The only reason we have carbon offsets is that market cultists have spent forty years convincing us that actual regulation is impossible. In the neoliberal learned helplessness mind-palace, there's no way to simply say, "You may not log old-growth forests." Rather, we have to say, "We will 'align your incentives' by making you replace those forests."

The Climate Ad Project's "Murder Offsets" video deftly punctures this bubble. In it, a detective points his finger at the man who committed the locked-room murder in the isolated mansion. The murderer cheerfully admits that he did it, but produces a "murder offset," which allowed him to pay someone else not to commit a murder, using market-based price-discovery mechanisms to put a dollar-figure on the true worth of a murder, which he duly paid, making his kill absolutely fine:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/14/for-sale-green-indulgences/#killer-analogy

What's the alternative to murder offsets/carbon credits? We could ask our expert regulators to decide which carbon intensive activities are necessary and which ones aren't, and ban the unnecessary ones. We could ask those regulators to devise remediation programs that actually work. After all, there are plenty of forests that have already been clearcut, plenty that have burned. It would be nice to know how we can plant new forests there that aren't "thousands of blowtorches."

If that sounds implausible to you, then you've gotten trapped in the neoliberal mind-palace.

The term "regulatory capture" was popularized by far-right Chicago School economists who were promoting "public choice theory." In their telling, regulatory capture is inevitable, because companies will spend whatever it takes to get the government to pass laws making what they do legal, and making competing with them into a crime:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/13/public-choice/#ajit-pai-still-terrible

This is true, as far as it goes. Capitalists hate capitalism, and if an "entrepreneur" can make it illegal to compete with him, he will. But while this is a reasonable starting-point, the place that Public Choice Theory weirdos get to next is bonkers. They say that since corporations will always seek to capture their regulators, we should abolish regulators.

They say that it's impossible for good regulations to exist, and therefore the only regulation that is even possible is to let businesses do whatever they want and wait for the invisible hand to sweep away the bad companies. Rather than creating hand-washing rules for restaurant kitchens, we should let restaurateurs decide whether it's economically rational to make us shit ourselves to death. The ones that choose poorly will get bad online reviews and people will "vote with their dollars" for the good restaurants.

And if the online review site decides to sell "reputation management" to restaurants that get bad reviews? Well, soon the public will learn that the review site can't be trusted and they'll take their business elsewhere. No regulation needed! Unleash the innovators! Set the job-creators free!

This is the Ur-nihilism from which all the other nihilism springs. It contends that the regulations we have – the ones that keep our buildings from falling down on our heads, that keep our groceries from poisoning us, that keep our cars from exploding on impact – are either illusory, or perhaps the forgotten art of a lost civilization. Making good regulations is like embalming Pharaohs, something the ancients practiced in mist-shrouded, unrecoverable antiquity – and that may not have happened at all.

Regulation is corruptible, but it need not be corrupt. Regulation, like science, is a process of neutrally adjudicated, adversarial peer-review. In a robust regulatory process, multiple parties respond to a fact-intensive question – "what alloys and other properties make a reinforced steel joist structurally sound?" – with a mix of robust evidence and self-serving bullshit and then proceed to sort the two by pantsing each other, pointing out one another's lies.

The regulator, an independent expert with no conflicts of interest, sorts through the claims and counterclaims and makes a rule, showing their workings and leaving the door open to revisiting the rule based on new evidence or challenges to the evidence presented.

But when an industry becomes concentrated, it becomes unregulatable. 100 small and medium-sized companies will squabble. They'll struggle to come up with a common lie. There will always be defectors in their midst. Their conduct will be legible to external experts, who will be able to spot the self-serving BS.

But let that industry dwindle to a handful of giant companies, let them shrink to a number that will fit around a boardroom table, and they will sit down at a table and agree on a cozy arrangement that fucks us all over to their benefit. They will become so inbred that the only people who understand how they work will be their own insiders, and so top regulators will be drawn from their own number and be hopelessly conflicted.

When the corporate sector takes over, regulatory capture is inevitable. But corporate takeover isn't inevitable. We can – and have, and will again – fight corporate power, with antitrust law, with unions, and with consumer rights groups. Knowing things is possible. It simply requires that we keep the entities that profit by our confusion poor and thus weak.

The thing is, corporations don't always lie about regulations. Take the fight over working encryption, which – once again – the UK government is trying to ban:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/24/signal-app-warns-it-will-quit-uk-if-law-weakens-end-to-end-encryption

Advocates for criminalising working encryption insist that the claims that this is impossible are the same kind of self-serving nonsense as claims that banning clearcutting of old-growth forests is impossible:

https://twitter.com/JimBethell/status/1699339739042599276

They say that when technologists say, "We can't make an encryption system that keeps bad guys out but lets good guys in," that they are being lazy and unimaginative. "I have faith in you geeks," they said. "Go nerd harder! You'll figure it out."

Google and Apple and Meta say that selectively breakable encryption is impossible. But they also claim that a bunch of eminently possible things are impossible. Apple claims that it's impossible to have a secure device where you get to decide which software you want to use and where publishers aren't deprive of 30 cents on every dollar you spend. Google says it's impossible to search the web without being comprehensively, nonconsensually spied upon from asshole to appetite. Meta insists that it's impossible to have digital social relationship without having your friendships surveilled and commodified.

