Search
1000 results for “commons_protocol”
-
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.
-
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0. Einige Minuten war der Autor falsch benannt.
Über Martin Schwarzbeck - netzpolitik:
Unter der Kennung "Gastautor:innen" fassen wir die unterschiedlichsten Beiträge externer Quellen zusammen, die wir dankbar im Beueler-Extradienst (wieder-)veröffentlichen dürfen. Die Autor*innen, Quellen und ggf. Lizenzen sind, soweit bekannt, jeweils im Beitrag vermerkt und/oder verlinkt.
-
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.
-
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.
Über Martin Böttger:
Martin Böttger ist seit 2014 Herausgeber des Beueler-Extradienst. Sein Lebenslauf findet sich hier...
Sie können dem Autor auch via Fediverse folgen unter: @martin.boettger -
Clair Obscur: To be accountable to those that come after
In my prior essays, I related themes woven through Clair Obscur to show how it can parallel real world complexities and oppression.
For the character of Alicia and Gustave (and even Lune if we accept my assertion of her as neurodivergent), disability cords through the story and asks questions the game may not have intended. I explored in that essay how Disability was a class constructed by capitalism to control labor and those unable to labor, and through that I showed how disability has been used to denote evil and bad throughout American history. But Clair Obscur twists those tropes on their head and refuses to villianize the disabled within the game. Instead, Alicia, Gustave, and others are given complex journeys and heralded as heroes in a way. Yet, by the end, the final ending choice between Verso and Maelle felt as if the player was the judge determining the fate of the disabled person for them. I wrote:
Will we be given the care and support we need to thrive? Will we be given agency to choose our own fate and route to healing?
Clair Obscur offers that choice to the player, thus placing the fate of a disabled person in their hands. In a way, the player acts as the judge who determines the fate of a disabled person, to determine whether they ever access the care and benefits they need. It is a replica of how our real world works, and it forces a painful glimpse into the struggles of disabled people.
This essay led me to my next where I explored the nature of the Canvas people and whether they are real. I examined how this paralleled dehumanizing narratives that subjugate and destroy unique cultures. I laid down a map of the shifting temporal realities the game presents through the different main characters of each act: Gustave (Lumierian reality), Verso (immortal painted Dessendre reality), and Maelle (both Dessendre reality and Lumierian reality). How weaving these different realities forces us to contend with the nature of what is real and who is allowed to exist within that reality.
The conclusion I came to, which perhaps will not surprise anyone reading my writings, is that I chose the ending that gave agency to people and saved the most lives. I could not accept that the unique lives of those in the Canvas were less than the Dessendre family. Nor could I accept anyone deciding for a disabled person how they must exist and heal.
By exploring these darker aspects of Clair Obscur, I undoubtedly focused on the more abusive and manipulative aspects of the Dessendre family to show how unsupportive they’ve been to Alicia/Maelle. The evidence painted within the game left me uneasy about the Dessendre family, partly informed by my own traumas as a queer nonbinary disabled person. Yes, they do love each other but love does not mean abuse cannot happen or exist, which I argued in my essay on Disability. That darkness echoed trauma and pain that destroying the Canvas cannot truly heal. A cycle of violence doesn’t heal through the use of more violence, but only when the cycle is stopped.
One could argue that Verso sought to stop the cycle of grief, and isn’t that stopping the cycle of violence? But that negates the temporal reality of the Canvas people, who endured countless oppressive actions and outright genocide. Sacrificing a population of people in an effort to ‘heal’ one family only continues the cycle of violence, and it doesn’t solve the lack of support in the Dessendre world, which Verso’s ending never truly reconciles. Alicia is still isolated, still without a voice, still disabled in a world that has done little to meet any of her needs.
So then, do we ever exit the cycle of violence? And what would it look like to attempt such a thing?
In my Disability essay, I pointed out healing cannot begin until we exit the abusive/traumatic environment/situation. Part of healing involves the end of the cycle of violence, which differs based on who abused and who endured the abuse. Those that abuse must hold themselves accountable and engage in repair as well as work on their own healing. Those that endured abuse must work on their own healing, and recognize the best place for that, which might require them to not engage again the person who harmed them. Ending the cycle of violence and moving toward accountability and healing is not an easy process and the trajectory will differ based on who is involved.
Yet even with those differing paths, one must still hold oneself accountable in order to push forward in the healing process. We will backslide. We will mess up, but it is crucial to acknowledge when we cause harm or when we make a mistake, apologize, and do better. That’s all part of the accountability process.
So in this essay, I want to explore what accountability is and how it does and doesn’t manifest in the characters’ storylines. Whether the characters were able to truly end the cycle of violence and move forward into healing or if the game leaves those questions open-ended.
What is Accountability? And how do we do it?
