Latest Posts (20 found)
ava's blog 1 weeks ago

are disabilities and chronic illnesses 'cool' now?

On September 5, The Telegraph released the article “ How having a disability became cool ” by Poppy Coburn. The by-line is: “ Young women, nicknamed ‘sickfluencers’, are turning chronic illness into a lifestyle trend and entrenching a culture of economic inactivity ” Quite venomous words already jumping out here. Attentive readers might notice it’s immediately insinuating that disabled people are lazy and choosing to lead this lifestyle voluntarily for fun. Awesome. The article immediately opens with the odd observation that many people at trans marches and protests use walking sticks. The transphobia is apparent throughout the article, but already starts here. That’s no coincidence: As a UK paper, they welcome that. To them, being trans is just another thing people make up as an excuse and for attention, so of course it can’t be left out in an article about how disabled people increasingly refuse to be invisible and actually feel confident enough to ask for support and accommodations, even fighting the stigmatization of walking sticks among young people. Further on, it says “ Disability is changing. To many, it is no longer an adversity to overcome, but a social identity akin to one’s sexuality, gender, or race; an immutable reality to be celebrated by the subject and accommodated by the rest of us. ” I find it so disrespectful by able-bodied, not chronically ill people to keep pushing this idea that disability is something to be overcome. It puts the onus on the disabled or sick person to somehow change or cure their disability or illness, instead of on their environment to accommodate different needs. It goes hand-in-hand with seeing us as merely people to be “inspired” by, and for this inspiration porn to be created, you make disabled and chronically ill people struggle and beg and settle for less and forego accommodations, just to go “ Wow, you’re so strong for that. ” and “ At least you’re not letting it define your life. ”, the latter being reserved for people who are lucky enough to function well enough to pass as healthy. Because people who dare to talk about it, to show it, to use accommodations like canes or more home office days or extra time for assignments? They’re not trying hard enough to be “normal” and “use” their disability for advantages and let it dEfiNe tHeiR liFe . You put us in this weird spot where we aren’t allowed to be utterly sad, bitter and angry about our fate, but we are not allowed to embrace it and find happiness in it either. Realistically, what is “overcoming” in this context supposed to mean? The vast majority of chronically ill and disabled people already try all they can to not worsen their condition; they go to doctor’s appointments if they can afford so, they get their tests done and take medication if they can pay for it and get it covered (if there is one for their condition, and they are taken seriously by enough to get it), they do physical or psychological therapy, limit their foods or their activities, and more. I do so many things in my life to keep my brain and body as intact as possible that healthy people don’t have to, and it’s like a second job; yet I will never “overcome” this. I’m in disbelief at the fact that people like Coburn do not seem to understand the finality of chronic illnesses and disability, probably because the thought that you could just become sick and never get better deeply scares them. But that’s how it is! Disability and chronic illnesses will most likely remain part of the person’s life until they die . Depending on what it is, it can influence anything from the way you dress to the activities you can partake in, your mobility, the foods you can eat, your social status, the jobs you can do, the income you have, and more. In what world would that not significantly impact your lifestyle, and why would we wanna hide that it does? No longer having legs to walk with, or no longer having parts of your colon, or being bedbound, or having cognitive issues is an immutable reality . What else would it be? We can change the names in the diagnostic criteria, but the symptoms remain and are a part of me just like race and gender. The article goes on to describe the strong increase in disability numbers, suggesting that the diagnostic criteria are too broad and hard to prove if it’s not literally a physical disability. It’s funny that Covid, an event that left a lot of people disabled, is not mentioned more prominently in this than just vaguely referring to “the pandemic” for timeline reasons. No, it has to be all those fakers with their little sadness they call depression, or the people who pretend to have POTS, apparently. Listen up: I’ve had a Covid infection so bad, I had POTS symptoms for 4 months after and also had to take beta blockers for it. The only reason I wasn’t diagnosed with it was that it went away in time, and symptoms have to persist for at least 6 months, I was told. And the longer it went on, the more scared I was that this could be permanent. There was no “overcoming” I could do. All I could do was wait and hope my body gets it together, and I was lucky. And now people like Coburn are surprised that after Covid (which is still going on!) we have a strong increase of people with POTS? I didn’t even bring it up myself; my doctor mentioned it and never made it seem like it was a controversial or illegitimate illness, like the rest of the article does. What follows is: “ But, were they not decked out in the accessories of their disease, it would be impossible to perceive the conditions they consider to be so central to their interaction with the world. ” Okay, and? What is the problem? I fail to see what’s the issue. Lots of disabilities and chronic illnesses are invisible. I have Crohn’s disease and Bechterew’s disease. I don’t yet have a stoma, but if I had, it and its bag would be underneath my clothes. And because I am young and on treatment, I don’t walk around with a fused, curved spine yet, and hopefully never will. If you catch degenerative diseases early and are lucky with successful treatment, it means we can slow the process and give people a higher quality of life, which often means it’s not visible. It being not visible doesn’t mean it’s not real, or symptoms don’t persist, or there isn’t treatment for it that the person goes through and wants to talk about. “* […]you’ll be bombarded with artfully curated pastel info-graphics (“Seven symptoms I didn’t realise were Pots”), beautiful women with slicked-back hair sharing their Pots journey (“hi life update: I have a chronic illness!”), pink wheelchairs and walking sticks, compression socks embroidered with flowers and bold messages against medical misogyny […]*” This is presented as a negative thing. Oh no, disabled and chronically ill wanna inform people about their conditions, and make art about it, and feel beautiful, and make sterile depressing looking medical aids beautiful and match their style! How terrible! Everyone, please show off your glamorous life online and embellish it… but not you, with your disgusting wheelchair! The article thankfully acknowledges the fact that more women than men suffer from chronic illnesses and that women struggle with being taken seriously by doctors. Despite that, the entire article feels incredibly misogynistic, because it never successfully connects the isolating and painful experience of that with the behavior that is weirdly critiqued; the tone is more like “ Young women and their hysteria and need for attention, am I right?! Just like when girls used their period to get out of gym class!!! ” Rightfully, Coburn mentions the darker side of social media illness content: Snakeoil salesmen preying on the helpless who have run out of options or hope. Those exist and deserve to be called out. I just find it weird to pretend a disabled person offering compression socks in their shop is somehow on the same level to what I have seen a lot more of: People selling courses, cookbooks, supplements etc., because everything can suddenly be cured by a healthy gut biome, FODMAP or carnivore diet, 3 capsules of turmeric in your rectum a day, or homeopathy. I’m not saying the call never comes from inside the house. Disabled and sick people can prey on each other and economic circumstances many of us have might edge people closer to it. However, the vast majority of scammers I have seen were healthy people who just got into that because we are easy targets. They slide into your DMs, your emails (even here!), they join patient groups on Reddit, Discord, and Facebook just to advertise their shit. I don’t know what that has to do with “sickfluencers” being open about their life online. “ She describes a “hyper-awareness of physical symptoms like fatigue and a racing heart” from patients who visit her seeking an explanation for their pain, with an expectation that there will be a single, incontrovertible diagnosis. Often though, she says, it is more likely that factors such as “a lack of sleep and exercise and a poor diet” are causing the patient’s symptoms, and these can be resolved with minimal medical intervention. ” I find this to be so incredibly dismissive. A lot has to be ruled out first for POTS to be considered, and there’s literally a table angling your body to see when your body abnormally responds to being upright. Lack of exercise, sleep and poor diet were not the case for me and my post-viral tachycardia. It’s not normal for your heart rate to consistently shoot up to between 120-150bpm just for sitting up in bed or slowly walking into the kitchen. Talk about hyper-aware when you feel like your heart is gonna jump out of your chest. It’s like going to the ER and having everything dismissed via “anxiety”. It fucking sucks, and I wish people lost their job for fabricating such non-sense proudly in a newspaper. “ For many observers, the phenomenon is a direct consequence of the way in which normal facets of life have become medicalised. You’re not forgetful, you have brain fog. You’re not feeling low, you’re depressed. You don’t dislike crowds, you’re suffering from agoraphobia. You’re not excited, you’re in a manic episode. The entire range of human emotions can be tidily sorted into a diagnostic box. ” Literally none of these have any significant overlap with each other and wouldn’t be diagnosed as such. The threshold for all of these is that it causes significant impairment in your everyday life. Simple forgetfulness might be annoying, but isn’t literally damaging your life and leading you to almost cause a car accident. Same with feeling low or uncomfortable in crowds; no one calls themselves agoraphobic for hating crowds! It’s the inability to leave the house at all that impairs people’s lives the most. I can’t even put into words how horribly ignorant this paragraph is. It’s like putting zero effort into researching just to be able to complain that everyone is sick nowadays. It shows zero personal experience too, which makes me wonder where the authority even comes from to speak on all this. “ Young women are also more likely to get caught up in “social contagion” – the spontaneous spread of behaviours or emotions previously observed by sociologists in “outbreaks” of bulimia, self-harm and transgender ideology. What may have otherwise been transitory feelings are seized upon and obsessed over until they form a central pillar of a person’s identity. A chronic-illness influencer won’t want to get “better” any more than a female-bodied transgender person would want to re-identify with their sex. ” I am at a loss for words, really. Chronic illness havers do not get better because that’s what makes it chronic. Most trans people have tried anything they can conceive of to not to be trans and had to fight intense denial and fear before taking that step - because it involves horribly long waiting lists, humiliating therapy sessions in which it is normalized to ask dehumanizing questions about their genitals, sexual life and porn preferences, as well as medical discrimination, job discrimination, the potential loss of family, friends and partner, and the risk to be murdered. But sure, they choose that for fun. Asshat. “ When my mother was a girl, she feigned unbearable abdominal pain to dodge a minorly unpleasant task. She kept the act up for so long that when a doctor diagnosed her with appendicitis, she failed to break character – and even when she was prepared for surgery – she couldn’t bring herself to confess. And so, whenever I’d swear blindly I was too unwell to go into class on a Monday morning, she’d remind me of the small scar beneath her stomach. ” I fail to see how the author’s mum being a horrible liar is a good reason to apply that mindset to strangers she only sees online and never actually speaks to. Maybe stop this weird projection? Of course, an article like that cannot survive without mentioning increased diagnoses of autism, the absolute favorite topic for people who pretend increased rates of any diagnosis is a bunch of bullshit. You can think what you want about the integration of “Aspergers” into ASD, but to pretend it doesn’t make sense that more women get diagnosed late in life now because only boys used to be considered and autism can look different in girls and be missed is simply illogical. It’s fearmongering for absolutely no reason. What’s the threat here, really? People online now get diagnosed at 30+ and make a video about it and nothing else changes in their life, as many of them do not need or cannot get accommodations because most of them are for the school years. What is the effect on you or society as a whole? “ It would require incredibly bad luck indeed for so many of these women to be afflicted by so many completely different illnesses with totally different medical causes. But luck seems to have nothing to do with it. There is a wealth of medical evidence that disorders with no proven pathology overlap. In many of these cases, if the cause is medical, it is strictly psychosomatic. And if it is not medical, it is likely to be based on identity: the desire to increase one’s status through suffering, or to enjoy a larger community of supporters. ” No, it’s just called comorbidities. My Crohn’s disease is actually one of the symptoms of my Bechterew’s disease as both patient groups have a significant overlap, and having one diagnosis helped diagnose the other. Lots of people with my diseases also have had depression in the past, and abusive childhood, allergies, and things like PMOS or endometriosis. All of these are real; the body is simply a system, and when my diseases (and its inflammation) were uncontrolled, everything else was worse as well. In general, we don’t fully understand all illnesses yet, especially ones that tend to happen after viral infections (like ME/CFS) or ones that are autoimmune. Why can’t we have reputable doctors for these discussions, instead of a journalist with an agenda? “ The truth is that it is not harmless to allow a generation of girls to convince themselves they are sick without good reason. Nearly one in 10 people of working age is now claiming a sickness or disability benefit, and the number of children receiving disability benefits has doubled in the past decade. ” No. The truth is that people like the author are scared of disability and chronic illness, and scared of the possibility that the source of it all could be environmental or systematic; that would require a lot of change that likely won't come, and it’s easier to pretend it’s all in our heads and we can will ourselves out of it than look the likely facts in the eye. “ All of the major political parties have acknowledged that disability-related welfare costs are unsustainable, with Reform vowing to compel a quarter of a million people back into work, saving taxpayers up to £50bn, if it forms the next government. Overdiagnosis of minor issues that 20 years ago would have resolved on their own can be ruinously costly. And it’s not just immediate welfare costs that are placing a strain on public finances. The number of school children receiving SEN (Special Educational Needs) support has soared since the pandemic, rising from one million in 2018-19 to 1.3 million in 2025-26, straining school budgets to the limit. […] As is also the case with dogmatic aspects of transgender ideology, sickness-as-identity politics is especially dangerous for children. We are creating a cohort of young people that is totally dependent either on doctors or activists for emotional support, and broader society for economic support.” Yes, people who need treatment rely on doctors and society for life. I don't understand why transgender people are always targeted in these discussions with this aspect, because I, or diabetics, or people with a pacemaker also are dependent on doctors and society for life. Moreso, talking about the costs of supporting disabled lives is incredibly icky. Austerity politics in the UK have killed tens of thousands of disabled people since 2010. There's this one Nazi propaganda poster/magazine cover that just never leaves me. I probably think about it multiple times a week, especially with where Germany is headed, but also because I'm a rather expensive patient and will continue to be so for life. Loosely translated, it says: "60.000 RM [currency back then] costs us this genetically diseased person for the rest of their life. Fellow comrade, that's also your money." It's a poster in favor of eugenics because sick people cost society too much. It's supposed to tell you that you can save money by being in favor of culling the sick. Poppy Coburn therefore, in a completely non-chalant way, spread Nazi rhetoric in The Telegraph, with apparently little to no pushback. To her, we are spectacles to be gawked at, people who merely exist on social media like a trend shoved down her throat, and only relevant enough to write ragebait articles about in which eugenicist views are normalized. What a disgusting way to make money. You should be ashamed of yourself. Published 08 Sep, 2026

journalism Journalism culture Culture media Media
0 views
ava's blog 1 weeks ago

wonders of web weaving podcast episode with me!