While they're not lying about encryption, they are lying about these other things, and sorting out the lies from the truth is the job of regulators, but that job is nearly impossible thanks to the fact that everyone who runs a large online service tells the same lies – and the regulators themselves are alumni of the industry's upper eschelons.

Logging companies know a lot about forests. When we ask, "What is the best way to remediate our forests," the companies may well have useful things to say. But those useful things will be mixed with actively harmful lies. The carefully cultivated incompetence of our regulators means that they can't tell the difference.

Conspiratorialism is characterized as a problem of what people believe, but the true roots of conspiracy belief isn't what we believe, it's how we decide what to believe. It's not beliefs, it's epistemology.

Because most of us aren't qualified to sort good reforesting programs from bad ones. And even if we are, we're probably not also well-versed enough in cryptography to sort credible claims about encryption from wishful thinking. And even if we're capable of making that determination, we're not experts in food hygiene or structural engineering.

Daily life in the 21st century means resolving a thousand life-or-death technical questions every day. Our regulators – corrupted by literally out-of-control corporations – are no longer reliable sources of ground truth on these questions. The resulting epistemological chaos is a cancer that gnaws away at our resolve to do anything about it. It is a festering pool where nihilism outbreaks are incubated.

The liberal response to conspiratorialism is mockery. In her new book Doppelganger, Naomi Klein tells of how right-wing surveillance fearmongering about QR-code "vaccine passports" was dismissed with a glib, "Wait until they hear about cellphones!"

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/05/not-that-naomi/#if-the-naomi-be-klein-youre-doing-just-fine

But as Klein points out, it's not good that our cellphones invade our privacy in the way that right-wing conspiracists thought that vaccine passports might. The nihilism of liberalism – which insists that things can't be changed except through market "solutions" – leads us to despair.

By contrast, leftism – a muscular belief in democratic, publicly run planning and action – offers a tonic to nihilism. We don't have to let logging companies decide whether a forest can be cut, or what should be planted when it is. We can have nice things. The art of finding out what's true or prudent didn't die with the Reagan Revolution (or the discount Canadian version, the Mulroney Malaise). The truth is knowable. Doing stuff is possible. Things don't have to be on fire.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/16/murder-offsets/#pulped-and-papered

#pluralistic #logging #pulp and paper #ontario #greenwashing #a market for lemons #incentives matter #capitalism #late-stage capitalism #climate emergency #wildfires #canada #canpoli #ontpoli #carbon offsets #self-regulation #nerd harder #epistemological chaos #regulatory capture #Claire Cameron #pines in lines

[chiquilines]

Idk what theyve done to me but im posessed. I need to draw them

#love love love dark skinned marceline #harder to convey that shes pasty #but oh well #she slays anyways #shes wearing silver jewelery on purpose i like my irony #anyways shes studying in a whats it called #conservatoire #how do you say it in english #where you study music #and bubblegum is doubling in chem and physics like the stem kid she is #theyre both nerds #bubbline uni au is all my brain can think of atm #my flu riddled brain can only muster 'they study together' through the haze #im sick as a dog btw #my nose dripped the entire time i was scribbling this out #actually awful #worst feeling #but we live love laugh for bubbline #bubbline #princess bubblegum #marceline the vampire queen #bubblegum x marceline #adventure time #wlw #chiquilines draws

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

At the start of this project all I wanted was to 'learn how to draw' using comics as a medium and the MDZS audio drama as inspiration.

I've come *very* far from making simple, 3 panel black and white comics, and I truly do intend to go even further. Thank you to everyone who cheered me on throughout 2023, it has been an incredible year in so many ways I never could have imagined. I look forwards to drawing throughout 2024 B*)

#poorly drawn mdzs #art summary #It's so interesting looking back at how my style and technique changed throughout the year! #I used PD-wwx as the consistent factor (October is an exception) and you can see so many processes going on. #My little petri dish amoeba (with a little red bow to tell him apart from the other amoeba) <3 #Whether it's getting new markers or trying out a new shading style - it's cool seeing a snapshot of my journey like this B*) #There's certainly been a slower curve to my overt improvement *but* I have become so much faster! #My life outside of drawing has been hectic and at several points extremely stressful this year. For all the work this blog has been- #-It has truly been a life saving anchor when the darkest of times have hit. #Love is hard work. Change is even harder work. Sticking to a goal I set out for myself and striving to keep going was worth it. #And I love drawing. I think there has always been something in me that longed for this. And it is finally tangible! I can draw!!! #I wanted to make a more elaborate year reflection where I looked back at my favourite comics and jokes. #but I'll leave that to the one year anniversary. #I have also been collecting a ton of statistics throughout the year and I am desperate to share them. I'm that kind of nerd B*) #I can never say it enough: Thank you all for the kindness and support. I wish everyone a lovely 2024!!!

[rhapsoddity]

a "what-if" pyrolisk and apollo never saved him, hephaestus throwing him and leaving him in the alley.... where a sliver of skulk found him :)

Joel and Sausage feel bad for not noticing sooner, but at least being heroes they can take him in for treatment,, he's not too far gone for that right??