Accountability within today’s culture, especially within America where I’m situated, is wrought with videos and images of call-out culture. Where people call others out publically the harm and demand repair. While this may be a useful tactic when facing off against the rich and powerful, it ultimately isn’t true accountability. Or at least not the kind that may lead to actual healing and change.
So when I speak of accountability, I do not mean that public spectacle. I instead mean conversations like what Maelle and Verso have in Clair Obscur. They happen on a personal level and/or within the community, and often are not on a public stage. They may instead happen behind closed doors with or without a mediator. The survivor may decide or not decide to be present, while the person who harmed them works toward healing and accountability. It’s a complex process that goes far, far beyond the initial identification of the harm.
In the first chapter of the anthology Beyond Suvival: Strategies and Stories from the Transformative Justice Movement, editors Ejeris Dixon and Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha writes:
“Transformative justice and community accountability are terms that describe ways to address violence without relying on police or prisons. These approaches often work to prevent violence, to intervene when harm is occurring, to hold people accountable, and to transform individuals and society to build safer communities. These strategies are some of hte only options that marginalized communities have to address harm.
The work of transformative justice can happen in a variety of ways. Some groups support survivors by helping them identify their needs and boundaries while ensuring their attackers agree to these boundaries and atone for the harm they caused. Other groups create safe spaces and sanctuaries to support people escaping from violence.”
Here they show how accountability is only one piece of a larger puzzle of addressing violence. Without accountability, much of the work to address and end the cycle of violence would fracture and fall apart, yet as crucial as it is, full healing requires far more than just accountability.
Ejeris Dixon goes on to add:
“Violence and oppression break community ties and breed fear and distrust. At its core, the work to create safety is to build meaningful, accountable relationships within our neighborhoods and communities.”
Without trust, one cannot build safety. Without safety, one struggles to be vulnerable. Without vulnerability, one struggles to heal. And without the choice to heal, one will fail to hold oneself accountable.
This isn’t to say these are steps in a process, but more they are interlinking threads that are woven into a larger tapestry. Each thread crucial to the final form, and the tapestry wouldn’t be the same without each thread and stitch. None of this is easy, but then healing isn’t ever easy.
Healing always requires a choice. Do we choose to heal? Do we choose to hold ourselves accountable to that journey? Do we choose to be accountable for our actions and engage in repair when we inevitably cause harm? How do we engage in repair? Are we willing to be responsible and listen to those harmed by us? To let those harmed take the lead? Can we separate shame from guilt? To not fear accountability but instead embrace it so all involved can move forward in healing?
Of course, asking those questions can feel daunting, and it’s why relationship-building is so crucial. Healing requires support of one’s family, friends, and/or community. We can’t really heal in isolation. In chapter three of Beyond Survival, Blythe Barnow speaks about how isolation harmed her ability to heal:
“In the end, that was the most damaging. Doing it alone. Believing it was all my responsibility. Not the assault. But the healing. The justice. The protection for nameless other girls. I leaned heavy into the skills I learned as a child, over responsibility, independence, sharp analysis, and self-sacrifice. Which meant I never asked for the support I was so desperate for.
Because what I needed, maybe more than his apology, was a community of people who could help me hold and honor the stories that led to this one, who could help me uproot the layers of silence learned through too much violence. I needed to be asked what I wanted and what I was hoping for. I needed someone to help me craft those letters, someone to remind me that I could list expectations. I needed someone who was going to sit with me through the fallout. Someone who could read the responses people sent me and tell me to wait before reading them myself. I needed someone beside me to reflect the ways my own trauma, old and new, was informing the process. I needed someone who could show me love that was deeper and more nuanced than just hating him.”
I relate deeply to Barnow’s words here because isolation can steal away our voice, where we put on a brave mask for others. Often society and even friends and family can put tremendous pressure on survivors to ‘move on’ from the harm, to not speak of it, to stay silent, but that too is part of the cycle of violence. If we cannot acknowledge violence happened, how can we ever stop it from replaying again and again? Many therapists and researchers have written of the cycle of domestic violence and how it can sometimes thread through families. Part of that relies on silence and isolation.
Breaking silence and isolation requires the support of others, and it’s not easy to do. Believe me, I’ve struggled with this my whole life, but I’ve made progress on my healing from abuse because of the support of dear friends and good therapists.
This is why Maelle and Verso are able to have any conversation that deals with accountability. Lune, Sciel, Esquie, and Monoco form a support system to help them break the cycle of silence and isolation. This chosen family gives Maelle the love she needs to learn and grow, and they attempt to offer this to Verso as well.
For example, exploring the Reacher area will lead to the peak, where Painted Alicia ignores her brother to speak with Maelle privately — here the color fades into greyscale. She leads Maelle into the cavern at the peak to show her the true axon, and also to express her thoughts to Maelle through gestures and their fencing match.