A while ago, a request for a podcast appearance made me seriously consider if I am comfortable with that. While that initial invitation didn't work out (still very grateful, and maybe in the future!), it also opened me up to be on James' podcast, Wonders Of Web Weaving ! My episode released today and you can find it here . It has both an audio file and a transcript, so if you don't want or can't listen to audio, you can simply read the content. It was a lot of fun! We recorded it in June and James was so nice to talk to and a really reassuring and friendly presence that made it easy :) I was still a bit nervous, so I apologize for any weird word mixups and mispronounciations ;D Published 08 Sep, 2026

career Career
0 views
ava's blog 1 weeks ago

health data and broad consent

Health data is my biggest interest within data protection law. If my health would permit it, I would work in a hospital or pharmacy. I even originally set out to complete my traineeship in medical documentation at a hospital! It fell through because I would have had to move to another state. Alas, now I don't work in any medical settings, but I still work with health data in a boring building instead. Under Article 9 GDPR, health data is considered a special category of data (often called "sensitive data"), and processing is by default prohibited. Processing of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health or data concerning a natural person’s sex life or sexual orientation shall be prohibited. This data can be vast and overlap in practice - some medical information is biometric or genetic, some might refer to your ethnicity or the color of your skin, some will be sexual and cover sexual activity, orientation, or gender. Some is just plain diagnoses, or values, tests, prescriptions, or otherwise documented treatment for something. Health data is in this weird spot where most people do not wish to share it, but on the other hand, most of us are supportive of research and new scientific discoveries that could help prevent, treat or cure disease. This doesn't immediately seem like a contradiction, because after all, we have clinical trials. Unfortunately, they only get us so far, as they are limited in scope, population, and variables. That is also why there is a period of time after market authorization (in EU at least) where a drug is additionally monitored as the general population starts to use it for the first time, and more trials are needed. The risk-benefit analysis might switch or new discoveries are made, like new side effects or drug interactions that need to be included in the package leaflet and the SmPC (Summary of Product Characteristics). You can spot these medications by looking for a black triangle, or check out the list on the EMA website. Not only practical reasons speak for more use of data; the promotion of scientific research is an objective in the EU’s founding treaties, and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights mentions unconstrained scientific research and academic freedom. So it makes sense that there is a growing interest in getting the health data of the general population, for example through their health insurance. We can do clinical trials, and we can analyze reported cases in pharmacovigilance systems or do journal reviews, but these are only small parts of the population, in very controlled environments, and the reporting isn't as good as it could be - lots of doctors simply do not report much or with too little information. Trends across populations are more difficult to detect that way or different causes and effects are never seen as connected. Examples for moves to combine health data across different registries, biobanks, organizations or countries for scientific purposes are for example the German Medizinregistergesetz to combine different national medical registries, the DARWIN EU project, and the secondary use option of the European Health Data Space regulation, whose infrastructure is currently being established across the EU (and is something I aim to work with). But how is health data handled under GDPR, for not just clinical trials but all kinds of scientific research? That is where the exceptions of Article 9 and the concept of Broad Consent comes in. The aforementioned Article 9 also contains exceptions to the total processing ban, and one of them is the purpose of scientific research. A controller needs to meet at least one Article 6 legal basis (like for example your explicit consent, a task in the public interest, legitimate interest etc.), and then it can base its processing on Article 9(2)(j) GDPR together with any Member State law that may apply. Member States are allowed to introduce further conditions and limitations for the processing of genetic data, biometric data or data concerning health, so each EU member might have additional laws to what I am about to describe; Germany, for example, has made use of this. On top of that, Recital 33 of the GDPR introduces the option of Broad Consent , saying It is often not possible to fully identify the purpose of personal data processing for scientific research purposes at the time of data collection. Therefore, data subjects should be allowed to give their consent to certain areas of scientific research when in keeping with recognised ethical standards for scientific research. Data subjects should have the opportunity to give their consent only to certain areas of research or parts of research projects to the extent allowed by the intended purpose. That means that in case of scientific research, it is possible to move away from the otherwise very granular and specific consent required by the GDPR, and agree more broadly, and most importantly, agree before the specific purpose of the processing is already set. This makes sense in practice: You technically need to be informed at the time of recording the data, but that may not be at a time where the purpose or scope of the research project is already set or it even already exists. This doesn't free controllers from specifying no purpose at all, or making it too broad. They cannot make you agree to simply all kinds of research, even if you want to do that. Instead, you might opt into, for example, "oncology research", and then later on, your data can be used for more specific purposes and studies within that bigger purpose. It's important that the purpose is within the defined research area and within the reasonable expectations of you as the data subject. Aside from this Broad Consent , controllers can also ask you to consent to different individual research projects separately, as soon as the purposes of those projects become known. This is called Dynamic Consent , and avoids some of the issues Broad Consent can pose. It's especially handy when future projects can be identified progressively or research continues over long periods and researchers maintain an ongoing relationship with participants, maybe because they need ongoing care or control. It can be difficult to fulfill the standard GDPR rights under Broad Consent in practice; you might not be reliably informed who specifically is currently (still) using your data for what purpose, especially years or decades later. It can be harder to withdraw consent and make it reach all parties that need to know about the withdrawal. Enforcement is harder because of how the data might have spread. Who makes sure to remove the data when you request so, or when the storage limitation is reached? And: While your data might be anonymized later on or pseudonymized in one dataset, multiple can be combined, which makes re-identification more likely. Of course, there are also reasons to be scared of health data being shared at all, with or without consent. Some illnesses, like HIV, herpes and more are still stigmatized. If this is revealed, the affected people could be seen as unsafe, dirty and promiscuous. Some are scared that it could lead to employers having access to databases where they can check an applicant's health status, which could prevent people who are sick often, or chronically ill and disabled people from getting and keeping employment. Trans people who wish to live stealth can be outed by the sharing of their medical data. Others see a risk in the data being used for racist and eugenicist reasons, especially via racial information and genetic data, or to detect specific populations the government wants to get rid of, like ethnic minorities, queer people, disabled people and more. In the wrong hands, health data could be used to deem you life unworthy of life . Plus, what if there's a data leak to third parties? With these risks in mind, I still wanna encourage people to check whether their discomfort around sharing their health data for scientific research is at a reasonable level and based on a likely concern, or a learned behavior because of the shame and stigma around discussing your health in social settings. It's hard to keep those apart! Many of us have learned not to share our illnesses because it makes others uncomfortable or because of bad experiences of others close to us using that information against us. The fears we usually have around discussing our diagnoses are often based on an information imbalance with our surroundings. That could mean: Your diagnosis of a stigmatized illness is revealed to people who have direct access to you, and now you are afraid that this changes how people view and treat you. You might be scared of being excluded, of being seen as a burden or being infantilized; fears of not finding sexual or romantic partners, and so on. But all of this usually requires a "leak" that exposes only you in your direct environment, and the other people around you aren't exposed and can use this power imbalance against you. On the other hand, if a data leak happens and strangers elsewhere have it in a dataset, there are different consequences; it doesn't give the people around you easy and immediate access, and they might be affected as well, leveling the playing field. What I am trying to point out with this is: Concern around leaked health data is often less focused on the actual outcome, each person's specific risk factors and what's technically possible, and moreso informed by general stigma in society and fears of interpersonal issues. People mix up the learned fears around admitting illness in their surroundings with the risks in a data leak, even if they barely have any overlap. For what it's worth, look around you: It is a false premise that we have a small amount of sick people, as if we were a minuscule minority. A lot of people are permanently sick or disabled in some way, needing medication for life, and this also increases the older the population gets. It's time for visibility and solidarity, and that only works if we don't pretend 90% of people are healthy and/or not reliant on medication or other assistance, or don't mentally "count" certain ones (or our own diagnoses) so people can feel above others and punch down. In your social circle and family, how many people are on antidepressants, how many people have rheumatoid arthritis or endometriosis or PMOS, how many have an Inflammatory Bowel Disease, how many people are on some heart medication, how many are diabetic, how many have epilepsy or have asthma or osteoporosis, who is fighting the effects of surviving cancer, who's on opioids for chronic pain etc., and who's simply dealing with age-related symptoms? That's just the most popular ones and isn't even including traditional physical disability. We all got something to lose and something to gain, and being open about being ill is easier when you realize the people around you are not exempt (forever). It is an inevitability of life. This perspective gives me the courage to be really open with my illnesses; of course no one else has to do the same. For Broad Consent to work well and not undermine your rights, there should be a clear understanding of what even counts as scientific research so there is no abuse of this privilege, and practices should be in place that keep the data secure and foster genuine attempts at informing patients and giving them the option to easily withdraw or keep updated about the use of their data. Helpfully, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) has released guidelines for the processing of personal data for scientific research purposes. They set some standards for what qualifies as scientific research. The six key indicative factors they describe, next to just the nature, scope, contexts and purpose of the processing, are the methodical and systematic approach , the adherence to ethical standards , the verifiability and transparency of the methods and results, autonomy and independence , the objectives of the research (" the aim of contributing to the growth of society's general knowledge and wellbeing "), and the potential to contribute to existing scientific knowledge . They also clarify: " If the research activities under assessment meet all of the factors [...], they can be presumed to constitute scientific research. If the research activities do not meet all factors, the controller needs to justify and be able to demonstrate why the activities should nonetheless be considered scientific research, within the meaning of the GDPR." Additionally, they discuss that even private entities can rely on the legal basis of performing a task carried out in the public interest, and scientific research can , in their eyes, be a legitimate interest under Art. 6(f) GDPR. And they also explicitly do not exclude commercial interests from falling well-within the scope of scientific research. What they suggest needs to be ensured is All these are supposed to "compensate" for the Broad Consent . These are not the only guidelines out there; the German Datenschutzkonferenz and others have also published their own, and while they tend to differ in some points (especially around what can and cannot be considered scientific research), they largely suggest the same safety standards and patient rights to consider. I felt like writing about this for a while now because not many people I ask tend to know about the general movement towards health data sharing and combining of datasets that is increasingly being prepared and legislated, or at least have a broad idea of how consent is handled in these cases. There's a lot I could go more in-depth on, but this is an overview for now. I am sure the processing of health data digitally as well as the ease of sharing will become more visible in the future as more milestones are hit for the European Health Data Space , and as health insurance providers and healthcare facilities all over the EU make changes in how they offer and organize the digital patient file, digital prescriptions and referrals, opt-ins to data collection or enrollment in studies via app, and so on. Published 07 Sep, 2026 further processing for scientific research purposes that are compatible with the initial purpose(s) of when the data was collected, storage limitations or criteria to determine the period of storage must be set before the processing; it may be okay to store the data for longer, even after the conclusion of a research project, if it is needed within peer review or similar things, data subjects understanding the consequences of their choice, and having access to information on how their data is processed, for example on a website or a via a newsletter, and where they can withdraw their consent possibly via a privacy dashboard or other offline means, reassessment when the circumstances change (purpose change, controller change, third country transfer etc.), possible extra involvement of independent data trustees, time-limited consent, independent oversight, ethics committees, and patient groups for participant representation, and proper technical safeguards (as usually required by GDPR and other laws anyway).

security Security data Data
0 views
ava's blog 1 weeks ago

notebook 15

Haven't posted since March. These selected pages range from April to September. Published 06 Sep, 2026

programming Programming career Career
0 views
ava's blog 2 weeks ago

rationalizations about ring, flock, etc.