#this may not be canon but the way the skulk is behaving is! the skulk infection is either the fast and painful type #or the slow and insidious type... and this is the slow type whihc is far harder to treat #esp in the later stages :) #they were hanging out with joel in the tower while on his suspension so at least its convenient to bring him down to the labs #vigilante sheriff au #what if #skulk #skulk infection #not pictured is the scuffle before they managed to restrain him... jimmy is much stronger than they pictured their nerd friend #could be stronger if he didnt get infected get skulked loser lmao #doodle

[thesargasmicgoddess]

PhD Ready! 🤓

Currently trying to get ahead with my reading for this semester after a full work day. Taking ALL the notes because I'm not sure that my mind is what it use to be 🤣🤣👵

#me #phd hoe chronicles #sargasmicgoddess #work hard play harder #nerd vibes

[mando-abs]

Guys, I’ve read the Wild Robot

And let me tell you, if I hadn’t recently taken a Children’s Literature class in college, I would’ve said this was the best middle-grade book I’ve read since elementary/middle school. I almost read this book in one night (I was sleepy 😴) like I couldn’t put it down.

The heart behind this book is astounding and it never shies away from showing complex and difficult concepts. You will fall in love with Roz and her gosling son along with all of the other animal on the island.

If you’ve got younger ones, I highly recommend reading this to them or having a little book club moment with them. However, be prepared for whatever hard questions may come your way (i.e. circle of life and climate issues). You know your child and how much they can handle/understand. If you’re like me and much older, it’s a quick read and a great way to finish off a long day. It’s a part of a trilogy and you bet I’m patiently waiting for my hold on a copy at the library.

If the movie is anything like the book (which, given a rewatch of the trailer, it’s looking like so), we are in for a special treat.

#the wild robot #children’s literature #pedro pascal #did I get the book on the off chance pedro might have been casted - yes #but from what I learned in my kid lit class is that middle grade fiction in much more nuanced than ya lit today #ya lit has better potential of being good bc it has more room to work with #however ya tends to lean on tropes more heavily than middle grade #middle grade is much more focused on learning topics and issues than playing with them #making them more tightly knit #also with the decline of media literacy I think this book is a wonderful counterattack #it’s not shattering by any means but def a big step in the right direction #especially for those who have a harder time getting interested in books #and once again I’m so pleased with how carefully curated Pedro’s projects are amidst his growing stardom #he truly cares about the message and thought provoking-ness of his work #and it makes this writer/literature nerd so proud #(yes I know there’s no true messages behind his recent gladiator and marvel roles other than it sounded like fun to him but I support that #- too… the man must have his fun purely for fun’s sake)

[reidrot]

mom i want one man and one man only who goes by the name Dr. Spencer Reid, who is a Supervisory Special Agent with the BAU. Dr. Reid is hailed as a genius with the IQ of 187, eidetic memory, can read 20,000 words per minute, has three Ph.Ds in Chemistry, Mathematics and Engineering with BAs in Psychology, Philosophy and Sociology.

#im so down bad #hes so babygirl yet so daddy and i love my men that way #he just checks all my boxes for what i want in a husband #caring? check #socially awk but a nerd when his fav topics are brought up? check #bad at expressing love but expresses it in smaller gestures and opens up over time to let u know he really trusts u? check check check #puppy dog brown doe eyes? ✅ #in conclusion #spencer reid is perfect to be my husband #i love him sm #hes my traumatized genius prodigy<3 #yeah thats it im back in my cm phase and fell ten times harder for spence #spencer reid #spencer reid angst #spencer reid blurb #spencer reid fanfic #spencer reid x reader #spencer reid edit #spencer reid fluff #spencer reid imagine #spencer reid x you

[feelingtheaster99]

Of COURSE Hank is gonna be like hey can I check out the parasympathetic nervous system/vegus nerve part of the brain

#hank green #ulitmate science man #I love him so much #he needs to come back and play again #I am a nerfighter even harder #nerd fighters #nerdfighteria #dimension 20 #d20 #mentopolis #d20 mentopolis #mentopolis spoilers #mentopolis grappling with death #grappling with death #and oh my goodness #that fact about constipation related amnesia is terrifying #live reaction

[stuckinapril]

how did u become this productive and academic and cool.. what age did u start..

Built this way babeyyyy

#I’m kidding. Idk I’ve been very academically oriented since I was a child #Being raised by an overachieving engineer mother probably helped but I can also safely say I was predisposed to academia the whole time #And as uni got harder I started mentally coaching myself until I got where I wanted #I also genuinely love science and I’m grateful to be studying something I’m passionate about every day #And while academic productivity (for the lack of a better term) comes naturally to me other stuff doesn’t #I’m very much a schedule kind of person and if I don’t have meticulous to do lists I literally die #I’m very lazy in certain aspects but I also like keeping my hands busy which is pretty fortunate #Flattered that u think being a nerd is cool. That is basically what I am