After Painted Alicia leads Maelle back to the others, the scene snaps back into color. Maelle offers Alicia “a new beginning,” and I think she meant to repaint Alicia’s face and restore her voice. However, Painted Alicia grasps Maelle’s hand and presses it against her, thus thwarting Maelle’s attempt to repaint her face. Instead, she gasps out her desire for Maelle to gommage her. Verso doesn’t have a chance to stop it, because Maelle does as Painted Alicia asks.
Verso responds by trying to stop Maelle, and ends up holding the red petal remains of Painted Alicia. Sciel is at his side to comfort him in his grief.
The conversation they have later at camp delves into the impact of Maelle’s act:
MAELLE: I’m sorry.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: It’s what she wanted. I owed her that much. We owed her that much. I honoured her wishes. That’s something neither you nor Renoir ever did. And not Maman either.
VERSO: … I didn’t get to say goodbye. You didn’t wait. You didn’t give me a chance to persuade her.
MAELLE: She knew what she wanted. You wouldn’t have been able to sway her.
VERSO: She’s not you. You don’t know that. I know her better than you do. But you didn’t even give me the chance to try. You just erased her.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’ve lost two brothers. You know what it’s like to lose your sibling and never get the chance to say goodbye.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: You Painters. You just do what you want, you don’t care how it affects the rest of us.
MAELLE: I do care. I know you’re hurting, but the person who made that decision wasn’t me. It was her. It would have been wrong to deny her just so you could try and talk her out of her decision.Here Maelle seeks to understand Verso and why he is upset. She wants him to understand her reasons, where she sought to honor Painted Alicia’s wishes. She argues here for Painted Alicia’s agency in this, and how taking away her agency wouldn’t have been right.
Verso lashes out because of his grief and pain, but his words here “you don’t care how it affects the rest of us,” doesn’t align with the truth of Painted Alicia and Maelle’s actions at the peak of Reacher. Painted Alicia had made her wishes known, where she did not wish to continue in the disabled body Aline had given her in punishment for an action she’d never done. Perhaps there could have been other ways for her to thrive, but Painted Alicia had tried for decades to find that. Yet, perhaps it is irony that she sought the same annihilation that Painted Verso secretly seeks.
Maelle tries, in her own way, to honor the agency of others. To offer them different solutions, but Painted Alicia didn’t want any other solution. She had taken Maelle’s hand to press against her and urged her to gommage her away.
Does Maelle come to understand what Verso is trying to articulate here? Because so far, she gives her reasons and argues for Painted Alicia’s agency. The scene continues:
VERSO: She’s the last of my family. I have no one left now.
MAELLE: You have me. You have us.
VERSO: MAELLE. I wasn’t ready.
MAELLE: I don’t understand. You were ready when you set Papa free. You expected that he would erase the Canvas and everyone in it. Isn’t that the same thing?
VERSO: It’s different! It’s different. Why did she do that?
MAELLE: You know why.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: But you’re right. I should have thought of you. I should have given you a chance to say goodbye. I’m truly sorry, Verso.
VERSO: … *cries* At least she’s free now.Maelle briefly gets defensive because she struggles to understand, but then she takes a moment to think. She may view the two events of setting Renoir free to erase everyone versus her honoring Alicia’s wishes to be erased as equivalent, but Verso does not. We then see Maelle hold herself accountable by putting herself in Verso’s shoes in an effort to understand. She admits that Verso is indeed right. She should have thought of him, and she apologizes. As one continues through the journey, Maelle does her best to honor this by doing better.
She also tries to show Verso that he does have people left. He has Maelle, Lune, Sciel, Monoco, and others as they all have been trying to reach out and build connections with him. He chooses to hold himself in isolation from them, whether he is conscious of it or not.
She actively does her best to hold herself accountable, to learn from her actions, and this shows how she wishes to end the cycle of harm. She wants everyone’s agency to be honored, for people to find what they need, and although she may offer different ways to do that, if the person ultimately rejects a solution, who is Maelle to refuse to honor their decision? For a sixteen-year-old, she’s remarkably mature here.
Verso, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to hold that same self-awareness, or if he did, he seems to have lost it. He’s so caught up in his cycle of violence, that he struggles to see any other solution as viable. To see this, let’s look at a conversation near the start of Act 3, when Maelle returns to the Canvas:
MAELLE: You should have helped me remember.
VERSO: Yeah… I wanted to, but I… I’m sorry.
MAELLE: I’m sorry too. If I’d listened to Maman… if I hadn’t trusted the Writers, Verso would still be alive, and you —
VERSO: Wouldn’t exist.
MAELLE: Wouldn’t be caught in the middle. Maman did a terrible thing, painting you into Verso’s Canvas. Giving you his memories. Pretending the fire only took me. But I’m glad you exist.