I have talked to multiple people using Ring cameras and similar surveillance tech at or around their home over the last few years, usually from the US. The reasons are mostly the same: Most of them have only started using these cameras after 2020, which is pretty odd if these are really the true reasons. Cameras and surveillance systems have been around since the 1940s, and have only become more and more affordable and easy to set up, even pre-Ring. Crime rates have existed before, as did the need to prove things to police or an insurance. Yet, the purchase of a private surveillance camera only came up in the recent years for them. Why? It really is the perfect proof that fear-based marketing works. Social media and the 24/7 global news cycle have us all hyper-aware of terrible events everywhere, and have blown things completely out of proportion. The constant recurring reminders that something bad happened just near you that you would have otherwise not known about is skyrocketing your anxiety. You could be next! Ragebait and other recorded rude behavior popping into your feed colors your perception of strangers and humanity as a whole. Everyone is out to get you! People have lost their minds, and now you have to protect yourself! It gets so bad that anyone walking on the street, being near your home, delivering your package is a suspect, a threat, before they are a human. They first have to prove they have nothing to hide, or prove they are doing their job correctly, all pressured by the presence of a camera (and the threat of this being shared with police or uploaded online and going viral), before they are seen as someone with rights. And maybe they even serve as content opportunity - fair game of course, as your camera yelled out that they're being recorded and by not immediately running away (as they have a job to do or wanna visit you), they consent, right? It's no wonder all that intensified during and after the lockdowns for Covid where everyone was extremely online, and that companies have found ways to capitalize on this fear. Because that's what it is: You fell for the marketing that promised to calm your worst fears and anxiety with more tech, and pretends it gives you some sort of control or a magic device that makes it all turn out okay. That's why you suddenly only need it now, after being able to live without it just fine. Overtly or covertly, the marketing tries to tell you: You can prevent all bad things from happening. You will spot bad things happening in time before any damage is done, or we will send a notification. Burglars and package stealers will be deterred. Due to the video footage, police will actually do something, and even catch the perp! You can find missing people and pets. Insurance will stop fighting with you! Your spouse will be too scared from bringing someone home while you're at work, and the kids will not do something forbidden while you're out of the house, and the dogs will not tear anything up because you can just yell at them to stop via a camera. You'll see if someone in the home has a medical emergency. But this is legit insane! You have smoke detectors and gas detectors for this. Criminals are not deterred by cameras. People everywhere are still getting their insurance claims approved and their lost package refunded. Police solved case rates are still embarrassingly low, despite almost all stores, and many streets claimed to be crime spots, being surveilled for a decade or longer now. People living with you or being in your home deserve privacy instead of suffering from your extreme insecurities. They deserve to not being judged all the time, especially children and teens. Knowing you are constantly recorded and watched and that it all can be played back or checked later (and possibly posted online) is completely damaging to any sort of character development and sense of safety, especially around trying new things and making mistakes. The chilling effects this has cannot be overstated, even for your guests! Your desire to see your pets all the time or be prepared for a possible unconscious person at home overrides none of this, and none of the risks like Life is unpredictable, and these things just appeal to a very scared part of us that we need to deal with differently than "arming up". Your trauma about your previous break-in is understandable, yet needs more substantial treatment than this clown show of a bandaid solution. I think any Ring user deep down is actually aware it is all outside of their control, and that this doesn't even make a dent and is just a farce, but it makes them feel better, and that's all that counts. It's a completely accepted delusion that the rest of us are expected to dance around and tolerate, which is ridiculous and I won't do. Realistically, you all know that there are no reliable stats, no actual proof any of this works, or does something to prevent anything, or help someone. You also know that the wholesome feel-good reasons are nothing compared to the risks. The chances are good that crime rates in your area have lowered since before you even had a camera, and it's not due to it existing. It's hard to prove something didn't happen , of course, but we have had store and street surveillance for quite a while now and it has not deterred crime from taking place. It has not even led to a meaningful amount of recorded crime actually being resolved. It's not in the police's interest to solve your petty bike theft because they are here to secure the property of wealthy people, not yours. Crime is best fought with resources like housing, food, money and education, but that costs more than a few thousand cameras and cannot be used for fascism, racial profiling, non-consensual recording and spying and doesn't supply the prison industrial complex, so of course it is unpopular with governments. What every Ring user is saying is basically: " Fuck society, fuck the political environment this is happening in, fuck you; my feelings matter more than the effect this has on society as a whole. I want the normalization of constant surveillance because I crave control and safety! I love the law and order appeal of literally any piece of media depicting fascism ! " It also hinges on this extremely individualist mindset I see emerge more and more where everyone is just fending for themselves, securing their own resources, and going "I got mine, fuck you." or " Doesn't affect me negatively, so why should I care? ". Everyone is seeking to buy their own McMansion, the further away from others and the higher the fence, the better. They're relying as little as possible on others, paying some stranger for things that usually a family member, friend or neighbor would do for free and have them drop it off without contact on the doorstep. They only interact with others online, and build up an impenetrable fortress together with surveillance everywhere, as if a horde of peasants could come and take away everything you have hoarded and worked for. And in the US of course, with a variety of guns in the home, and a ChildKillerTank5000 SUV in front, because the safety and comfort of the driver is top priority and your goal with driving is to win and survive, not to drive defensively and respectfully in a reasonably sized car. It's ridiculous to see from the outside, because you're building this insular allegedly hypersecure prison for yourself in which you are willing to hand over any piece of possible evidence as a loyal neighborhood spy and as proof you're a good behaved citizen, just because media tells you your biggest threat is other people; yet the biggest threat of our lifetime is climate change, and there is nothing that protects you from it in your fortress, and no one you can bootlick enough to be safe from it. Nothing you can do about the rising heat, dying wildlife, ruined crops, water scarcity, the upcoming climate refugee movements, the floodings, tornadoes and earth quakes that intensify, and so on. You think you can separate yourself from society and from your own choices and its effects and secure yourself, and it's not working. It will never work. And you are also capable of having blood on your hands. But in the meantime, you can make unethical companies like Ring and Flock a little richer, and you can help police and ICE and alike organizations do their kidnapping, killing, discrimination and intimidation more effectively, you can help train AI on people just existing in public, and you can help normalize being recorded everywhere to make a Nazi's wet dream come true. And please, spare me the replies about how everyone else using it is just evil and misusing it while you are an angel using it for good, that you totally agree with all of this yet sadly you just have to do this , reiterating the same tired Ring propaganda I listed above, and yapping some more of why they're actually good and justified in your specific situation and how everyone you know also does it and your grandma just doesn't know any better. I do not care. You have to seek absolution from someone else because I will not read it. That's not me ignoring the other side of the argument, it's me not wasting my time on hearing the same garbage I have heard from several people and online content before. There is nothing you could tell me to change my mind, and I don't care if it's worded nicely or rudely or by a friend or a stranger. God herself could come down and hand me a letter saying all this is good and justified and it would not change. This is something I have an ethically-informed fixed stance on, something you would also have if you had a backbone. Published 02 Sep, 2026 We live in an area with a high crime rate. We had a break-in before. We wanna have proof for insurance/police, or when the delivery isn't delivered or my packages get stolen. I wanna see what my pets/kids/spouse are doing. I wanna check for fires, cheating, make sure things get done around the home etc. Police or undisclosed third parties using the video stream without your knowledge or consent ... or with your consent, to harass people of color and other marginalized groups Hackers gaining access to the video stream and watching you, even in private moments you would not want anyone to see An abusive partner or parent exerting more control via the cameras, and forcing cameras to be hung up even in private rooms Partners recording you during sex or other private moments against your will or without your knowledge, and possibly even disseminating it

marketing Marketing security Security data Data
0 views
ava's blog 2 weeks ago

rose ▪ bud ▪ thorn - august 2026

Published 30 Aug, 2026 I met Suliman ! I'm having a good time playing FFXIV; made it to Heavensward now, excited to play more. My wife gifted me the new Hello Kitty Island Adventure DLC (Tea Garden) and it's been very sweet and calming :) We had a great date day on which we tried out a vegan kebab we had never eaten before, went to a few manga shops, Build-a-Bear, a cinnamonroll shop, and more. My matcha order surprisingly arrived without notice, just in time, when I had used up my last bit of the old an hour or so prior. We went to Gamescom and I found merch of a Sanrio character I like that barely gets any or is never included anywhere; a Mocha plush, and I even pulled Mocha (or rather, Cinnamoroll dressed as Mocha) out of a blindbox too! Plus I paid less than the price tag said for something. The way my wife looked at me when I pulled the small plushie out of the blindbox brings tears to my eyes. It was just so overtly, shockingly full of genuine love and joy for me. I can't even describe how it feels to see someone look at you like that when finally something good happens to you. I think remembering that look will sustain me for the rest of my life. Saw a full rainbow in a pink sky while looking out the window. I got back into journaling for joy, and using up some of the stickers I had accumulated in the months of not doing so. I felt really grateful for a friend reaching out that I hadn't talked to in months and how supportive he was when I told him about my struggles. He independently remembered specific upcoming days I was worried about, and then checked in with me on them to see how I was doing. I am still so surprised that anyone would do that for me, unasked. Generally received kind messages and emails of support, which I am thankful for. Started feeling more like myself again towards the very end of the month. Getting back into my gym routine that I had to pause for health reasons. Regaining my sense of purpose, re-establishing parts of my life that give me a sense of security, a plan to follow, something to work towards. Studying for my degree. I've really fallen off this semester. Finishing up my blog post drafts. There's so much I wanna put out there, but time just keeps running through my hands like fine sand. This has been the worst month of the year for me... yet. What happened this month cannot ever happen to me again. I've had 20+ high heart rate notifications via my smartwatch this month because of anxiety, stress, panic attacks and rumination, mentally spiraling while sitting there doing nothing. I don't usually mention it when I talk about my illnesses because for the past few years, it genuinely did not affect me at all after treatment with EMDR, but I was diagnosed with (C-)PTSD years ago. Something in my life recently triggered it again pretty badly, so this is the fallout. I've spent most of this month trying to exit this hypervigilant state, this feeling of always being in danger or hunted, even when I know I am safe, and trying to implement the coping mechanisms I had learned. It has also made some some other mental health issues reemerge that were never officially diagnosed, and I might need to get on that. Unfortunately, Germany is currently completely gutting psychotherapy... All of that is the reason it's been quiet and I have been very behind on answering emails. I've endured some really weird and off-putting behavior from multiple different people this month; some friends, some acquaintances, but also strangers.

gaming Gaming culture Culture
0 views
ava's blog 2 weeks ago

link dump - catching up on my online reading

While I am slowly getting back up on my feet after a tough time, I am catching up on emails (will still take a bit!), my RSS feed reader, and several newsletters that have accumulated in my inbox. Here's what I picked out to read and share: This Is Capitalism: Apple's Hidden Data Workers at the Shadows of the AI Boom - 19 page paper detailing what data workers actually do and what problems they deal with, written anonymously by a data worker interviewing their colleagues. Parts of the work descriptions remind me of the work in Severance . Is this really a good reason to triple datacentre capacity in Europe? - online blog post tracing where the idea to triple the EU's data centers comes from that is mentioned in several EU AI strategies. Turns out it's from be a blog post from Savills, a commercial real estate firm who profit off of data centers being built. Fake US thinktank set up and funded by Israel sought to game AI for propaganda - AI slop meant to absolutely flood the web to be included in AI training funded by the Israel government to spread disinformation in AI answers. A new force is increasing inequality in America - WaPo article about how AI is not leveling the playing field or bridging the gap between poor and rich, but instead worsening the gap. People making the most use of AI are concentrated in richer urban areas and are already often rather wealthy, while the AI data centers are in poorer neighborhoods and the data workers are often migrants or in the Global South. Rich people can invest into AI and its stock, therefore profiting off of the hype and concentrating even more wealth. An operational framework for AI literacy in the workplace - 15 page paper from Interface EU addressing the vagueness of "sufficient AI literacy" that is often mentioned in EU AI legislation. It proposes a cumulative three-tier framework based on the nature and consequences of a worker's interaction with AI which then dictates the level of literacy required and how to attain/ensure it and measure it. The Quiet Erosion of Collective Action Under Digital Surveillance - article on chilling effects of permanent surveillance and the feeling of constant suspicion which continues to erode activism. Flipping the kill switch: I survived 72 hours without US tech - online article about an experiment to live without reliance on US tech. The US has such a strong monopoly that almost all online services and tech are unusable with this rule. Gone in one click - assessing the socio-economic impact of browser-level consent in Europe - small informative flyer style PDF by the Implement Group showing figures about cookie consent rates and ad industry revenues depending on the mode of consent. Inside the growing vigilante movement to knock out Flock surveillance cameras - online article by The Guardian. I admire these people, and we need more civil disobedience now, everywhere. Not just against Flock; against Meta glasses wearers, against Ring camera owners (Yes, you too! None of you are the "good ones" with "valid" reasons!) and more. There's many ways to affect these devices that you can find online or just get creative with it. Keep yourself safe, don't write about it, don't record yourself doing it, don't discuss it via digital means, leave your devices at home, and leave no fingerprints. Did someone wearing Meta Glasses film you today? Are you sure? - another Guardian online article, this time about the spy glasses and the people who enable hiding the recording light on them. The man behind GhostMeta is actually so vile and disgusting; anything else I could say would violate the Code of Conduct this blog is hosted on. German links: HeißeLuft.org - German website with interactive map showing where AI data centers are planned, in development, and paused, together with information on protests. Made me discover that they are planning on building one not too far away from me... Deutsche Post trainiert ihre KI mit Ausweisfotos - article about how Deutsche Post is training their AI with ID pictures they get via digital identification procedures. It's not voluntary as they claim, as you need to give permission before being allowed to proceed. Verhaltensscanner in Berlin: Harte Kritik an der KI-Überwachung - online article about the new camera installed in Berlin that will analyze all people in that area via AI surveillance software by Adesso, with more cameras to follow. They want to put them up in high crime rate areas , but keep secret what the standards for this are, which enables a mass roll-out of them if they wanted to without any oversight or control. There has already been one mix-up leading to higher crime reported in an area than actually happened. These cameras already also exist in Hamburg and Mannheim. Möglicher AfD-Sieg in Sachsen-Anhalt - online article detailing the fear of queer people and people of color of an upcoming potential win of the AfD in their state. Afd-Gutachten.de - website containing some stats and a PDF report of a legal assessment on the chances of a successful AfD ban. „Gipfel gegen Linksextremismus“: Mit Trump gegen die Antifa - online article about the cooperation of Germany with the US on its fight against antifascism. Unfortunately it has continued, with the German government realigning to focus more on supposed "leftist extremism" and even re-distributing money away from leftist projects, which mostly hits projects aimed at helping queer people and migrants. Wie weit ist Deutschland beim digitalen Gewaltschutz? - an online article about the really embarrassingly low standards of protection against digital violence, especially image-based ones like deepfake nudes and revenge porn, in Germany. Lots needs to be done in general, but especially to even meet the new EU standards. Wer ist für Straftaten der KI verantwortlich? - legal article about the criminal liability of autonomous AI in Germany, and how crimes done by AI agents are pushing the legal system to its limit as we only legislate for humans. Published 29 Aug, 2026 This Is Capitalism: Apple's Hidden Data Workers at the Shadows of the AI Boom - 19 page paper detailing what data workers actually do and what problems they deal with, written anonymously by a data worker interviewing their colleagues. Parts of the work descriptions remind me of the work in Severance . Is this really a good reason to triple datacentre capacity in Europe? - online blog post tracing where the idea to triple the EU's data centers comes from that is mentioned in several EU AI strategies. Turns out it's from be a blog post from Savills, a commercial real estate firm who profit off of data centers being built. Fake US thinktank set up and funded by Israel sought to game AI for propaganda - AI slop meant to absolutely flood the web to be included in AI training funded by the Israel government to spread disinformation in AI answers. A new force is increasing inequality in America - WaPo article about how AI is not leveling the playing field or bridging the gap between poor and rich, but instead worsening the gap. People making the most use of AI are concentrated in richer urban areas and are already often rather wealthy, while the AI data centers are in poorer neighborhoods and the data workers are often migrants or in the Global South. Rich people can invest into AI and its stock, therefore profiting off of the hype and concentrating even more wealth. An operational framework for AI literacy in the workplace - 15 page paper from Interface EU addressing the vagueness of "sufficient AI literacy" that is often mentioned in EU AI legislation. It proposes a cumulative three-tier framework based on the nature and consequences of a worker's interaction with AI which then dictates the level of literacy required and how to attain/ensure it and measure it. Great quote from it: "No evidence yet shows that these trainings work, and three gaps might explain the reason. The first is motive. Corporate training aims at productivity and teaches people to use the tools well, whereas the law cares whether operators understand how systems fail and cause harm. A workforce fluent in prompting can still be illiterate in the sense a regulator means: trained to produce good output, but not to recognise when a model misleads or to know its duties under data-protection and risk rules." The Quiet Erosion of Collective Action Under Digital Surveillance - article on chilling effects of permanent surveillance and the feeling of constant suspicion which continues to erode activism. Flipping the kill switch: I survived 72 hours without US tech - online article about an experiment to live without reliance on US tech. The US has such a strong monopoly that almost all online services and tech are unusable with this rule. Gone in one click - assessing the socio-economic impact of browser-level consent in Europe - small informative flyer style PDF by the Implement Group showing figures about cookie consent rates and ad industry revenues depending on the mode of consent. Inside the growing vigilante movement to knock out Flock surveillance cameras - online article by The Guardian. I admire these people, and we need more civil disobedience now, everywhere. Not just against Flock; against Meta glasses wearers, against Ring camera owners (Yes, you too! None of you are the "good ones" with "valid" reasons!) and more. There's many ways to affect these devices that you can find online or just get creative with it. Keep yourself safe, don't write about it, don't record yourself doing it, don't discuss it via digital means, leave your devices at home, and leave no fingerprints. Did someone wearing Meta Glasses film you today? Are you sure? - another Guardian online article, this time about the spy glasses and the people who enable hiding the recording light on them. The man behind GhostMeta is actually so vile and disgusting; anything else I could say would violate the Code of Conduct this blog is hosted on. HeißeLuft.org - German website with interactive map showing where AI data centers are planned, in development, and paused, together with information on protests. Made me discover that they are planning on building one not too far away from me... Deutsche Post trainiert ihre KI mit Ausweisfotos - article about how Deutsche Post is training their AI with ID pictures they get via digital identification procedures. It's not voluntary as they claim, as you need to give permission before being allowed to proceed. Verhaltensscanner in Berlin: Harte Kritik an der KI-Überwachung - online article about the new camera installed in Berlin that will analyze all people in that area via AI surveillance software by Adesso, with more cameras to follow. They want to put them up in high crime rate areas , but keep secret what the standards for this are, which enables a mass roll-out of them if they wanted to without any oversight or control. There has already been one mix-up leading to higher crime reported in an area than actually happened. These cameras already also exist in Hamburg and Mannheim. Möglicher AfD-Sieg in Sachsen-Anhalt - online article detailing the fear of queer people and people of color of an upcoming potential win of the AfD in their state. Afd-Gutachten.de - website containing some stats and a PDF report of a legal assessment on the chances of a successful AfD ban. „Gipfel gegen Linksextremismus“: Mit Trump gegen die Antifa - online article about the cooperation of Germany with the US on its fight against antifascism. Unfortunately it has continued, with the German government realigning to focus more on supposed "leftist extremism" and even re-distributing money away from leftist projects, which mostly hits projects aimed at helping queer people and migrants. Wie weit ist Deutschland beim digitalen Gewaltschutz? - an online article about the really embarrassingly low standards of protection against digital violence, especially image-based ones like deepfake nudes and revenge porn, in Germany. Lots needs to be done in general, but especially to even meet the new EU standards. Wer ist für Straftaten der KI verantwortlich? - legal article about the criminal liability of autonomous AI in Germany, and how crimes done by AI agents are pushing the legal system to its limit as we only legislate for humans.