[disastersteps]

casually giving julia a new look in the happy ending au ✌

#fhr #fallen hero #fhr au #julia ortega #dr mortum #chargestep #mortumstep #mortumchargestep #fh: julia ortega #fh: dr mortum #sidestep: anita lee #big & butch jules is becoming more and more strong in my mind everyday and i HAVE to!!!! #myarts #mycomics #UHHHH #julita | when will we ever be each others #mortunita | soft hands be patient for me #myaus | mortumchargestep aka nerd fuckers #myaus | happy ending 202X #ANYWAY jules is just asking a Important Question and the two are 👍👍 so fast she pikasurprised herself #neets wearing a lightning & science flask necklace :) #jules wearing a green diamond earring and mortums likely to have a green diamond ring as a simple subtle way okay!!! #neets is Falling harder and mortum is kermit nodding bc good on them?? #anyway drop them and runs away into the abyss

[zarla-s]

Thirteen years the ladies have been around! Always there, just hanging about, haha. I recently picked up Aseprite and I wanted to give it a try, and I was always intrigued by those pixel landscapes that had lots of moving pieces all at once. I didn’t understand how they did that until I picked up Aseprite and saw the timeline feature! I might fiddle with it some more as time goes on. In the meantime this was a fun change of pace, I haven’t done in-depth pixel work like this in a while. It’s meditative in a way.

[patreon]

#ladyverse #charger #hunter #smoker #jockey #z art #give me that hotdog nerd you're not even going to eat it #jockey's braid twitch looks like a tail but i think it's cute #tiny tiny hassy #harder billows on the smoke looked too dramatic at that distance so it's a bit more subtle #boy drawing guns at awkward angles at this resolution is tricky

[mostlysignssomeportents]

In defense of bureaucratic competence

Sure, sometimes it really does make sense to do your own research. There's times when you really do need to take personal responsibility for the way things are going. But there's limits. We live in a highly technical world, in which hundreds of esoteric, potentially lethal factors impinge on your life every day.

You can't "do your own research" to figure out whether all that stuff is safe and sound. Sure, you might be able to figure out whether a contractor's assurances about a new steel joist for your ceiling are credible, but after you do that, are you also going to independently audit the software in your car's antilock brakes?

How about the nutritional claims on your food and the sanitary conditions in the industrial kitchen it came out of? If those turn out to be inadequate, are you going to be able to validate the medical advice you get in the ER when you show up at 3AM with cholera? While you're trying to figure out the #HIPAAWaiver they stuck in your hand on the way in?

40 years ago, Ronald Reagan declared war on "the administrative state," and "government bureaucrats" have been the favored bogeyman of the American right ever since. Even if Steve Bannon hasn't managed to get you to froth about the "Deep State," there's a good chance that you've griped about red tape from time to time.

Not without reason, mind you. The fact that the government can make good rules doesn't mean it will. When we redid our kitchen this year, the city inspector added a bunch of arbitrary electrical outlets to the contractor's plans in places where neither we, nor any future owner, will every need them.

But the answer to bad regulation isn't no regulation. During the same kitchen reno, our contractor discovered that at some earlier time, someone had installed our kitchen windows without the accompanying vapor-barriers. In the decades since, the entire structure of our kitchen walls had rotted out. Not only was the entire front of our house one good earthquake away from collapsing – there were two half rotted verticals supporting the whole thing – but replacing the rotted walls added more than $10k to the project.

In other words, the problem isn't too much regulation, it's the wrong regulation. I want our city inspectors to make sure that contractors install vapor barriers, but to not demand superfluous electrical outlets.

Which raises the question: where do regulations come from? How do we get them right?

Regulation is, first and foremost, a truth-seeking exercise. There will never be one obvious answer to any sufficiently technical question. "Should this window have a vapor barrier?" is actually a complex question, needing to account for different window designs, different kinds of barriers, etc.

To make a regulation, regulators ask experts to weigh in. At the federal level, expert agencies like the DoT or the FCC or HHS will hold a "Notice of Inquiry," which is a way to say, "Hey, should we do something about this? If so, what should we do?"

Anyone can weigh in on these: independent technical experts, academics, large companies, lobbyists, industry associations, members of the public, hobbyist groups, and swivel-eyed loons. This produces a record from which the regulator crafts a draft regulation, which is published in something called a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking."

The NPRM process looks a lot like the NOI process: the regulator publishes the rule, the public weighs in for a couple of rounds of comments, and the regulator then makes the rule (this is the federal process; state regulation and local ordinances vary, but they follow a similar template of collecting info, making a proposal, collecting feedback and finalizing the proposal).

These truth-seeking exercises need good input. Even very competent regulators won't know everything, and even the strongest theoretical foundation needs some evidence from the field. It's one thing to say, "Here's how your antilock braking software should work," but you also need to hear from mechanics who service cars, manufacturers, infosec specialists and drivers.

These people will disagree with each other, for good reasons and for bad ones. Some will be sincere but wrong. Some will want to make sure that their products or services are required – or that their competitors' products and services are prohibited.

It's the regulator's job to sort through these claims. But they don't have to go it alone: in an ideal world, the wrong people will be corrected by other parties in the docket, who will back up their claims with evidence.