VERSO: Your father was right to erase everyone. It’s better this way.
MAELLE: Better for who? Verso would have never wanted his Canvas gone. He loved Esquie and his Gestrals and the Grandis.
VERSO: It was killing my … our mother, staying here so long in a make-believe world with her make-believe family.
MAELLE: It’s not make-believe. It’s not… you’re not.. To me…Here Verso sees only one solution: annihilation. However, his reasons for why he manipulated and lied to Maelle are just that — excuses. So he acknowledges the hurt he did and apologizes. For true accountability to happen, it’s not enough to simply apologize; one’s present and future behaviors will need changed to avoid replicating the harm and continuing the cycle of violence.
For Maelle, she also apologizes, but in this instance, what is there for her to apologize for? Perhaps she shouldn’t have trusted whoever the Writers were, but she is not responsible for them starting a fire and for Verso’s death. Maelle is only responsible for her own actions, not the actions of others. This shows how she’s internalized the shame and guilt Clea and Aline both shoved onto her; both needed someone to blame, and Alicia, the survivor, is a convenient person to lay down the blame. Maelle/Alicia is young and lacking the support to realize that she does not need to carry this blame as it is not hers to bear.
Painted Verso does not try to negate the blame Maelle/Alicia puts on herself. Instead, he tries to convince Maelle that it is better for those in the Canvas to not exist, for the Canvas to be destroyed, but Maelle refuses to accept that destruction of entire people’s is the right answer. She disagrees that everyone in the Canvas is make-believe. To her they are as real as herself. This ties into what I discussed in my Right to Exist essay.
I wrote there:
We have now returned to one of the most crucial questions in the game: What is the right decision in regards to the fate of the Canvas people and the fate of Alicia/Maelle? As I have hopefully shown thus far, erasing people’s temporal realities causes immense harm and is genocide; people have a right to exist, and sacrificing them for the ‘greater good of society’ (or in this case the Dessendre family) cannot ever be the morally right answer.
Necrosecurity, as I spoke of earlier, paints a bleak and death-filled reality, where healing cannot ever take place because denial and control is at its roots. Until people’s temporal realities are respected and their agency honored, healing will forever stay out of reach.
Thus, escaping pain by committing genocide is not healing. It’s a continuation of the cycle of violence. The marginalized populations facing genocide have a right to exist, and their temporal realities are as valid and important as the oppressor. Just as the temporal reality of the Canvas people are as valid and important as the Dessendre family.
Healing can only happen when the cycle of violence ends.
Verso tries to justify the death and destruction as necessary to end the cycle, but Maelle refuses to accept that reasoning. She believes Verso is wrong when he claims his self and those of the Canvas people are make-believe, and she believes they have a right to exist. She acknowledges harm happened to Painted Verso. She apologizes for her part in it. This is a step forward in the addressing of harm and ending the cycle: acknowledging what happened and why it wasn’t okay.
Again, Maelle cannot repair what her mother did because it’s not her burden to bear. Only Aline can take responsibility for her own actions. Maelle can only take responsibility for Maelle’s actions, which Maelle tries her best to do. She tries to hold herself accountable, which is something neither Clea nor Aline ever seem to do. This act of being accountable seems to have been taught to Maelle perhaps by Renoir, but far more likely it was Gustave, Lune, Sciel, and the Lumierians who taught her this.
She may have regained her memories from the real world, but that doesn’t mean she lost her memories of growing up as a Lumierian. She holds both in her head, as she will admit to Lune and Sciel after she brings them back:
MAELLE: I’m sorry. I didn’t — My memories — I would’ve told you if I’d known —
LUNE: Don’t apologize. You were trapped too. You lived among us. You’re one of us. Even if you’re also one of them.
MAELLE: It’s… so weird. I have memories of two childhoods. Two homes. Two Lumieres.
SCIEL: You’re not an orphan anymore. You just found your family. Don’t you want to be with them?
MAELLE: I love my family, but … they’re all gone. In one way of another. And you’re my family too. So are Gustave and Emma. And I didn’t see it at the time, but all the families who took turns taking care of me…Here Maelle, once again, tries to take on burdens that aren’t hers to hold. She had no memory of being a Paintress, so how could she have told them? Lune understands this and gently points this out to her. To root her in the facts of what they now know. She accepts who Maelle is — Maelle’s full self of being of Lune’s Lumiere but also of the Dessendre’s Lumiere — and provides comfort in this way.
Sciel, in turn, asks a crucial question, even though her voice aches with grief. “Don’t you want to be with them?”