ai AI data Data business Business
0 views
ava's blog 3 weeks ago

book: the ethical slut by dossie easton and janet hardy

During my break, I have also read The Ethical Slut . It's been on my list for a while, and I even had a Kindle version I just never got around to read; then I left Amazon years ago and deleted my account, and it seems like my conversion of the EPUBs via Calibre failed or I copied over the wrong files when I did my backup. All my Kindle books are unreadable. Because polyamory and open relationships have become more relevant for me again lately (after being a bit buried by Covid, my illnesses, feeling saturated, not meeting anyone interesting etc.), I chose to get a physical copy this time. In 2018, I read another book about polyamory, called More Than Two by Franklin Veaux and Eve Rickert, published 2014. In retrospect, it was the wrong book to read at the wrong time for me, and while it definitely has its uses and worth, I regret reading it when I did! I went in with an absolutely deep sense of shame and insecurity, which was unintentionally amplified by the book because it's essentially a manual for when troubles arise in non-monogamous relationships, with all kinds of real life examples and tips. It was as if I was scared about taking medicine, and spent days reading package leaflets with all the possible side effects. Did not reassure me at all. I should reread it again with a better mindset. I'm happy to say The Ethical Slut is a lot more upbeat, positive, silly, fun, reassuring and open, and I'd say, not even a book about non-monogamy in general, even if it's on the cover. This is a useful read even for monogamous relationships, because it focuses a lot on destigmatizing and communicating needs in relationships, regardless of how many partners there are or whether the needs are sexual or not. The focus is on living the kind of relationships you want, no matter what the modalities look like, and to get rid of meaningless past fragments and indoctrination and instead do the things you really want to do, irrespective of imposed gender roles, sexual orientation pressures, and more. Many of us simply never question the cultural messaging we get about gender, sexuality, and romantic relationships. I'll also say that if you are a mature-acting adult in healthy relationships, not much in this book will be news to you. There is lots you either already bring to the table, aspire to be, or have learned by yourself via mistakes made. But it's nice to be reaffirmed and get a little reminder! One thing that challenged my previously held beliefs in a surprising way was the framing of serial monogamy as, ironically, a form of of non-monogamy. I'm not saying this is more correct - many would say that the simultaneous involvement is the main point - but I found it an interesting perspective shift to see multiple partners spread across time, as opposed to the ideal of finding one and committing forever, like this. It underlines that many people are already capable of falling in love with different people throughout life, and renegotiating different rules in each relationship, being different with each partner and finding they fulfill different needs in a variety of ways. So all that stands between many monoamorous and polyamorous people is the time overlap between those relationships. Some criticisms I have: While trans people are often mentioned and very much credited for a lot of their work and pioneering many new relationship models and terms, and the book has been updated to include gendervariant identities that were missed in the first two editions of the book to make it, as the authors say, fit to as many sexualities and genders as possible, the entire book still feels very cis-normative in many parts. Especially when it's about lesbians or gay men, there is an implicit assumption that they are all cis, and rather stereotypical assumptions about how their gender is expressed, and these groups being reduced to tropes like "lesbians love longterm monogamy and consent, and gay men love being sexually confident sluts". I also find that especially in the parts about bisexuality, trans people get a lot of ungendering/third gendering done to them, where they are always their separate categories (instead of trans lesbians being included in lesbian sections) or it's like "I am bi or simply queer because I can't know what the person I'm attracted to is biologically " and I feel like this has never even been a good thing to do or say, and if you are updating the book anyway to be more inclusive, just remove that shit. Additionally, I don't care much for the more woo-woo, spiritual, hippie parts of the book, even if they can be amusing or neutral for me to read; like how we all breathe sexual energy, and that it's all around us, and that by them writing about sex and me reading it, we are having sex with each other... it's not my cup of tea personally. And I respect that the book is older, and some parts of the book now mention the internet and social media or even dating apps, but there's a whole section dedicated to how to write a personal ad to find love, and it feels very outdated. I think I could have easily skipped chapter 1 and 2, and only 3 and 4 were really relevant or getting to it. Still, I found myself wanting; while it was entertaining, it sometimes lacked depth for me (both practice and theory), and it often felt a bit too naive to me. It's written from an utopian, aspirational, free love place, in which people are innately good, and never do anything bad to upset you, they'll all understand and see your point of view, and you're capable of feeling love and appreciation for everyone. I feel incapable of coming from such a place, unfortunately, so some parts felt rather needlessly unrealistic to me. I will not like everybody, not everyone will understand me, and people can absolutely be mean, ruthless, unfair, and doing things purposefully to hurt you. I can't "love everyone" myself out of that reality. A lot of things in this book sound fine until you remember how shitty many other people's relationships are and how insecure they are, and how many, many people select the absolute worst people to be their partner, or have absolutely no healthy standards in place. I think you have to be a lot more guarded, careful and selective than the book describes. In my view, it also puts too much responsibility on you to control your emotions and endure them, versus taking them as a deserved warning signal that something is wrong, as if the latter could almost never happen. Your jealousy or envy isn't always something whack and unreasonable to endure until it goes away, or something that can just be resolved with a reassurance talk or additional 1-on-1 time together. Sometimes, you are genuinely treated in a rude way and shouldn't celebrate having "endured" that. Like, on page 152-153, Dossie describes having casually dated a man, telling him she cannot be monogamous, and then when she took him home and her best friend was there, those two just started making out while Dossie sat there staring, not knowing what to do, and in the end opting to go upstairs and read a book until the two left. This was, she writes, her first encounter of surviving jealousy. But in my view, that wouldn't even have been jealousy - just reacting to the rudeness of the other two! It was completely odd and insensitive behavior of the man and her bestie to just do that, without asking her, without involving her, or without them retreating into another space to do that, or making out a date to meet up separately. It's not about the sexual act even, it could have been playing cards while ignoring her, too. I would never celebrate being completely disregarded and ignored as a victory. If people don't give a fuck about your feelings, they should be booted from your life, not you accommodating them for it too. Never applaud yourself for enduring or even enabling disrespect! And it's not the only time in the book where they fail to come down hard on shitty behavior. They absolutely downplay cheating, despite the rest of the book being so full of the value of consent. I would just regard it as "groundbreaking at its time" (1997, then updated in 2009 and 2017) but not holding up well now, not really useful for people who are already on board with non-monogamy, and increasingly irrelevant as more books and online writing is published that is better suited now. Next up in that niche, I'll probably finally read Opening Up: A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships by Tristan Taormino, and Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality by Christopher Ryan. But not that soon. Published 25 Aug, 2026

books Books writing Writing
0 views
ava's blog 4 weeks ago

thinking about friendships

Currently taking stock of my social life, and throughout life, the same patterns emerge. I’ve always been a more solitary person. I’m an only child, and my parents were rather neglectful and homebodies as well; so we never really went on trips, they never took me to the playground or anything. I played in my room, alone. I went out to play in the shared garden by myself, I went to playgrounds and forests alone (I grew up in a small town/village). I occasionally played with other kids I met outside, but not always. I have always preferred my hobbies to be something I don’t need other people for and that I can just start on my own, whenever, exactly because of the way I am and how I grew up. At kindergarten, there was one other child I talked to and played with, and absolutely no one else. If she wasn’t in that day, I’d just be alone. I couldn’t stand anyone else. Having anyone over or having to bring me to any other kid’s place was always treated as this impossible task by my mother, and would result in her being mad at me and abusing me, so I soon just didn’t ask for that anymore most of the time. I didn’t wanna cause any issues. Later on, it meant a lot that I was able to help out at horse stables, earn riding lessons, and have community there. Adults who trusted me, a topic to bond over with people (esp. people my age), a shared interest, shared responsibility. I wasn’t ever enrolled in any team sports or anything, so that is the closest I had. I’m no longer involved in equestrian sports for a multitude of reasons, but I’m glad it was there for me back then. At least I could socialize there. School was a sensory nightmare for me, extremely draining, overstimulating. My skin felt like it was raw, every sound felt like nails on a chalkboard. I had to use the breaks between classes to retreat to a quiet place and recover before the next class, but this also meant never hanging out with people between classes. The few times I tried, standing with others in these giant halls, people talking loudly and screaming and laughing everywhere around us, I just zoned out. I could barely listen or think of anything to say because everything was too loud. Then I entered the next class regretting how I spent my break. I always thought things would improve with time. Next year, or when I reach university, and so on. But it never did. At my first university, I tried hard to make friends and attend events, but most connections simply fizzled out, and people dropped out. It didn’t help that I could otherwise barely interact with university life; the public transport home stopped at 9pm (bad for parties!), and other than that, my mother used our dog to guilt trip and control me all the time. I was going in for a class or two and otherwise staying home for him. I could never stay after class for lunch or going to a café together because she’d be throwing a fit and I relied on her for housing. After that, I started a traineeship with some school parts. It started promisingly, and I indeed felt like people liked me in class. Unfortunately, trying to see anyone outside of it was like pulling teeth; I tried to organize hangouts at the park, barbecues, game evenings at my place etc., but most never materialized. I think some people showed up at my place once, some cancelling shortly prior, the few coming like 1-2h late and leaving early. It never happened again. After the traineeship ended, we all dispersed and didn’t keep contact with one another. Surely, things would improve with full time work, right? Not really. It’s harder to bond with coworkers who are either much, much older or live a very different life in general, especially with kids, houses, vacations. I know what to ask them, and I do - is your aunt feeling better? How is your kid? Did he pass the difficult exam? What summer vacation are you planning/how was Egypt? How’s the garden project coming along? But they don’t know what to ask me, and I totally get why. They can’t ask me about things they bond to each other about, and they don’t understand anything about me. Sometimes they ask if my wife found a job yet, and I still have to give the same answer, and then that’s it. I share stuff about myself, but am never asked about that. I thought things would change when a new, similarly young coworker started here and got seated in my office. I put a lot of effort into being her guide, showing her everything, helping with the start, complimenting her work, bringing her coffee one time (which she didn’t touch for the entire day and then probably dumped, woohoo), spending lunch together, and all that. But now, 2.5 years or so later, I have to admit it failed again. I make sure to always ask about how she is today or how her weekend was when I come in, I share stuff from my life to signal openness and to give her something to ask about or something, but it doesn’t help. We greet each other, say we feel alright, complain about public transport, and then spend 6-8h in complete silence in the same room until one of us leaves for the day. There is no ease, no jokes, no conversations emerging inbetween. I also feel like when we have good weeks where I try extra hard and it flows better, it takes just one office day of being a little more quiet, or just a week of time off or sick, and then I have to start at zero again. I feel that way about lots of people, as if my progress with them is constantly reset by something. Everyone else seems to bond just fine with her (and vice versa) despite the age difference and different lifestyle, so I guess it really wasn’t that; it was just me. I often have to rely on a group setting at work to find out stuff because people will just not tell me much directly for some reason. Now that I have been in an online/distance university since 2022, there is even less contact with other students. Everyone I befriended in the beginning or had a study group with dropped out and disappeared. I no longer even join any groups or interact much because it’s pointless; I study the material, do the exams, and that’s it. All alone, no one to talk to about it, no one to ask or practice with. It’s easier that way than dealing with the flakiness. In general, I think I just don’t seem to read people correctly, or I put too much stock in what they say or do, somehow, and expect it to follow the indicated pattern? This year I suggested meeting up at a conference in a group, someone else made a group chat for that meetup, people joined voluntarily, and then I didn’t see most of them because they made no effort actually making plans in that group chat or reacting to my efforts to meet up. No feedback, no replies, no “sorry can’t make it”, just silence. You’d think there’s interest when people accept the idea, make a group and join it, but apparently I must have misread the intentions somehow. In the era of nonchalance, I guess it’s my fault for showing interest and enthusiasm. I’ve also noticed that online friends, especially the ones more far away, and general real life friends that live very far away (because you or they moved away) make much more of an effort. They text more, they make online plans, they make an effort to meet irl when it fits. Meanwhile people local to me… you might as well not exist. I’ve tried to change LGS/Magic the Gathering connections into something deeper and broader, and it just fails. I make an effort to ask people about their interests, they don’t ask back. I make an effort to note that someone’s cat has been sick, and to check back in about the cat’s health later, and get completely ignored. Or the usual “This was great, we should do this again soon!” and then you’re the only one trying. My wife and I are really great hosts. We have an option for guests to stay in my wife’s apartment. We stock the fridge for them. We bake cookies and gift people bread we bake. We cook great meals for people when they visit. We have a decent collection of boardgames and card games we invite people over to play, or bring to their place. We can watch your pets while on vacation, we can water your plants, we can bring you soup when you’re sick. We’re happy to go to museums and cafes and other stuff with you. But for some reason, actually establishing all that is painfully hard with local people. People love to complain about a loneliness epidemic, but at this point, I consider that many people just wanna be lonely and make no effort to change that, or are saturated with what they have, or don’t actually have what it takes to build and maintain a “village” (“It takes a village”, if you want a village you have to be willing to be a villager and help, yada yada). Me too, probably; there seems to be something wrong with me, it’s probably my autism. But at least I try, which is more than I can say for most people who live close. Right now, almost all friends I have are through my wife. They are hers, or ours, but never just mine. I even “lost” people to her when I introduced them. The vast majority of days, the only person I talk to in real life is my wife. 1 of 2 office days per week, I don’t say a single word at the office because I don’t see anyone; everyone is in their own little room, and my team mates are not there. I don’t really grocery shop, and when I do, I use the self checkout. Cashier contact gives me nothing. Anywhere in public, no matter if shops or public transport, I don’t get these sort of whimsical stranger interactions others do. I make a joke and people don’t get it or don’t hear it, people say something to me in public and I am too surprised to say something of value or anything that would keep the conversation going, and the moment passes. The same happens in work hallways or the work kitchen. I chat occasionally via Matrix or Signal, and that’s it. Every other month or three, we play Magic with some people and I get to socialize. Or friends from far away come visit. But other than that, nothing. And I don’t think anything is gonna change that. I don’t understand people, and they don’t understand me. The only times it has ever really worked reliably is if they were romantically or sexually interested. There is always this invisible wall between me and other people, and in many cases, an effort mismatch and an importance mismatch. I’m at a point where I might just accept it; hold the people close who really love and understand me, and otherwise be content with my solitary little hobbies and special interest. At least those can’t leave and aren’t unavailable. It just sucks when everyone you rely on so much (because you don’t have many others), have what feels like a sea of people available to them. You always have to share them, but they never have to share you. Published 18 Aug, 2026