So when the FCC proposes a Net Neutrality rule, the monopoly telcos and cable operators will pile in and insist that this is technically impossible, that there is no way to operate a functional ISP if the network management can't discriminate against traffic that is less profitable to the carrier. Now, this unity of perspective might reflect a bedrock truth ("Net Neutrality can't work") or a monopolists' convenient lie ("Net Neutrality is less profitable for us").

In a competitive market, there'd be lots of counterclaims with evidence from rivals: "Of course Net Neutrality is feasible, and here are our server logs to prove it!" But in a monopolized markets, those counterclaims come from micro-scale ISPs, or academics, or activists, or subscribers. These counterclaims are easy to dismiss ("what do you know about supporting 100 million users?"). That's doubly true when the regulator is motivated to give the monopolists what they want – either because they are hoping for a job in the industry after they quit government service, or because they came out of industry and plan to go back to it.

To make things worse, when an industry is heavily concentrated, it's easy for members of the ruling cartel – and their backers in government – to claim that the only people who truly understand the industry are its top insiders. Seen in that light, putting an industry veteran in charge of the industry's regulator isn't corrupt – it's sensible.

All of this leads to regulatory capture – when a regulator starts defending an industry from the public interest, instead of defending the public from the industry. The term "regulatory capture" has a checkered history. It comes out of a bizarre, far-right Chicago School ideology called "Public Choice Theory," whose goal is to eliminate regulation, not fix it.

In Public Choice Theory, the biggest companies in an industry have the strongest interest in capturing the regulator, and they will work harder – and have more resources – than anyone else, be they members of the public, workers, or smaller rivals. This inevitably leads to capture, where the state becomes an arm of the dominant companies, wielded by them to prevent competition:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/05/regulatory-capture/

This is regulatory nihilism. It supposes that the only reason you weren't killed by your dinner, or your antilock brakes, or your collapsing roof, is that you just got lucky – and not because we have actual, good, sound regulations that use evidence to protect us from the endless lethal risks we face. These nihilists suppose that making good regulation is either a myth – like ancient Egyptian sorcery – or a lost art – like the secret to embalming Pharaohs.

But it's clearly possible to make good regulations – especially if you don't allow companies to form monopolies or cartels. What's more, failing to make public regulations isn't the same as getting rid of regulation. In the absence of public regulation, we get private regulation, run by companies themselves.

Think of Amazon. For decades, the DoJ and FTC sat idly by while Amazon assembled and fortified its monopoly. Today, Amazon is the de facto e-commerce regulator. The company charges its independent sellers 45-51% in junk fees to sell on the platform, including $31b/year in "advertising" to determine who gets top billing in your searches. Vendors raise their Amazon prices in order to stay profitable in the face of these massive fees, and if they don't raise their prices at every other store and site, Amazon downranks them to oblivion, putting them out of business.

This is the crux of the FTC's case against Amazon: that they are picking winners and setting prices across the entire economy, including at every other retailer:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/25/greedflation/#commissar-bezos

The same is true for Google/Facebook, who decide which news and views you encounter; for Apple/Google, who decide which apps you can use, and so on. The choice is never "government regulation" or "no regulation" – it's always "government regulation" or "corporate regulation." You either live by rules made in public by democratically accountable bureaucrats, or rules made in private by shareholder-accountable executives.

You just can't solve this by "voting with your wallet." Think about the problem of robocalls. Nobody likes these spam calls, and worse, they're a vector for all kinds of fraud. Robocalls are mostly a problem with federation. The phone system is a network-of-networks, and your carrier is interconnected with carriers all over the world, sometimes through intermediaries that make it hard to know which network a call originates on.

Some of these carriers are spam-friendly. They make money by selling access to spammers and scammers. Others don't like spam, but they have lax or inadequate security measures to prevent robocalls. Others will simply be targets of opportunity: so large and well-resourced that they are irresistible to bad actors, who continuously probe their defenses and exploit overlooked flaws, which are quickly patched.

To stem the robocall tide, your phone company will have to block calls from bad actors, put sloppy or lazy carriers on notice to shape up or face blocks, and also tell the difference between good companies and bad ones.

There's no way you can figure this out on your own. How can you know whether your carrier is doing a good job at this? And even if your carrier wants to do this, only the largest, most powerful companies can manage it. Rogue carriers won't give a damn if some tiny micro-phone-company threatens them with a block if they don't shape up.

This is something that a large, powerful government agency is best suited to addressing. And thankfully, we have such an agency. Two years ago, the FCC demanded that phone companies submit plans for "robocall mitigation." Now, it's taking action:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/10/telcos-filed-blank-robocall-plans-with-fcc-and-got-away-with-it-for-2-years/

Specifically, the FCC has identified carriers – in the US and abroad – with deficient plans. Some of these plans are very deficient. National Cloud Communications of Texas sent the FCC a Windows Printer Test Page. Evernex (Pakistan) sent the FCC its "taxpayer profile inquiry" from a Pakistani state website. Viettel (Vietnam) sent in a slide presentation entitled "Making Smart Cities Vision a Reality." Canada's Humbolt VoIP sent an "indiscernible object." DomainerSuite submitted a blank sheet of paper scrawled with the word "NOTHING."

The FCC has now notified these carriers – and others with less egregious but still deficient submissions – that they have 14 days to fix this or they'll be cut off from the US telephone network.