Maelle’s answer is heart-rending, because truthfully, her family is gone. Clea is off fighting a one-person war with the Writers, Aline — Maelle’s mother — blames Maelle and casts her aside, Renoir may seek to bring Maelle back but he too has been neglectful of her, and Verso is gone. So what roots her in the Dessendre World? There she is disabled with no support system and half the family is abusive toward her (as I discuss in my Disability essay). So in a way, her Dessendre family is “gone” in the sense they do not truly support her, not like the Canvas Lumierians.
When Maelle blames herself for those that have harmed her or those she loved, she exhibits a common traumatic response; when she apologizes for actions that aren’t truly hers to own, that is also a traumatic response.
I know I’ve fallen into those trauma responses, where I had internalized the blame that it was my fault for the abuse done to me, my fault for the sexual assault. However, that blame is false. In reality, it wasn’t my fault as I did not do those actions. Those actions were done by other people to me. Just as Maelle did not paint Painted Verso, Aline did that. Just as Maelle didn’t start the fire, the Writers did that. Just as Maelle didn’t kill Verso, the fire and whoever started the fire did that. Just as Maelle didn’t lie to Lune and Sciel, she had no memories of her Dessendre life and thus no information to share; instead, Verso had that information and chose to not share it.
Maelle still tries to take accountability, but truthfully, it is not hers to bear. Lune gently teaches her that in that scene above.
Understanding these truths are hard when society and/or loved ones pressure us into thinking it’s our fault we were hurt. That’s just a falsehood to avoid accountability and to pressure survivors into silence, which effectively continues the cycle of violence.
To break out of that cycle, we must acknowledge that we are only responsible for our own actions and speech. Then we must separate out shame and guilt. We must choose to heal and continue toward healing no matter how hard that trajectory may become. But to even make that choice requires us to have support of others, to help us see when we are falling back into harmful thought processes that inhibit our ability to heal. Those that support us help us stay accountable to the process of healing.
Lune and Sciel both act as supporters for Maelle here. Lune, especially as she has also been hurt by Verso’s actions, seeks to hold Verso accountable. At this point in the game, Lune acts as a protective older sister to Maelle, while Sciel often falls into a motherly role. That’s part of how chosen families relate to one another — they fall into roles with one another, and those roles may change depending on the situation. Sometimes Maelle may be the more sisterly one to offer support to Lune or Sciel.
Chosen family can be a powerful support group and a crucial one, especially if one’s biological family has been abusive toward us. In the case of Maelle, some of her family members have been abusive toward her. So her chosen family provides the support for Maelle to work toward healing from that.
So what about Painted Verso? How does he hold himself accountable after this massive reveal? He hid the truth of who Maelle was from not only Maelle but everyone in the party. He manipulated them toward his end-goals. He chooses to talk to each individually, which the player can choose which character to start these conversations (or could choose to avoid them). If the player chooses to have these conversations, then how do they go?
Lune calls Painted Verso out for his lies:
LUNE: I was right not to trust you.
VERSO: And what would you have done in my position?
LUNE: I wouldn’t have betrayed my expedition. I would have warned them that everyone they cared about was about to be erased. That THEY were about to be erased. I would have told them the truth. Because after everything we’ve been through, we deserved that.
VERSO: So you’d choose your expedition over your mother?
LUNE: That’s your problem. You think in false dichotomies. It wasn’t an “either / or” a situation. Other solutions were possible, if you’d only trusted us enough to ask.
VERSO: Knowing what you know now, would you have helped me force my mother out of the Canvas?
LUNE: … *sighs*
VERSO: I don’t apologize for saving her. But I am sorry I broke your trust. And I will do everything I can to help bring everyone back.
LUNE: I guess we’ll see.Here Verso is intent on his reasons for his lies and manipulations. Lune, of course, points to the faults in his argument, because there might have been more solutions possible. Verso’s response is to put Lune on the spot, which when it comes to intense conversations like this? It’s very hard to consider alternatives when one is upset, so of course Lune couldn’t respond right away. She takes her time deliberating and analyzing possible solutions. Put her on the spot? And she falls quiet because she has not been given adequate time to process the information and analyze for other solutions. So Verso acts rather unfairly toward her, and then makes a promise to win back her trust.
For Sciel, she processes her anger and hurt differently. She may have chosen to ‘get over’ her anger, but the hurt in her voice betrays how she feels. She tries to keep her tone light, but the desperate hope still slips through. Their conversation ends with her saying:
SCIEL: As long as you help me bring Pierre back. You owe me.
VERSO: You got it.Once again, he makes a promise. Yet, his conversation with Maelle shows he may not honor the promise to Lune and Sciel:
MAELLE: We have to push Papa out of the Canvas before he erases everything.
VERSO: I’m surprised he hasn’t already.
MAELLE: He’s been weakened by his battle with Maman. That’s probably why he hasn’t come after us. But it won’t stop him for long.