Psychology writing Writing culture Culture
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

shop milking their customers for social media content

I'm really conflicted between naming and shaming this store, and not wanting to help them with more traffic for their rancid business model. For now, I have not redacted the social media handle in the picture. In Cologne, Germany, there is a kiosk that has switched owners, and now greets you with the following poster at the door: Picture by andi_808 Your appearance at @(socialmediahandle) @(socialmediahandle) is a Social-Media-Kiosk. That means we produce video material showing life during our opening times. By entering, you accept that your appearance at @(socialmediahandle) is recorded with video and audio, saved and used for @(socialmediahandle) material. That is the goal. By entering of the @(socialmediahandle) as a person of legal age, you participate in it and give us (Company name) the right to use the recorded material of you irrespective of time and location for the following uses: Distribution and reproduction, making the recorded content publicly accessible, and broadcasting the recorded content as part of our social media channels and streaming services and on other corresponding platforms (in particular, but not exclusively, on the TikTok, Instagram and YouTube channels), and on TV, live, on demand and/or in edited form. Archiving — all by (company name) and/or by third parties. This also applies to the promotion of our own products and services, as well as the promotion of products and services of third parties using the recordings made. There is no entitlement to the exploitation or publication of the material produced. Read? Agreed? Then buzzer now! By pressing the button, you agree that you agree to the above conditions. By letting you into the kiosk, we accept your agreement. Next to the door seems to be a green little buzzer. On their online presence, they clarify that there will be live events, surprises, vertical mini-series with "microdrama", aiming for "real moments with customers - unscripted, spontaneous, authentic and opinionated". They aim for producing reality TV content. I am baffled that someone thought this was a great idea. First off, this notice is not telling customers about their GDPR/BDSG rights, which you need to do when you film an area as a business. People need to know that they have rights, particularly right to access, rectification, erasure, restriction of processing, and more. It's not telling people how long the data is stored. There is no proper contact information on who to contact to enforce these rights as is mandated, which is another failure. Second, this notice and the modalities of how you are being informed are lacking for people with visual impairments, children (especially because they do mention they only want adults, but children entering will most likely still be recorded, even if it won't be used, and children have special protections under the GDPR), and people who otherwise cannot consent. As this is not just for security purposes, like a normal CCTV surveillance system used in almost any store, but instead is supposed to be (manipulated) content for potentially millions to see, I see a heightened need to inform people via other means, even verbally inside the store. I'd also be curious to know whether AI will be used or not, and whether people agree to also give their likeness for that, or to be associated with product ads this way. Third, lets think about the customer base for kiosks. There will be children buying candy, chips and sugary drinks, of course, and many people just buying magazines, cigarettes and the like in a mundane way; but many, many times, these shops are also the main hub for homeless people, people suffering from alcoholism, and more. Poor people who are seen as Asoziale , based on fulfilling stereotypes like being from a migrant family, dressing in sweats, talking a certain way, chain-smoking, being seen as unintelligent, violent, with no ambition. It's always been fair game to many people here to make fun of people they deem inferior like this. So what is the entertainment value supposed to be here? You wanna make fun of Renate and that she buys 5 packs a day? You wanna milk a homeless guy's heartbreaking story for clout? You wanna show how the local alcoholic deteriorates within months? It's extremely clear that they are searching for content that as a German, you'd otherwise see on RTL2 reality TV formats, or the BILD newspaper. The fact that the company markets this under the guise of "funny feminism" and that it's for the "Girls, Gays, and Theys" is disgusting. You wanna expose these groups to absolutely disgusting comment sections and turn them into a spectacle to be gawked at? Women to be slutshamed, gay men to be called slurs, trans and nonbinary people ridiculed? I don't know what to say. You aren't woke, you aren't funny, you aren't cool, you aren't an ally. The main motive is to exploit vulnerable people, cut together compromising and dramatic stuff, expose and embarrass people and earn money doing it. People just wanna shop at the closest kiosk, yet now have to go elsewhere because otherwise, they might get a shitstorm in a comment section they can't control, because they were coaxed into some kinda reaction of wore the wrong clothes or bought something deemed odd or bad. Even if the video with them in it does well and is nice, what's the payoff? You are the product, with no compensation! You pay them money for a product and then they try and make even more money off of you! Social media has rotted the kiosk owner's brain and made them see other people as mere opportunities to go viral, no matter what that could possibly mean for them. I hope no one ever enters that store again, and I hope more people alert the LDI NRW to the absolute carelessness of people's privacy rights. This business model should not survive. I don't care that people can just opt not to go in if it bothers them. I think this is a threat not every customer can correctly interpret and decide on, it is predatory, and I don't want this to become a trend and my shopping experience to turn into someone's entertainment and money source. Published 17 Aug, 2026

programming Programming
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

book: muskism by quinn slobodian and ben tarnoff

Another book I finished in July was Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed by Quinn Slobodian and Ben Tarnoff. It argues that instead of seeing Musk as an individual or even an exceptional outlier, he should be seen as a symptom of a bigger playbook, something other forces in society brought forward and shaped. Just like Henry Ford is where Fordism gets the name, the authors argue that Muskism is an ideology based on Elon Musk. Musk primarily sells a fantasy: That, if they buy into his walled garden, both individuals and states can be self-reliant, uninterrupted by grid failures, geopolitics and more. This is sold as techno-sovereignty, when it actually makes them rely on Musk himself. He depends on perpetual hype, online trolling/meme warfare, state symbiosis and financial fabulation to convince the public and for his businesses to even survive. In Muskism, everything is code, undesirable people are bugs, and empathy is an exploit. There is a huge focus on vertical integration, lean production, Agile-like processes and being anti-union. Sovereignty is seen as infrastructure instead of just territory, and is much more decided by access to bandwidth, compute, and orbital real estate. Governments everywhere are reliant on few companies to ensure their duties. The authors dive in deep into Musk's personal history: Joshua Haldeman, his maternal grandfather, wrote for the Technocracy Incorporated journal and dreamed of a future in which society was run under the dictatorship of engineers who would allocate resources according to scientific principles. After Canada banned Technocracy in 1940, he emigrated to South Africa with Elon's mother Maye; two years after the National Party introduced apartheid. That is where the embrace of technology as facilitator of self-reliance and hardening of racial inequalities started happening with support from IBM, Ford, and Toyota, as their tech was used, among other things, to count, track, and reallocate Black laborers, enable homegrown industries and nuclear weapons. South Africa was an early "biometric state", where the "Book of Life" identification system recorded racial classifications of every citizen. Pretoria, where Musk was born in 1971, was a prime example of fortress futurism, as it housed the executive offices and government buildings that instated and managed apartheid. As other groups were pushed to segregated townships on the outskirts, the white elite, including Musk, lived in wealthy suburbs like Waterkloof. Black labor was able to be cast aside or drawn from quickly, and entire communities were displaced for cheap industrial sites. Musk's family directly benefited from all of it, and it set the tone for the way Muskism sees most people: As faceless laborers in the background, ready to be added or deleted at a whim, as "NPCs", as he loves to call people. Many of his pursuits relied on state creations and tax payer money: Using free military GPS data for Zip2 maps, using the federally ensured stability of the US financial system for online banking (his attempt at the earlier version of X.com and his resulting PayPal involvement), and the internet, a technology invented by the government. He later grafted himself onto the state via his companies gaining a lot of government contracts: Using the increased military spending and visions of network-centric warfare after 2001 to launch small satellites via SpaceX, and then subsequently getting a $8 million, then a $100 million contract by the DARPA and the Air Force in 2004 and 2005 to build rockets and provide low-cost orbital launch vehicles and services, plus a COTS contract of $278 million in 2006, to name just a few. Later on, this provided the money and power in space to bring Starlink to life, which by 2025, made up about two thirds of all active satellites and is available in over a 100 countries. It also got plenty of government contracts and subsidies, one being $900 million for internet in rural US areas, and a $1.8 billion contract in 2021 for Starshield, a military version of Starlink. Tesla fared the same way, using the fear of foreign oil, the War on Terror and the resulting green/clean tech boom post 2001 to get massive financial funding from the government. According to the book, Diarmuid O'Connell, former chief of staff for George W. Bush's assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs lobbied for Musk and got Tesla a $465 million loan from the Department of Energy in 2008 (under the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program), as without it, Tesla likely would have gone bankrupt. Which means: Taxpayer dollars went to a company that produced a basically unaffordable 100k car with fewer than 200 units in existence back then, just to bail it out. xAI is going the same way of using government money: In July 2025, they announced that they have entered a contract with the Department of Defense to offer a suite of AI products to them. The goal for Musk has always been that governments can only exercise their authority by purchasing services from a monopoly provider, which he tries to be, and at least with SpaceX, is. If the government cedes its sovereignty to an immense degree, it would be forced to buy it back in increments from corporations. Via this government contractor route, his companies can also evade compliance with some regulations. The authors also draw connections between Musk's favorite media and his business decisions as well as product names and more, especially The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy , Star Trek , Battlestar Galactica , Transformers and Robotech . He would grow obsessed with the idea of colonizing space, and with becoming one with the machine, which can be seen not only with Neuralink, but him saying that to avoid AI killing humanity, humanity has to become one with AI. He co-founded OpenAI with Altman over his AI fears. 2022 is when he increasingly started to share right-wing viewpoints, especially talking about the "woke mind virus". For the first time, he seemed to be very pre-occupied with the problem that, in his previously ideal solution of a merged together, cybernetic intelligence cluster of half human, half AI population, there's a risk that the system could become infected. In an interview, he shared his personal horror scenario, in which AI nannies would go around, see that there are too many white men in power, and go kill some - kill him. His fear is that for once, instead of always targeting other groups, he could be targeted and treated like he has treated them, because of rules that infected everyone's mind and turned them against him; rules that he has no control over. This fantasy is also what got him to buy Twitter, use it as a training ground and invent Grok, the "non-woke" AI and its Grokipedia. It's his idea of a safeguard against an army of AI coming to the conclusion that people like him need to be eradicated. He constantly influences the training data (by pushing his tweets artificially and giving them wider reach) and the training itself (by suddenly proclaiming that Grok is giving too woke answers, and adjusting, leading to events like the MechaHitler outburst). Despite his transhumanist ambitions, he does not consider modifying ones body within a gender transition as a good thing. A merger with AI could be dissolving the boundary between the natural and artificial, but it might open other boundaries like gender to be redrawn. But he actually wants to strengthen traditional social hierarchies, so a humanity segmented by gender, race and class is still possible. Don't forget: One reason why he hates his daughter's transition is because he does IVF sex selection and paid specifically for a male sex. He wants total power over how people function and live. His takeaway from South Africa's apartheid is that some humans are born to rule, others to be ruled, and these are the markers needed for that. That was also a big motivator behind DOGE: See the government as a platform, eliminate information silos that were there to ensure legal and privacy safeguards for privileged information, and then prepare systematic overreach, misuse and surveillance by working on ways to integrate information of different agencies into one database, to better "purge" unwanted people. For example, via the SSA's death master file, which cut off people's access to credit cards and bank accounts by declaring them dead - a form of "financial murder", where the goal was either for people to die or to "self-deport". Efficiency, in this case, became an excuse for centralization, and the Trump administration had no problem with it as it further advanced their own goals and made Musk the fall guy, as he got the blame while most things stayed the same. This entire climate paved the way for Palantir's $30 million ImmigrationOS contract with ICE, which promises near real-time visibility for non-citizens. He relies on this sort of oppression to make his businesses and lifestyle possible. To just name one example: The data center in Memphis powering Grok is in a historically Black neighborhood that originated as a community for emancipated slaves (cheap opportunity for him) and the facility's methane gas turbines emit pollutants linked to asthma, respiratory diseases, heart issues, and cancer. You can be sure that this would not be built in the kind of areas Musk grew up in. This is also visible in his increasing focus on fertility and population numbers, alleging a white genocide or a "Great Replacement". Fertility is actually fine in many countries; it's just not the right countries for him, as they aren't white. This is another remnant of his South African upbringing, in which white politicians in the apartheid era warned of being swamped by Black people and wanted to win the "cradle race" by boosting white fertility, and where it was normal for white people to live in their own settlements and schools away from the rest (as he does, with his own schools for his children). It actually is at odds with the rest of his views, as he keeps talking about robot descendants, merging with AI, and that within the next decade, humanoid robots will outnumber humans ten to one. He seems to facilitate a different kind of replacement, and it leaves you wondering what the supposed difference is between an AI-merged, cybernetically enhanced Black man and a white man, or whether human or robot does the "replacement". Why do white birth rates matter if they are going to be surpassed by robots, and if human labor will be less and less needed in his view? Towards the end of the book, the authors suggest 4 ways Musk could move forward - either a return to clean tech and electrification ("Carbon Musk", unlikely), even more state symbiosis ("Contractor Musk", inspired by Palantir's current successes), focusing harder on segregating from the rest via schools/settlements and on his white genocide bullshit ("Compound Musk", inspired by Bezos and Jon Lonsdale doing the same), or doubling down on AI and robots ("Cyborg Musk", with more Neuralink stuff). The book ends with an idea of what the ideal Muskism future could look like, slightly exaggerated at times I think, for comedic effect? Or because our future has sincerely become ridiculous? I can't tell. But I'm glad I read it. Published 10 Aug, 2026