This is a problem you don't fix with your wallet, but with your ballot. Effective, public-interest-motivated FCC regulators are a political choice. Trump appointed the cartoonishly evil Ajit Pai to run the FCC, and he oversaw a program of neglect and malice. Pai – a former Verizon lawyer – dismantled Net Neutrality after receiving millions of obviously fraudulent comments from stolen identities, lying about it, and then obstructing the NY Attorney General's investigation into the matter:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/31/and-drown-it/#starve-the-beast

The Biden administration has a much better FCC – though not as good as it could be, thanks to Biden hanging Gigi Sohn out to dry in the face of a homophobic smear campaign that ultimately led one of the best qualified nominees for FCC commissioner to walk away from the process:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/12/15/useful-idiotsuseful-idiots/#unrequited-love

Notwithstanding the tragic loss of Sohn's leadership in this vital agency, Biden's FCC – and its action on robocalls – illustrates the value of elections won with ballots, not wallets.

Self-regulation without state regulation inevitably devolves into farce. We're a quarter of a century into the commercial internet and the US still doesn't have a modern federal privacy law. The closest we've come is a disclosure rule, where companies can make up any policy they want, provided they describe it to you.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to cheat on this regulation. It's so simple, even a Meta lawyer can figure it out – which is why the Meta Quest VR headset has a privacy policy isn't merely awful, but long.

It will take you five hours to read the whole document and discover how badly you're being screwed. Go ahead, "do your own research":

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/annual-creep-o-meter/

The answer to bad regulation is good regulation, and the answer to incompetent regulators is competent ones. As Michael Lewis's Fifth Risk (published after Trump filled the administrative agencies with bootlickers, sociopaths and crooks) documented, these jobs demand competence:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/11/27/the-fifth-risk-michael-lewis-explains-how-the-deep-state-is-just-nerds-versus-grifters/

For example, Lewis describes how a Washington State nuclear waste facility created as part of the Manhattan Project endangers the Columbia River, the source of 8 million Americans' drinking water. The nuclear waste cleanup is projected to take 100 years and cost 100 billion dollars. With stakes that high, we need competent bureaucrats overseeing the job.

The hacky conservative jokes comparing every government agency to the DMV are not descriptive so much as prescriptive. By slashing funding, imposing miserable working conditions, and demonizing the people who show up for work anyway, neoliberals have chased away many good people, and hamstrung those who stayed.

One of the most inspiring parts of the Biden administration is the large number of extremely competent, extremely principled agency personnel he appointed, and the speed and competence they've brought to their roles, to the great benefit of the American public:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/18/administrative-competence/#i-know-stuff

But leaders can only do so much – they also need staff. 40 years of attacks on US state capacity has left the administrative state in tatters, stretched paper-thin. In an excellent article, Noah Smith describes how a starveling American bureaucracy costs the American public a fortune:

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/america-needs-a-bigger-better-bureaucracy

Even stripped of people and expertise, the US government still needs to get stuff done, so it outsources to nonprofits and consultancies. These are the source of much of the expense and delay in public projects. Take NYC's Second Avenue subway, a notoriously overbudget and late subway extension – "the most expensive mile of subway ever built." Consultants amounted to 20% of its costs, double what France or Italy would have spent. The MTA used to employ 1,600 project managers. Now it has 124 of them, overseeing $20b worth of projects. They hand that money to consultants, and even if they have the expertise to oversee the consultants' spending, they are stretched too thin to do a good job of it:

https://slate.com/business/2023/02/subway-costs-us-europe-public-transit-funds.html

When a public agency lacks competence, it ends up costing the public more. States with highly expert Departments of Transport order better projects, which need fewer changes, which adds up to massive costs savings and superior roads:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4522676

Other gaps in US regulation are plugged by nonprofits and citizen groups. Environmental rules like NEPA rely on the public to identify and object to environmental risks in public projects, from solar plants to new apartment complexes. NEPA and its state equivalents empower private actors to sue developers to block projects, even if they satisfy all environmental regulations, leading to years of expensive delay.

The answer to this isn't to dismantle environmental regulations – it's to create a robust expert bureaucracy that can enforce them instead of relying on NIMBYs. This is called "ministerial approval" – when skilled government workers oversee environmental compliance. Predictably, NIMBYs hate ministerial approval.

Which is not to say that there aren't problems with trusting public enforcers to ensure that big companies are following the law. Regulatory capture is real, and the more concentrated an industry is, the greater the risk of capture. We are living in a moment of shocking market concentration, thanks to 40 years of under-regulation:

https://www.openmarketsinstitute.org/learn/monopoly-by-the-numbers

Remember that five-hour privacy policy for a Meta VR headset? One answer to these eye-glazing garbage novellas presented as "privacy policies" is to simply ban certain privacy-invading activities. That way, you can skip the policy, knowing that clicking "I agree" won't expose you to undue risk.