VERSO: If you and your father keep fighting, you risk breaking the world again. Another Fracture, but this time, it might be you trapped inside the Monolith.
MAELLE: What’s the alternative?
VERSO: Maybe… maybe you should go home.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’re fighting each other but you’re all doing the same thing.
MAELLE: No.
VERSO: Aline wants her son back. Renoir wants you and Aline back. You want Gustave back. The cycle we needed to break wasn’t the Gommage. It’s your family’s cycle of grief.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: Our whole world carries the burden of your family’s grief.Although there is truth that the Canvas world carries the burden of the Dessendre’s family’s grief, he makes an assumption about Maelle’s motivations. Yes, Maelle may want Gustave back, but she earlier had clarified that she doesn’t believe Painted Verso nor the Canvas people are ‘make-believe.’ She views them as real, and she refuses to let people die simply because her father decided they were a threat. So his assertion that it’s her continuing the cycle fails to understand the complexity in her motivations.
Instead, Verso tries to argue again why Maelle should leave the Canvas, but if she does, that means Renoir will finish erasing the Canvas and Lune and Sciel will never see their friends and family again. In fact, Lune and Sciel will cease to exist too. This conversation reveals that Verso is simply telling Lune and Sciel what they want to hear so that they can aid him in his goals. He isn’t holding himself accountable here. He’s manipulating everyone to push them toward the end-goal that he’s decided is best.
In doing this, he shows a lack of ability to understand and learn from the hurt and pain he’s done to others. He’s not really listening to them because he’s mapped out ways to carefully push each person into the actions he needs for his own goals. Thus, he’s continuing the cycle of violence.
Maelle has made it clear she wants the cycle of violence to end. She wants to save the Canvas people, because she believes they have a right to exist, that they are not ‘make-believe’ but real. Yet in these conversations, Verso turns up his charm and manipulation tactics to try to tweak the situation to his benefit. He wants Maelle to give up and leave the canvas so Renoir can erase it. He needs Lune and Sciel to work with them so that he can reach Renoir as he suspects that confrontation will be the only way he can push Maelle out of the Canvas.
Healing cannot happen in a manipulative environment that continues to cause harm to others. In the Beyond Survival Anthology, Kai Cheng Thom’s essay called ‘What to Do when You’ve Been Abusive,’ has a list of steps to assist people on that journey toward accountability and healing. The first step:
“‘Learn to Listen When Someone Says You Have Hurt Them.’ When one has been abusive, the very first — and one of the most difficult — skills of holding oneself accountable is learning to simply listen to the person or people whom one has harmed:
- Listening without becoming defensive.
- Listening without trying to equivocate or make excuses.
- Listening without minimizing or denying the extent of the harm.
- Listening without trying to make oneself the center of the story being told.
When someone, particularly a partner or loved one, tells you that you have hurt or abused them, it can be easy to understand this as an accusation or attack…”
Thom here lists what Verso struggles to do in these conversations. He listens but is also defensive with Lune about his actions and proceeds to make excuses for his actions. In a way, Verso struggles to not see these confrontation as an attack, but truthfully, Lune calling out the harm isn’t an attack, it’s a consequence. Pointing out harm isn’t an attack but a courageous moment of honesty and vulnerability. Whether Verso sees that gift of vulnerability is hard to say as his actions and words are conflict depending on the person to whom he speaks.
Verso tends to make himself the center of the story being told in both Lune and Maelle’s conversations. The only one he doesn’t do this with is Sciel, but then Sciel doesn’t really give him that chance. Sciel recognizes that he speaks to give his reasons, and she doesn’t want to hear it, so she instead takes the conversation toward what they will do next. It’s a masterful way of pivoting the conversation to a more active form of accountability — Sciel is essentially asking Verso, “So, you hurt us, what are you going to do to fix this? Here’s one solution.”
Verso accepts Sciel solution, but then his conversation with Maelle, he goes on the rampage. He points out her family’s cycle of grief continues to hurt this Canvas, but he also knows that if Maelle leaves, there is no possible way he can honor his promises to Sciel and Lune. He speaks of a cycle of grief that causes harm, which is important to acknowledge, yet he refuses to listen to what Maelle is saying. In turn, Maelle goes quiet, which she often does to think over what others have said.
Thus, Verso’s defensiveness with Lune and Maelle ends up being:
“… the cycle of violence talking. This is the script that rape culture has built for us: a script in which there must be a hero and a villain, a right and a wrong, an accuser and an accused. What if we understood being confronted about perpetuating abuse as an act of courage — even a gift — on the part of the survivor?
What if, instead of reacting immediately in our own defense, we instead took the time to listen, to really try to understand the harm we might have done to another person?