business Business books Books culture Culture
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

playing the mass effect board game

As a Mass Effect fan, and I am very grateful that my wife gifted me the ( relatively new) board game Mass Effect: Priority Hagalaz :) I am completely smitten with it! You can tell so much thought and love went into it by a huge fan who knows their stuff. The gameplay was translated so well to this format, and the characters and their abilities stay very true to the games. Nothing feels weirdly renamed, missing, or wrong, or too vague. Nothing feels like they had to compromise. All materials are beautifully printed on thick, glossy paper with amazing artwork, consisting of three spiral bound booklets and separate character and scenario sheets to track stuff on. The dice feel great, the tokens are sturdy, you have six character minifigs that are nice, two card stacks that look and feel high quality, and you get a little sack with the Alliance symbol on it and a marker pen with the Mass Effect label on it. Just feels like they went the extra mile with some little details they knew fans would love :) The concept is less a static boardgame, but a whole campaign you can play through with different paths, missions and outcomes. Instead of having to build a map via different physical parts or a map you unfold in each scenario, you open the specific map page in one of the spiral bound books and play on that. Less mess, cooler maps! You use the included colorful stones and marker to track skill progress, XP and unlocked abilities on the character sheets, as well as the tracker for each scenario for what you did or didn't do, and the tracker for the whole campaign. Thanks to the glossy/laminated finish, you can just remove the markings on any material so you can easily play again. There are different starting missions, character loyalty missions, and depending on your choices (what missions to do, who is loyal, how many War Points you get, if you play the scenario as more Paragon or Renegade, etc.) you get different sections in the Story Book, so it's a little like a "Make Your Own Adventure" book where it says " If you did this, continue reading at xyz, if you did the other, read abc ". This is so amazing for replayability! Gameplay-wise, it is easy to get into, but hard to succeed initially. It takes you a bit to get to know how the game expects you to behave and what you should focus on, and it can be difficult. If you do not focus on taking out at least 1-2 enemies each turn of a character (or at least weakening them), you will quickly be completely overrun as new enemies spawn frequently and existing ones get activated after each character turn. While shields recover, health only recovers with medigels you may find in the scenario. Just like the real game, characters love to go down and have to be revived (lol). If Shepard goes down, the scenario fails. As it was our first run through one of the possible routes of the campaign, we gave each other a bit of grace. There were a few moments where we realized we had played wrong (discovering a new rule or that we had applied it wrong, like for example, realizing later that you cannot split movements on the same die), and then either decided to do it right from that moment on, or create a map state as close as possible to how it would have been if we had been playing right. In the Loyalty Mission for Garrus, there's the option to actually monumentally fuck up Shepard's position in a way that completely traps them and makes moving away without dying impossible based on how the map is structured in that spot and due to a specific boss spawning. We agreed that if we had known this trap could occur when the enemy spawns, we would not have positioned Shepard this way or made her run away immediately. As we didn't wanna start over because of this incredibly niche problem/beginner mistake, we agreed to reset to an earlier boardstate as best as possible where Shepard wasn't standing in that horrible spot. I know it's technically cheating, but we really wanna focus on getting to know the game and progressing forward in the story as best as we can while learning :p I'm not sure a non-Mass Effect fan would like it as much; maybe the gameplay isn't convincing enough to stand on its own without the game relation. But for me, it's so fun to get back into a world with these characters again. I love it, and there are expansions announced for it, too! I hope they aren't cancelled, would love to have and play them. Published 08 Aug, 2026

ui UI ai AI
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

letting an LLM write an indie web parody post

There's certain topics and writing styles that do really well on the indie web; especially on Bearblog's Trending page. There are enough joking and seriously annoyed posts about it every now and then. We cannot stop talking about how tech is bad, analog media is good, blogging is good, and how good RSS is. I was wondering whether LLMs are trained on enough data from here to generate a post that would do really well, and is realistic, while also parodying us bloggers a little. So I prompted: Generate a short to medium sized stereotypical post that could be posted on bearblog.dev that could easily reach Trending, to parody how always the same topics get recycled in the indie web. Make it a little satirical/over the top, but still realistic, just enough to let the viewer know it is a joke, but still enough that it is something someone would really post. And it delivered. Behold. A few weeks ago I archived my notes, closed my 137 browser tabs, and deleted the app that was supposed to organize the apps that organized my life. Nothing happened. The sun still came up. My coffee still got cold because I was busy reading something interesting instead of optimizing my morning routine. I've started carrying a small notebook again. It's imperfect. The pages wrinkle. My handwriting is terrible. But somehow that feels... human? The modern web keeps asking us to produce, optimize, engage, and monetize. The old web just asked us to make a weird page about something we cared about. That's why I like small websites. No algorithm. No growth strategy. No personal brand. Just people quietly existing on the internet. Maybe the future isn't another platform. Maybe it's RSS. Maybe the best software is software that gets out of your way. Maybe the best note-taking app is the one you stop thinking about. Anyway, thanks for reading. If this resonated with you, I'd love to hear your thoughts on your own little corner of the web. A little sidenote at the end roasted us: The parody works because nearly every paragraph contains a familiar indie-web trope: deleting productivity tools, rediscovering notebooks, criticizing algorithms, romanticizing the old web, ending with RSS, making broad philosophical claims from a minor lifestyle change, and closing with a gentle invitation for conversation. making broad philosophical claims from a minor lifestyle change Well, that answered my question. And this marks my first and only (partially) AI-generated post on my blog. Don't worry, I think that will be my last. If you want to check out my stance on AI, here is my tag for it . Published 07 Aug, 2026

programming Programming ai AI
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

seeing the person behind the piece

Edit: This post was being rapidly upvoted by bots for some reason. The issue has been fixed and the fake upvotes removed. Something I noticed as a consequence of online culture and platform design, especially on social media: It is very common online to follow an account not for the person behind it, but the way they present and discuss a topic or niche, even if they aren’t doing this with a professional intent or style. Then when the topics shift or we get tired of the person, people try to find someone else that scratches the itch. It’s like we use people online to engage with topics by proxy, and they are rather replaceable. We don’t just watch crochet videos, we watch this specific person crochet, but not for her as a person, and so on. People seem to have roles to fill in terms of who they follow, and they’ll move on if the role is no longer adequately filled, or the roles change. Feeds are highly curated; too many posts considered off-topic and you are ruining the vibe. In my experience, on the personal web, I really enjoy the culture of people being genuinely interested in learning about someone else. Seems like the general question is “ What’s that person up to? ” There is a wish to see life from the perspective of them, read their diary, explore their interests through their lens, and an acceptance that this person doesn’t necessarily write for you, but more likely for themselves (or at least, also for themselves). From the responses I get via e-mail or blog posts, people seem to respect that this is the specific situation of a stranger, and they’ll compare it with their own. There is a distinct separation. Yet, when my posts breach containment and land on link aggregators or social media, a different crowd shows up. In my experience, people coming from, and heavily using, social media that lets you reshare (reblog/retweet etc) a post onto your own profile tend to read posts as if they are meant to be self-inserts. What I mean is: Every post or article they come across is read as if they are judging whether this crosses a threshold of when they feel like sharing it onto their profiles to be like “ that’s soooo me! ”. Because that’s what happens with, I’d say, most reshares you put your name and picture to: You adopt what this person said and say it too. People find your profile and see everything you reshared as an endorsement, as something you re-say with your own voice. And when this type of person reads my posts, it feels like they do so with tunnel vision, with completely disregarding anything that doesn’t fit into how they see themselves and their own situation. They just wanna plunder my posts for parts that fit enough, so they can plaster it across their feeds as something that represents them, and are mad when there is something in there that is too different from their experience, something they wouldn’t co-sign… and therefore just ignore it or dismiss it, or accuse me of lying. Their responses, while almost never super rude, are at least not empathetic enough in the sense that they write criticisms as if I told a lie about their own life; a life that is extremely different to mine. It seems like for this type of person, the human being behind it doesn’t count at all. Every “content” someone puts out is a meme; further ammo to use to further their view on their own situation, or as self-promotion on their own internet presences. The source is forgettable and irrelevant, because in 5 minutes, they’ll find the next thing to consume. Single use entertainment. It’s just words written by someone else to take into their mouth and spit at the feed 1 , and maybe get upvotes and likes for something they had no hand in. I wouldn’t even mind as much, if it wouldn’t result in a completely warped picture of what I wrote about or what the conclusion is, while posing self-confidently as an expert in the comments trying to give advice or “correct” my experience. And people challenging those is rare because everyone is tired of beefing with random strangers over semantics. Did all this come from the way we are expected to engage with professional content creators who decidedly make mass-appeal content you are support to insert yourself in, and we end up applying it to almost everyone online? How do we feel being treated like a TV channel or magazine? You can be an inspiration, a pastime and distraction to someone; how does that make you feel? Can you withstand the pressure to box yourself in so you are more fitting for the role? Are you beating yourself up for falling short of a label you applied to your blog? Are you already thinking of the brand you have inadvertently built? Are you ready to tear it down over and over again? Published 06 Aug, 2026 Feeds I cannot even properly access or see, because they are all on extremely locked down Mastodon instances which are either completely inaccessible or unusable (bad or no search/content navigation) without an account, which genuinely pisses me off a lot. It's similar to how much info is locked inside Discord servers. You all profit from posting easily accessible public stuff like my blog, but the people create that stuff out cannot even take a peek what you're saying about them. So much for the "better alternatives" and being "open". It's not more open to me than Instagram or X, who also wall their content to death. At least be so kind and send me a direct link via mail, since search engines don't even pick it up either. ↩ Feeds I cannot even properly access or see, because they are all on extremely locked down Mastodon instances which are either completely inaccessible or unusable (bad or no search/content navigation) without an account, which genuinely pisses me off a lot. It's similar to how much info is locked inside Discord servers. You all profit from posting easily accessible public stuff like my blog, but the people create that stuff out cannot even take a peek what you're saying about them. So much for the "better alternatives" and being "open". It's not more open to me than Instagram or X, who also wall their content to death. At least be so kind and send me a direct link via mail, since search engines don't even pick it up either. ↩

media Media culture Culture programming Programming
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