This is the approach that Bennett Cyphers and I argue for in our EFF white-paper, "Privacy Without Monopoly":

https://www.eff.org/wp/interoperability-and-privacy

After all, even the companies that claim to be good for privacy aren't actually very good for privacy. Apple blocked Facebook from spying on iPhone owners, then sneakily turned on their own mass surveillance system, and lied about it:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

But as the European experiment with the GDPR has shown, public administrators can't be trusted to have the final word on privacy, because of regulatory capture. Big Tech companies like Google, Apple and Facebook pretend to be headquartered in corporate crime havens like Ireland and Luxembourg, where the regulators decline to enforce the law:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/15/finnegans-snooze/#dirty-old-town

It's only because of the GPDR has a private right of action – the right of individuals to sue to enforce their rights – that we're finally seeing the beginning of the end of commercial surveillance in Europe:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/americans-deserve-more-current-american-data-privacy-protection-act

It's true that NIMBYs can abuse private rights of action, bringing bad faith cases to slow or halt good projects. But just as the answer to bad regulations is good ones, so too is the answer to bad private rights of action good ones. SLAPP laws have shown us how to balance vexatious litigation with the public interest:

https://www.rcfp.org/resources/anti-slapp-laws/

We must get over our reflexive cynicism towards public administration. In my book The Internet Con, I lay out a set of public policy proposals for dismantling Big Tech and putting users back in charge of their digital lives:

https://www.versobooks.com/products/3035-the-internet-con

The most common objection I've heard since publishing the book is, "Sure, Big Tech has enshittified everything great about the internet, but how can we trust the government to fix it?"

We've been conditioned to think that lawmakers are too old, too calcified and too corrupt, to grasp the technical nuances required to regulate the internet. But just because Congress isn't made up of computer scientists, it doesn't mean that they can't pass good laws relating to computers. Congress isn't full of microbiologists, but we still manage to have safe drinking water (most of the time).

You can't just "do the research" or "vote with your wallet" to fix the internet. Bad laws – like the DMCA, which bans most kinds of reverse engineering – can land you in prison just for reconfiguring your own devices to serve you, rather than the shareholders of the companies that made them. You can't fix that yourself – you need a responsive, good, expert, capable government to fix it.

We can have that kind of government. It'll take some doing, because these questions are intrinsically hard to get right even without monopolies trying to capture their regulators. Even a president as flawed as Biden can be pushed into nominating good administrative personnel and taking decisive, progressive action:

https://doctorow.medium.com/joe-biden-is-headed-to-a-uaw-picket-line-in-detroit-f80bd0b372ab?sk=f3abdfd3f26d2f615ad9d2f1839bcc07

Biden may not be doing enough to suit your taste. I'm certainly furious with aspects of his presidency. The point isn't to lionize Biden – it's to point out that even very flawed leaders can be pushed into producing benefit for the American people. Think of how much more we can get if we don't give up on politics but instead demand even better leaders.

My next novel is The Lost Cause, coming out on November 14. It's about a generation of people who've grown up under good government – a historically unprecedented presidency that has passed the laws and made the policies we'll need to save our species and planet from the climate emergency:

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250865939/the-lost-cause

The action opens after the pendulum has swung back, with a new far-right presidency and an insurgency led by white nationalist militias and their offshore backers – seagoing anarcho-capitalist billionaires.

In the book, these forces figure out how to turn good regulations against the people they were meant to help. They file hundreds of simultaneous environmental challenges to refugee housing projects across the country, blocking the infill building that is providing homes for the people whose homes have been burned up in wildfires, washed away in floods, or rendered uninhabitable by drought.

I don't want to spoil the book here, but it shows how the protagonists pursue a multipronged defense, mixing direct action, civil disobedience, mass protest, court challenges and political pressure to fight back. What they don't do is give up on state capacity. When the state is corrupted by wreckers, they claw back control, rather than giving up on the idea of a competent and benevolent public system.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/23/getting-stuff-done/#praxis

#pluralistic #nerd harder #private right of action #privacy #robocalls #fcc #administrative competence #noah smith #spam #regulatory capture #public choice theory #nimbyism #the lost cause #the internet con #evidence based policy #small government #transit #praxis #antitrust #trustbusting #monopoly

[kinokoshoujoart]

is Rock/Romeo different in the japanese ds cute?

(as someone who isn’t fluent) yea in jp romeo sounds like less of a bastard and more like idk. idiot airhead spacey naive kid? the jp version also takes him much more seriously as a love interest option which stresses me out a bit but it’s also cute

for the english version of DS and cute natsume sometimes added some arrogant douchey scum bastard zaniness to romeo’s lines to idk i guess try and match rock? (who has different speech habits / “role speech” in JP compared to romeo) and of course natsume also just handled a lot of DS lines Weirdly or Not at all

for example

the wedding vow

JP:「もう一生離さないよ♡ 」| “For the rest of my life, I’ll never let go!♡” (cute)

Natume EN: “I’ll never leave you. Heh heh.” (troubling)

the divorce fakeout event you get if you neglect your husband (the entire thing)

JP: romeo thinks you hate him and he’s sad because you don’t communicate, and says goodbye.. he comes back and apologizes and admits he never wanted to leave, he just wants to stay together and you head to sleep (all’s well that ends well)