When we think of accountability in terms of listening and love instead of accusation and punishment, everything changes. Listenign without becoming defensive does not necessarily mean relinquishing one’s own truth. We must be able to make room for varying perspectives and multiple emotional truths in our hearts.”
Painted Verso doesn’t make room for varying perspectives or multiple emotional truths. He may take some responsibility for his actions, or at least acknowledges the harm his actions have done, where he takes on only what he has done — no more, no less, but he doesn’t truly grow from that.
Thom writes how taking responsibility for the abuse is next but one must also “accept that your reasons are not excuses.”
There is no reason good enough to excuse abusive behavior. Reasons help us understand abuse, but they do not excuse it. Accepting this is essential to transforming culpability into accountability and turning justice into healing.
Painted Verso spends a lot of time giving his reasons and expecting that to excuse his actions. Lune will have none of it as his reasons doesn’t excuse his lying and manipulative actions. He didn’t just betray them but also lied to them and manipulated them in harmful ways. Can Verso recognize the harm and truly be accountable?
This is where support of others can be crucial. Thom writes:
“When having a dialogue with someone who has been abused, it’s essential to give the survivor the space to take the lead in expressive their needs and setting boundaries. You should also take time to think about your own needs and boundaries without making the person you have harmed take care of you. This is why having support in the community is crucial. If basic needs are going unmet, no one can heal from abuse, nor can anyone truly be accountable.
If you have abused someone, it’s not up to you to decide how the process of healing or accountability should work. This doesn’t mean that you don’t get to have rights or boundaries, or that you can’t contribute actively to the process. It means that you don’t get to say that the person you have hurt is “crazy” or that what they are expressing doesn’t matter.
Instead, it might be good idea to try asking the person who has confronted you questions like these: what do you need right now? Is there anything I can do to make this feel better? How much contact would you like to have with me going forward? If we share a community, how should I navigate situations where we might end up int he same place? How does this conversation feel for you, right now?
At the same time, it’s important to understand that the needs of survivors of abuse can change over time, and that survivors may not always know right away — or ever — what their needs are.
Being accountable and responsible for abuse means being patient, flexible, and reflective about the process of having dialogue with the survivor.”
It’s crucial to note here that Thom is not saying that the survivor is an expert on accountability or that they should have full control over the process. Thom adds:
“I feel strongly that as long as punishment remains at the center of our thinking around accountability and justice, survivor-led processes are doomed to fall into the trap of individuals desperately trying to avoid accountability out of fear. Survivor-led, to me, means that survivors get to lead their own process of recovery, that survivors are given space to tell their stories and speak their needs (which criminal justice usually does not allow).
It does not mean that people who have been deeply wounded are suddenly handed full responsibility for a community dialogue and rehabilitation process. Survivor-led does not mean that the community gets to abdicate its responsibility for providing support, safety, expertise, and leadership in making healing happen.”
There are multiple paths in the accountability and healing process: the survivor, the one who caused harm, and the community. These paths may intersect at times, but Thom is arguing that none should exert control over the other’s path. Instead, listening, understanding, and opening onself up to changing present and future behaviors is what ‘survivor-led’ should mean.
Thom also makes it clear that the community itself needs to be involved to lay the groundwork to meet the needs of those within this process. Support by building safety, sharing expertise to help guide, and providing leadership to keep those involved accountable are all needed to assist in the healing process here.
Community support allows those involved to have someone with which to work through their emotions and thoughts. By working through emotions and thoughts, one can come to understand one’s own behaviors, emotions, actions, and through that find a path forward. This work means they are also holding themself accountable in the sense they are continuing to move forward on the path toward healing. Supportive friends, family, and community members can assist in helping those in this process stay on the healing path — that’s another type of accountability.
Supportive community is is what Painted Verso lacks. He does not allow anyone to truly be in community with him, and those that try are held at arm’s length with him manipulating events toward his own ends. Whether he ever allowed community to help him work through his trauma and pain relies on his own shared stories, of which seem suspect since what he says to one person doesn’t always align with what he says to another of the same event. The best we have is a journal entry from a prior expedition where he expresses his pain and hopes — hopes he doesn’t seem to have in Maelle’s time.
VERSO’S JOURNAL:
I miss you. I don’t have the right to miss you but I do. I wish I could talk to you. Tell you. Fuck. I don’t know what I would tell you. Just ask that you forgive me. Julie, forgive me. I’m not… I’m not a traitor. I’m not. I’m trying to save… I’m trying to save us all. But you’re right. I am a coward. I’m a fucking coward. You deserved to know why. But I couldn’t. I couldn’t face you properly. Not and still do what had to be done. Papa believes you are Clea’s creation, and even if you’re not, we can no longer trust you. But I think you just wanted answers.