show respect - name things correctly

I occasionally come across people who call themselves “almost vegan” “practically vegan” “99% vegan” and similar descriptions. The reasons for that are usually casual in nature: They still want to enjoy grandma’s great cake, they don’t wanna cause a ruckus at the company barbecue, and when it’s pizza night, they can’t say no to a good cheese. But other than that - plantbased. And they quickly want to convey that to someone. I still want to urge others to be precise with language. We have words for “almost vegan”. They’re “vegetarian”, or, depending how you mean it, “flexitarian”. When you say you are vegetarian, people will understand that you refuse to consume certain animal products, but still eat some. When you label yourself a flexitarian, it suggests to others that you made the decision to reduce the animal products you consume, but you still consume them. Meanwhile, “vegan” is more restrictive. It is supposed to tell the listener that the person avoids consuming animal products as far as is possible and practicable. People like to forget the latter part, but this is the exception needed for emergencies, medicine and similar pressing matters. And this also applies to non-food items, something I don’t see many vegetarians practicing. When you are saying you are “ basically vegan, but still eat xyz ”, you are making things complicated for others, and reduce the lifestyle choice to merely food intake. I’ve been vegan since 2019. Education about different ways to eat/live is still lacking, and I’ll still encounter people who have trouble keeping vegan and vegetarian apart. “ You eat no animal products? What about eggs? And fish? Wow, no fish! And what about milk? ” and I think, unfortunately, one puzzle piece of it is that what vegetarians do seems willfully inconsistent to most omnivorous people, and makes it hard for them to remember who eats what. They wonder: “ If meat is so unethical, why not milk and eggs too, coming from similar conditions? Why still choose to eat fish, when that is also an animal carcass, and technically meat? ” And then you come on top, saying you’re vegan but still eat this or that animal product, adding to the confusion. You’re then becoming the person people bring up to me like “ But so-and-so is vegan and still eats cheese! ”. Please don’t further add to confusion. Make it easy for people to understand your boundaries and lifestyle, make it easy for them to cook and bake for you if they want to do that. I’ve been wondering: What makes the vegan label so attractive to people who are not vegan? After all, vegans are not very popular. Some people will know none personally, yet have a passionate (hateful) opinion about them. Others invent weird strawmen of the hypocritical vegan who preaches to others and yet flies 200 days a year while gorging themselves on avocados and almonds. Allegedly, the vegan will harass anyone at the table, brings the mood down and makes everyone uncomfortable. They’re extremists and privileged, some say veganism is classist and racist. So what is there to gain? I hypothesize that deep down, surprisingly many people actually have no problem with veganism and think it is good, and that they’d also live that way if it was easier for them - maybe cheaper products, better recipes, better replacement products, better and bigger selection of vegan products everywhere, normalized in society, their caregivers agree to enable it, possible with their illness or allergies, and so on. So they do what they can (for example, becoming vegetarian), but reach their current limit. It hurts though, to be aware of an ideal you have and falling short of it. You know what you think is right, yet you feel hindered from acting like it. This dissonance is unbearable at times, especially when you see others living the life you want to live, or feel like you have to justify yourself in front of others whenever this topic comes up (vegans can tell you all about this awful stage before they finally made the jump!). It usually goes as follows: Person makes an impassioned speech about how eating animals is wrong, and to not seem like a total hypocrite, they follow it up with “I am basically vegan”. It’s supposed to convey: I am almost there, this is just an embarrassing temporary situation, I totally know what’s right, and these exceptions shouldn’t count much! They’re practically non-existent! But I don’t think this is serving you well. In the moment, it saves you some embarrassment and makes you feel better about falling short of your ideal, but further on, it just minimizes your actions and doesn’t hold you to the standards you want to fulfill. It protects you from facing the fact that, yes, no matter how strongly you have reduced anything, you are still by definition a vegetarian (or flexitarian), which means you eating cheese once a week falls under the same umbrella term as vegetarian Aunt Emma who still eats eggs and milk daily and fish on Fridays. It feels unfair, but that is how it is. I also understand that it feels better for some people to claim the harsher, more extreme, more difficult label (in anything, really) because there is some clout in it. You might want the image of being someone who is doing something that is uncommon and regarded as difficult, someone that is going against the grain to do something good; you want the valor, and maybe you wanna come off as morally superior. But you cannot get the valor without doing the work. Your friends still see you eating that kebab while drunk, no matter what you say otherwise. You’re losing credibility, and people might come to the conclusion that you don’t practice what you preach. Plus, you are not going to build rapport with vegans when you do this, no matter if you might do this to impress them. It comes down to respect for me. If you want to acknowledge that veganism is worth doing, but it is difficult and you cannot do it right now, then leave the label to those who can, and acknowledge where you fall short. This isn’t about punishing people who do what they can - even little counts - but about using language correctly, and making it easy for people to understand your habits and lifestyle. You would also not seriously say any of the following: (Though I have to say, saying them as a joke is funny.) So continue to be precise in this aspect as well. There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying “I’m vegetarian.” or “I avoid animal products except cheese.” or “I prefer to eat vegan options, but not all the time.” Published 03 Aug, 2026 “I don’t drink liquor, just beer and wine. I’m almost sober.” “I jog twice a week. I’m basically an athlete.” “I can order tapas in Spanish. I’m kinda bilingual.” “I have a few houseplants. I’m practically a botanist.”

culture Culture writing Writing
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

book: whipping girl by julia serano

During my break in July, I said I wouldn't read. I partially lied! I did not read any papers, blog posts, or most news articles, and I initially wanted to extend that to books as well. But I ended up ordering and reading some, and one of them was Whipping Girl! Originally released in 2007 and edited a bit in 2015 and with an afterword from 2023, it is a tad older, but such a foundational work in gender studies. It's a feminist analysis about how femininity is punished in society, specifically illustrated on the hatred on, and cissexism enacted against, trans women and their representation in media. It discusses common models of thinking about gender (gender essentialism vs. social constructionism) and where they fall short, as well as different kinds of feminism (and why feminism needs to be trans-inclusive) and theories as to why people are trans that do not serve trans people. It's specifically mentioning trans-objectification (= disregarding trans people as living human beings, reducing them to an unfeeling thing you can speculate over and ask invasive questions, an anomaly to demonize, ridicule, exploit or fetishize), trans-fascimilation (= portraying trans genders as facsimiles of cisgender ones), trans-sexualization (= asserting that trans women transition to attract sexual desire, to attract men, or to become the women they're attracted to; relegating them to a fetish, as merely sex workers, perverts, exotic fucks etc.), trans-interrogation (= obsessively focusing on the reasons why trans people exist, pathologizing them), trans-erasure (= silencing trans voices and preventing them from being visible and coming out, prioritizing cis people's theories and feelings), trans-exclusion (= excluding trans people from events and spaces based on their trans status), and trans-mystification (= turning transition into a taboo, a hidden secret, a scandal instead of a real and mundane thing) as ways trans people, often specifically trans women, are harmed in society. It also covers the way trans people have been historically (mis)treated and mischaracterized by the medical world without giving them a chance to speak, and the way gender transition has been gatekept by dehumanizing standards like attractiveness, sexual orientation, sterilization, secrecy about the trans status, and more, resulting in only letting a small amount of people transition at all, and only if they were most willing to comply with cis expectations and also had the resources (money, changing jobs, moving away etc.). Any gatekeeping of transition resources is done for the well-being of the cis population, and especially the extremely, extremely small portion of them who could transition and regret it, and is never actually done for the well-being of trans people. This is possible because, despite many people rejecting ideas of attaining social status, occupation, political power etc. via birth right (casteism, for example), cis society has no problem seeing gender as a birth right, something you inherit and cannot gain otherwise, and is otherwise not as legit as theirs. This further leads to the ridiculous double-standards and unfair judgment trans women are subjected to: Act feminine, and you are seen as a parody, a facsimile of a woman, a costume, or "leading someone on"; act masculine, and it is deemed a sign of a "true male identity", as not even trying, as a joke for media. Pseudofeminists say women can do anything men can and should be strong and unafraid to speak their minds, yet ridicule trans women for behaviors deemed masculine, especially when they speak out about their oppression. They create standards of what makes someone a "real woman", yet reject the same when men do it. Crossdressing is fine for women and is, technically, done on the daily when you're wearing pants - yet a man wearing a skirt is already classified as a mental illness and used to historically focus on men only ( Transvestic Disorder (F65.1)). The book asserts that the mechanisms behind it are traditional sexism (the belief that maleness and masculinity are superior to femaleness and femininity, and the delegitimization of the latter as weak and artificial), and oppositional sexism (the belief that female and male are rigid, mutually exclusive categories, and the delegitimization of gender non-conformity). Through effemimania (the word she coins for the societal obsession with transfem expressions of femininity), cissexist society is wielding transmisogyny against trans women. She also partially calls out feminists who have aided the societal view that femininity is artificial and needs to be abolished, which is misogynistic and alienates people who naturally gravitate to, perhaps "perform", femininity. Other than that, Julia Serano also develops the intrinsic inclinations model in the book as a path between either bioessentialist ideas or the idea that gender is merely a social construct, opting instead to say that there are both biological and social components to why someone is trans. She also covers how cis people take their gender for granted, as it just happened to be congruent and likely never questioned by them or others in their life, and therefore often doubt that one could "feel like" a specific gender, even though they do, too. If this wouldn't be the case, we wouldn't have so many gender-affirming surgeries and treatments for cis people, and many would freely transition to better fit a role in a movie, go undercover, or to succeed in a field dominated by another gender - but they don't. As an outlook on the future of queer/trans communities and politics, the book explains why identity politics and subversivism in queer/trans spaces are not beneficial; genders outside the gender binary shouldn't be seen as more radical and "good" while binary trans people are seen as "bad" or "reinforcing the gender binary". Alliances are more important than understanding us all as one group, as this has the chance of brushing over different needs and experiences that need to be addressed without being called "divisive". Overall, I found it very pleasant and engaging to read, and one could tell (in a positive and delightful way) that a lot of the book consisted of separate essays published elsewhere before they were combined. It didn't read to me as a particularly dry "book-writing style", no vibe of "I'll sit down to write a whole book now and talk down to readers in a clinical way", but something that could be published in a series of posts on personal blogs musing on social topics nowadays, which made me wish more bloggers would opt to release their works as different chapters in a book some time, instead of leaving them spread on platforms like Substack. Despite the patchwork, the entire book felt so cohesive, in a great order, and approachable, like a longer blog post, but without losing depth or attention. It felt very satisfying how thoroughly Julia Serano covers and debunks everything and still manages to not lose you, to lead from one thing to another with such ease. It was a cathartic read, with a marker in hand. I'm surrounded by trans people and have witnessed online trans discourse since I was about 17, but even I found some sections in the book more difficult to understand with the mixing of terms and knowing a different version of the used concepts and definitions; especially in regards to "transsexual" and "transgender". So in some sentences, both words were used interchangeably or one as umbrella term, but in other sections, they described different things. As the work is older, many concepts, words etc. have evolved and changed quite a bit, and some ideas have become very unpopular. I have also never seen anyone online hold on to the idea that there are 'transgender cissexuals' or vice versa, but this is discussed in the book, and some of it might be labeled transmedicalist. I think it helps to discuss some things in there with trans people you know (if they are genuinely interested to, and you're not burdening them). I don't know if I would give this to anyone that is a complete newbie to the topic for that reason; it's not a "I'm coming out, to understand me, go read this.", especially when some of it is no longer the default in discourse, but it's still something people should have read if they are not entirely new to gender discourse or queer history. Let me end this post with a quote from the Afterword: "As I said at the start, I cannot say how this particular anti-trans moral panic will end. But what I do know is this: efforts to eliminate trans people will never succeed, because we are part of natural variation, and we will persist as long as human beings exist. Anti-trans activists may strive to "disappear" us like they did during the twentieth century, but that outcome is no longer possible. Back when I was a trans kid, we were isolated from one another - quarantined, if you will - due to a lack of access to information and reliable ways to communicate with one another. But now we live in a hyperconnected world, and there are countless trans-centered books, artworks, media and organizations that share our perspectives and trans-related resources. Anti-trans activists may attempt to ban books about us from libraries and censor discussions about us in school settings, but they cannot stop us from finding one another online or elsewhere. Now that we know how many of us there are, we will continue to seek out and learn from one another. Trans people have always been resourceful and resilient, and nobody can take that away from us. " Published 02 Aug, 2026

Julia books Books culture Culture
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