EN: romeock thinks you hate him and he says “is it my looks? my gorgeous looks can’t be fading already, can they?!” when he comes back he’s like “i know you can’t be tired of my looks already. it must just be a phase. well time for some beauty sleep” (who the fuck said you were allowed back in)

other than stuff like that, in general i’m finding a lot of events make slightly to very more sense in japanese because often it feels like each line of dialogue was either translated too literally into english or they didn’t have context, so that also applies to romeo’s heart and random events especially later events / events after marriage / rival marriage

the entire yellow heart event didn’t make proper sense to me in english compared to japanese but one small silly example from it where (probably) no context translation made the scene 10x funnier is when he has his dramatic confession

in JP he realizes he may have hurt you by joking around and making up stories to hide his feelings and apologizes profusely. protag shakes her head no with a heart over it to be like “it’s okay <3”

in EN he asks “Can you forgive me…?” and protag does the same gesture. like “NO <3”

also neither here nor there but his relationship with Louis feels a lot more familial in japanese. in english i wanted to kick him out the window during the child discipline event. in JP it’s more silly… (i still want to kick him out the window but more affectionately…) she overall sounds a lot more idk timid in EN but in JP she’s rougher and teases and scolds him a bunch (good👍). she and her two NEET cats children are a very cute family imo

overall i find natume’s odd additions to the game incredibly funny and enhance the experience in their own way (by making it worse) and i enjoy the more bastardly creature but i also think the more serious and soft romeo is sweet. he still has a lot of “what is wrong with his brain” moments in both en and jp he’s just more douchey in english

#thank you for the ask <3 #weird how this is the opposite of the impression i got from rock sosawl #there’s points where xseed definitely made him sound less skeevy than the jp version. especially the. added event #tho in both cases the dialogue was jazzed up for the english versions just in… different directions #natsume also made rock more of a jackass jock type in the english version of AnWL #like if your kid gets into studying he has this whole fear of them becoming a nerd #they also invented the ‘if we don’t make this farm work i might have to get a job. oh man! try harder please?’ #same w gustafa’s version of that event. out of nowhere he says he doesn’t mind never bathing. #look as a rock apologist rock deserves slander as punishment for various crimes. gustafa did nothing to deserve his slander #my favorite natume oopsies in this game are the two chicken men #neither mick nor purple say anything like ‘i’m your chicken man’ in japanese. i especially don’t know why purple says it in english #asks #bokumono #rock tumbling (sos) #harvest moon #hmds cute

[marysong-mp3]

went to a 1989 party last night and it was an absolute blast and my voice is completely gone this morning <333

#i love these parties so damn much #literally the dream party environment. just massive taylor swift nerds getting dressed up and slightly tipsy and dancing for 5 straight hrs #i say slightly tispy but there were some people who went harder ofc. but my crew stayed buzzed enough without getting sick lol #dee speaks

[taylortruther]

Same. I’m in college and while i love my friends dearly so many of them just do not know anything and it’s so annoying sometimes. One of them said I was “educated” because I explained what internalized homophobia was after someone used the term incorrectly🤦‍♀️

ah yes the fine line between sharing info and being a know-it-all. i know this feeling lmao.

kinda like when my group of friends said the discourse/criticism over girl dinner or girl math was stupid - and i was like "i get why it's annoying but i think it's important to talk about how self-deprecation and joking about being bad at math or other stereotypes isn't empowering," and literally the convo stopped and they looked at me like

and then they said it "wasn't that serious" 😭 i learned that day that, in this group, i'm a know-it-all so i've tried to tamp it down

#if it bothers you you should branch out bestie #i found my people in college and we were goofy cerebral nerds together #it's harder to find them after college i fear

[parktheghost]

hey park do u have any advice for gcses

hi!! i can try:

don't stress too much solely based on your experience of mocks - when you do mocks you usually have like 10 exams all in one week, for actual gcses they're spread over a way longer time so it's not as rushed and you definitely feel way more prepared for them

for languages learning the vocab lists and knowing set phrases with complicated grammar will save you

for sciences and maths i would recommend looking at the specification for the subject (it's on the exam board's website) and doing a ridiculous amount of practice questions. like do as many as you can find/have time for, for gcse i found a lot of the questions were very similar to pre existing questions

for english i made huge mindmaps of each character and theme with quotes and quote analysis etc which really helped me with essays + quote learning

for geography and history. make concise notes, pray, and if all else fails make up plausible sounding statistics and dates

honestly the best thing to do in my opinion is practice papers/questions, the more you do of them the less stressful they feel and the easier they get

as soon as you're done with gcses and move onto a levels/whatever you're doing next gcses will feel completely pointless and you'll wonder why you were so scared about them. obviously try to do your best but remember it's not the end of the world if something goes badly and it's definitely not worth sacrificing mental health over!!!

good luck!! i hope this helps <33

#bear in mind im a massive nerd and spent way too much time revising #let me flex for a second: i got ten nines #you dont need to spend as much time as i did like somehow i was doing full days of revision with no breaks and that was NOT necessary #i wouldve done just as well if i'd taken breaks and focused harder when i was actually revising #i hope this helps i feel like i wrote too much and yet said nothing of substance #if you want more detailed advice or like more subject specific advice lmk!!!! #all of a sudden i feel like a studyblr blog #studyblr #gcses