we don't shame smart glasses wearers enough

Wombat sent me the above picture: A physical ad by Apple on a big canvas. Pictured is a person hiding their face with their iPhone, but therefore actually pointing the camera at the people seeing the ad. It says: " Safari. A browser that's actually private. " and " Privacy. That's iPhone. " It's accidentally perfectly demonstrating the limitations in current popular privacy discourse and movement: The fact that devices or software may claim to keep the users private, but not people in general, especially not the people the users point these devices at. Privacy, as it is commonly practiced and advertised, is for the person inflicting the damage onto their surroundings, not their surroundings. Privacy, in the mainstream, is seen as this highly personal, individualized thing; something you buy into, switch into, invest time becoming "good" at. Everyone is fending for themselves, arming up on their own. Your choices seem to reflect something about your values and how well you understand the topic. The goalposts get moved fairly frequently: " Oh you still use that company? They aren't actually that good. Switch to the other one instead. " " Wait, you think only using this browser extension and a VPN is enough? You are a dumb little child. If you don't use these more extreme measures, you might as well not try. " It lends itself to a certain demographic cosplaying as state targets and playing evil hacker because they feel cool using Kali Linux. Meanwhile, a lot of popular privacy content online is essentially a whole ad break, together with bad news about what Big Tech recently did that you can then reshare with people to get upset about together, driving up engagement and that's it. It doesn't tell you why something is bad, what you can do to stop it, what rights you have, or other actionable steps besides " Switch if you can, I guess. But use my sign-up code and/or subscribe to the newsletter. ". At other times, it's just empty complaining - what should be, could be, maybe is illegal, but no drive to find out, confirm, or what initiatives and ways exist to make it so. The general message often seems to be: If you don't conform to what is currently being recommended by this or that privacy community, you shouldn't complain. You did it to yourself! You chose to use all that and not switch. Therefore, you invited it and were okay with this happening to you. Or otherwise: It is all futile. I'm not going to pretend people do not have any agency in what products they use, and I am always in favor of people switching to less bad alternatives. Otherwise, I would not have no accounts on social media platforms and not use Linux or Tuta, for example. However, it is also incredibly stupid to pretend the change towards better alternatives is always effortless and affordable, or that competitors are always comparable or even exist. Even Apple has spotted the potential goldmine of privacy a while ago, not just to set themselves apart from data-hungry competitor Google, but also recognizing that in our current society, privacy is a privilege and is becoming one more and more. Knowing the "right" products and being able to buy into them is a flex, it sets you apart. You can feel like you are treating yourself, like you are investing into a good thing. Understanding privacy as a right, being informed about what tech companies do, and what effects it has or can have on your life and the lives of others and then also doing something about it is a highly intellectual affair that many of us in the privacy space underestimate. It perfectly fits to Apple's health-conscious, society-conscious, upper class brand image. We tend to underestimate how costly it can really be to no longer want to support certain companies, be in control of our own data, and no longer be the product being sold. From your own VPS to domains and paying for traffic, YubiKeys etc., a new PC that is more compatible with a Linux distro, an iPhone (or if you can, replacing whatever you have with a phone that can run GrapheneOS), the much higher priced plan on other email suite providers than it is on Google, paying for search engines, paying for a reputable VPN provider, and so on. Do you have to do all that? No. Lots of privacy-respecting stuff is FOSS, and not everyone has the same need for privacy (compare the average Joe to an investigative journalist!). But not all of it is free; a lot of products in the privacy space might have a free tier, but their other tiers simply offer more (alleged) privacy. That doesn't even touch the costs of just not playing the game - not having a smartphone, not having social media, and so on. All of it leaves out that you can go to the most extreme measures and are still victim of the privacy practices of others. The best privacy-conscious service can still leak your data. Your devices can still become compromised. Your family members, friends, partner(s), coworkers and the like still have pictures of you on their phone which sync to the cloud, still chat with you on their data-hungry devices, still put information about you in an LLM or nudify a picture of you, still navigate to your address with Google Maps, and post your group selfie on Instagram or Facebook. When you enter their homes, you are in the presence of home assistants like Alexa, or their indoor pet cameras. When you walk outside, you are increasingly filmed with strangers' doorbell Ring cameras. You sit in restaurants and cafés, and walk through the city, while being in the background of some YouTube videos and TikTok dances. People film and post you without your knowledge or consent to gain internet likes because you looked odd. Cars have more and more sensors and cameras for both the people inside and the world outside. Cities everywhere are investing into AI-assisted camera surveillance and make contracts with Palantir and Flock. More and more law enforcement is wearing body cams (for both good and bad reasons). And, of course, you got people walking around with smart glasses now! Surveillance is fun when you're the one doing it; after all, we have always had people in our society that love being informers, block wardens and spies. Now, by appealing to the feeling of having control over others, documenting all our lives, having video proof of interactions and even more material to feed into LLMs for self-optimization, large corporations market their new surveillance systems for private use under the guise of individual security, productivity or entertainment, which ultimately undermines the security and freedom of us all. Webaligo fittingly writes: " The cost of comprehensive surveillance has fallen so far, so fast, that the central reason tyranny used to burn itself out - the sheer human expense of paying enough people to watch everyone else - has simply evaporated. The bottleneck is gone. You no longer need a nation of informers. You need a vendor contract. " This is where we need to come together, and aside from structural changes, make it personal. When someone buys and wears smart glasses, it should be made clear to them that they are considered a massive asshole committing a social fauxpas and are unwelcome in any space. It doesn't even matter much that they are a mindless consumer following tech trends without question; they wouldn't be alone in that, and that is not a crime. But: They are trading the rights of others for the chance at cosplaying a Sci-Fi movie until the novelty wears off. They try to flex with an expensive product with an inherent power imbalance between wearer and environment to compensate for something. They choose to invest a lot of money into ethically untenable companies for a product that is entirely optional and does not add any value. After all, we have object and facial recognition capabilities already built into our fucking brains. They are fine with being seen as a creep who is filming and taking pictures of people without their consent, even children, and adding to the general constant surveillance of us all. These glasses are also vulnerable to attacks, and I'm sure if nudifier apps are already a thing now, it won't take long for live nudification on the glasses. Them wearing smart glasses is in solidarity with the panopticon we are in, with all the pranksters, pickup artist, street interviewers and other online scum who embarrass, scare and harass strangers (especially women) to generate views on social media, and all the disgusting people who generate nudes of people non-consensually via AI. All that is its main draw, its main purpose, its main user group. Smart glasses wearers can tell people all they want that they are not like that, but no one should believe that. They rely on people not being able to spot the glasses, not knowing what the consequences are, or not knowing what the recording light is for, and their reassurances are worthless as other wearers modify their glasses so the recording light is always off. Meta is also currently testing a prototype feature called "super sensing" where the glasses would always record, all day - that's the goal. There is no justification for wanting to have the features it has if you are not morally bankrupt. You have to understand that the wearers are playing a significant part in not only gathering faces in motion (for companies like Clearview.AI), but also training spatial data for AI to act in three-dimensional space - eye, head and body movements, hand-eye-coordination and more. This, undoubtedly, will not only be used in autonomous AI weapons, but any context where bots are supposed to replace humans negatively. There is only so much shit you can gather underneath your shoes before you can no longer blame everyone else for thinking you're the asshole; or rather, glasshole . So don't let them off the hook about owning the pervert glasses. Don't let it go. Ask them if they're recording, or better, ask them to take them off. Tell them being a walking CCTV for daddy Zuckerberg isn't a personality and no one is impressed about another tech bro who can't experience reality and has to dehumanize everyone around them to feel good. Kick them out. Published 01 Aug, 2026

security Security media Media
0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

rose ▪ bud ▪ thorn - july 2026

The stickers I bought at the convention, and a card I got for free with it. Me playing MtG in a stuffy gym hall at 33 degrees Celsius. Oof. Got my nails done. New matcha order arrived. Sushi my wife made. Self portrait. But with alien eyes. My FFXIV character. Published 31 Jul, 2026 The break from everything went well. I'm enjoying the mindset shift it brought, and am appreciating that I'm currently putting my focus elsewhere; on my comfort, my rest, my play, my relationships, instead of being highly ambitious in so much else. I've also gotten rid of some unnecessary people-pleasing behavior that had emerged especially around this blog. I feel more protective and selective over who or what I give my attention and efforts to. I read a nice amount of books, and I have some blog posts scheduled about them. I started playing FFXIV. I'm now a Level 55 Black Mage; I'm otherwise a big fan of Miner, Botanist, and Fisher. Still trying to figure out the Red Mage stuff. Please add me if you want: I'm on EU Light Data Center on Raiden, character is called Ava Nehalennia. Went to a faerie convention with lots of artists, board and card games. My MtG proxy decks arrived. I made a bug deck with Fumulus as commander, and a poison deck with Vishgraz. Got to play them at the event, and I am very very happy with them! I made more art. A self portrait, and a longer project with a night sky and clouds I'm still working on. I finally reached a new personal best on the treadmill: I jogged 5km straight without pause. Took 48 minutes because I'm a bit slow for now. I got an AeroPress and am experimenting with it. I tried out a new matcha cafe! Review coming soon on my matcha blog . I got lucky and was able to get the Stardew Valley MtG Secret Lair drop! I bought the "Welcome to Stardew Valley" Non-Foil bundle. The aforementioned art project. I'm working on one day running 5km in 30 minutes (a reduction of 18 minutes). I wanna build up my stamina to be able to ride my bike to work (27km one way, roughly 1.5h). I also wanna get it repaired, finally. My body had a weird flare up of my Bechterew's disease. Weirdness around my sacroiliac joints, neck inflammation and extremely fatigued days. It caused some regression in my strength training, because I had to essentially lie around and wait until it's over for a couple days. Then I promptly angered my neck again and couldn't go to the gym anymore. I struggled with deep disillusionment about my goals and ambitions, about anything outside my home really... and the effort I put into things. I just don't feel like anything (broadly) gives back the kind of effort I put in; no matter if in the area of work, volunteering, people, the systems I pay into or donate to, my hobbies or my studies. It all feels sort of pointless, and right now I am not in the mindset to appreciate these things anyway or just enjoy the path with nothing expected in return. Maybe I'll get my spark back the next few weeks. I've had to cry a lot because of some unexpected interpersonal issues and tough conversations, and accidentally took too much of a medicine to calm me down.

programming Programming ai AI
0 views
ava's blog 2 months ago

the first six months of 2026

First half of the year has passed, only half of the year left. 2026 is a difficult year for me so far. At the end of 2025, I wished for more rest this year. I didn’t do that yet. I pushed harder in different ways and I just can’t keep doing that. For 1.5 years now, I have been going extra hard in everything I do - I asked for more work at work, I created new opportunities and roles for me there, I blogged longer informative posts that took a lot of my knowledge and research, I completed more exams in my part time degree than ever before, I started and finished the certificate to be a data protection consultant, I attended conferences, I started volunteering, I went harder on my fitness, and so on. I do that to make up for my severe illness in 2024 and because of how a chronic illness turns everything into a pressing matter (fear of relapse, fear of no longer getting to do something, urge to maximize good times etc); and I can no longer keep it up. I need a longer break where I can just exist. I need to allow myself to do less in my part time degree and accept that it will postpone my graduation, I need to stop doing court case summaries for a month for noyb, I need to stop blogging for a while so I am not always working on some big essays and reading sources and running to keep up with articles and papers, and so I don’t always have a full inbox with like 50 emails to answer. I need to stop reading my web reader (RSS) and the Discover page. I can’t scale back work, so it has to be everything else. I want to enjoy life for a while and not always feel like I got something to prove, something to chase, something to keep up, something to get back to as soon as possible. And the thing is, I had so much fun stuff planned the first half of this year. I didn’t build those experiences up in my head and I didn’t have unrealistic standards, yet all of them kinda left a bad taste in my mouth when they happened. Travels, courses, conferences, restaurants, whatever. Everything I looked forward to had something difficult and disappointing about it, or had this Monkey’s Paw thing I mentioned in my other post. So I no longer feel like even planning nice things for myself and my wife. I’d rather save the energy, time and money. And that's sad, so I need to take some time to change that. It adds to the general burnout. I notice my impatience is worse, I get snappier, less forgiving, feeling more like someone’s fault or error is done in malice rather than accidental or born out of cluelessness/obliviousness. I no longer want to explain anything, elaborate, or help people, because I feel like I have to conserve my energy and efforts, as most interactions with others have a severe imbalance where I do most of the work. This would be the opposite if I wasn’t feeling burnt out. I react more defensively than usual if you point out small, irrelevant, inconsequential mistakes or make small requests for things I don’t care about changing. I retreat, I wanna be alone more, I wanna focus even more on personal projects that only involve me in isolation (and no other people, location, etc.) because those don’t let me down. I crave social interaction, yet listening to people or reading what they write is like nails on a chalk board. It’s a confusing time to be in, because I more or less get everything I want with some exceptions, but in a warped way where it doesn’t make me happy and is always accompanied with some annoying twist or extra price (figuratively). Nothing just flows. I have to micromanage everything and deal with ridiculous hurdles. I have stress “dreams” where I am half asleep, having hypnagogic hallucinations how it’s my turn in something (usually a board or card game happening on my bed) and I can’t figure out what people want me to do and they get impatient and urge me to finally hurry up, so I flee (sleepwalk around the apartment) before waking up and walking back to bed. In other such dreams, I am convinced I forgot to do something I promised I would do in a different reality/parallel world (?), but I can’t quite understand what I owe and how to do that thing, it’s incredibly vague and confusing, and I walk away from the bed to avoid the harassment by these dream people about it until I wake up and walk back as well. Those two repeat so often. Probably once a week. The feelings don’t leave me after I wake up, like I genuinely feel guilty and stressed even when awake and my brain still tries to decipher what I forgot to do and what I owe and that I’m running out of time? I haven’t bored myself purposefully nearly as much as I want to, need to and used to. There is always a blog post I want to write or continue; an article, book, blog post or paper to read; a video to watch; something to study; work; gym. I notice I'm desperately craving to do these things, and do them, yet also feel like I have to force myself through it. Like it takes an intense amount of energy and focus. I need a lot more time to do them, lots of micro breaks and distractions, and it all feels so difficult internally. I feel exhausted. Even when stuff is very easy and I want to do it. It’s like my brain is full, nauseous, sick. It screams at me to stop. My memory/retention is so shit, too. I have never said " I don't remember that. " ever as much in my life as I did this month. What adds to me not being able to stop is that it all feels mundane and harmless. Just one more thing. And they’re all things I do all the time, and things I am expecting myself to do, that are standard function, default. I understand when others burn out because bad timing of horrific events, like their house burned down while the pet is sick and grandma died and they just lost your job or something. Or: Insanely stressful high stakes job working 50-70 hours a week. But none of that applies to me. I just do normal things. And I don’t wanna be someone who does less. I want to do it all. My chronic illnesses play into it. You can be chronically ill, but you are supposed to work and act like everyone else and achieve things and work on yourself. You cannot be visibly ill, you cannot do markedly less, you cannot struggle with a basic task or workload. You cannot let yourself go. You cannot waste yourself. Otherwise you are giving in, you’re a lost cause, you do nothing to help yourself, you make your illness your personality, you use your illness as an excuse. You’re not an inspiration, and that’s kinda all you’re good for if you are forever sick. You are supposed to reassure everyone that chronic illness doesn’t alter life much and that life can go on unchanged and you can totally achieve everything you would have if you weren’t sick. If you cannot be used for this cause, you are discarded by society. There is a pressure to not let that happen to me, especially when my wife depends on me. Anyway, before I end up in the kind of burnout that makes you completely unable to work a job for most of your life, I have to change things. Just putting some self care things on my todo list doesn’t help, as it is just another obligation and doesn’t make me feel better. I just put it on the list because it is supposed to be good for me and a productive way to deal with stress. Like, what sounds better in our current society: That you slept all day to rest and watched some Simpsons, or that you did some yoga and then had a bath with 5 products to make you prettier and then journaled and then went on a walk? But I actually need to do the former for once. Which is what I have been doing a lot the past week. Lounging around, letting my mind wander, napping, just existing and breathing, like a cat sprawled on the sofa. I need to do things freely, and not do straining things all day, and let myself not do things that you can be measurably good or bad at. No care about consistency. I feel like I arrived at small versions of this burnout every now and then over the years, did something to help it for a while, and then experienced it again. And every time, it took a shorter while to relapse, and it felt worse, and it felt like I needed more rest and relaxation than I could realistically give. I only ever gave enough to function again, to make it work, to take the edge off, delay the worst. Like a day here and there doing little to nothing. Nothing more, no changed behavior moving forward. Something has to change permanently so I don't always run into this same issue over and over again, risking my mental health and my ability to do my hobbies and work. :) I still have to figure out where my sweet spot is between my ambition and what my body can give. I don't mind giving 200% for a time, just not forever. It seems like 1.5 years is my limit. With that said, I am gone the entirety of July. I won't blog 1 , I won't reply to emails until August, I won't read your posts. Friends can still reach me via Matrix and Signal. Reply via email Published 30 Jun, 2026 There is one announcement that I'll likely publish, that's it. ↩ There is one announcement that I'll likely publish, that's it. ↩

career Career writing Writing
0 views