Why? Why couldn’t you just let it go? Why did you convince them to abduct me? Interrogate me? No. I shouldn’t say that. You thought I was a traitor. You were doing what you thought was right, just like we are. I swear to you, I’m doing what’s right. I should have known when you started questioning things that you wouldn’t be fooled. But how could I even explain? You’d have thought I’d gone mad. Doppelgangers. Countless worlds. But Papa’s right. We can’t take the risk. Too much is at stake. Too much. It had to be done. It had to. Clea already took our sister. If we want to save our family, our world, our people, we can’t take any chances. And once we free Maman, she… she’ll bring you back. It won’t be forever. I promise. We deserve to live. All of us. We deserve to exist.
In this journal, Verso admits to his pain and how much he misses Julie, who seems to be a loved one. He justifies his actions, but also shows a willingness to understand why Julie did what she thought was right. He does his best to not internalize the hurtful words that Julie and her expedition likely threw at him — traitor for one. However, he makes a crucial mistake here by assuming Julie’s reactions to the actual truth. He doesn’t allow her to have agency, and instead took that from her by keeping her in the dark. This fueled distrust, especially as he acknowledges Julie had started to question things and notice what doesn’t make sense. Julie wanted answers, and Verso, here at least, acknowledges that she did deserve to know why things transpired the way they did.
He also asserts that they “deserve to exist.” Yet, in Maelle’s time, he seems to have changed his mind entirely as he spends far too much energy trying to convince Maelle to let the Canvas be erased. In his ending, he goes to great lengths to make sure the Canvas is erased. So he breaks all of his promises, and decides that no one deserves to exist in the Canvas. That they are not real and thus it is okay to erase populations.
Why does he come to this conclusion? Partly due to the massive amount of death he witnesses over the decades, and also because he doesn’t have a community to hold him accountable. When one is isolated like Painted Verso, it is all too easy to fall into despair and a desire for annihilation. This is why those who are suicidal shouldn’t be left alone, but need supportive family and friends to help them heal and find new meaning in life.
In Maelle’s ending, Maelle will try to give Verso that opportunity when she offers him the choice of “if you could grow old, would you… find a reason to smile?”
She’s trying to break the cycle of violence by making sure Verso doesn’t have to live the immortal life he so abhors. So she offers solutions that doesn’t end in a genocide of peoples or Painted Verso’s death. Despite the harm Verso has done, Maelle seeks to humanize him and offer him a compromise. Her ending hints strongly that he accepts her alternate solution and seems to find some hope in it, as he does indeed grow old.
This humanization of the person causing harm is also critical to the healing process. The survivor of abuse doesn’t have to be the one to humanize the one causing harm, but those in the community ought to be able to step in for that.
In another essay in the Beyond Survival Anthology, there is an excerpt from the handbook, Ending Child Sexual Abuse:
“We see that abuse happens when one person believes, consciously or unconsciously, that their needs, wants, and preferences take precedence over others. People engaging in abusive behaviors are often numb to, or seemingly unable to feel, the impacts of their behaviors on others.
A process of accountability and transformation requires that the person who has been harmful:
- Stop doing the harm.
- Feels empathy and remorse for the pain and impact of their actions.
- Takes measures, like restitution or reparations, to address the harm caused.
- Takes measures to prevent future harm.
- Works to understand the root causes of their harmful behavior.
- Engages in the ongoing work of accountability, healing, and integration.
- Take action and organizes to support others to heal or to be part of changing community and social conditions that allow for CSA and other forms of violence.”
Here the list shows how difficult healing can be, and how scary it is to make the choice to heal. Yet, it’s crucial for ending the cycle of violence to not dehumanize anyone involved. Dehumanization continues the cycle of violence. As the handbook excerpt says:
“It is important to center the needs of those most directly impacted by the harm in a situation. We also hold that recognizing and attending to the humanity of those who harm is a central aspect of transforming our families, communities, and society. Seeing and dignifying the healing needs of people who abuse also runs counter to the idea that some people “out there” are “monsters” who are expendable or need to be “weeded out.” By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we challenge the dehumanizing logic that is central to systems of oppression, domination, and abuse. By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we maintain our commitment to a vision of true liberation.”
Part of this process means those who cause harm need to understand that not all consequences are “harm.” Consequences to their actions are often necessary and may not be a form of “harm.” For example, Lune calling out the harm of Verso’s lies is the consequence of his actions. She lost trust in him is another consequence. Him having to earn back that trust is yet another consequence. None of these consequences are “harms” done to Verso. It’s simply part of the accountability process.
Humanizing those involved are absolutely critical to ending the cycle of violence. When people are dehumanized, they are stripped of who they are, and this causes harm to all involved. If the cycle of violence is to be ended, then those involved must be humanized and their dignity honored.
This is incredibly difficult to do at times. As a survivor of abuse, I struggled greatly with wanting my abuser to feel the weight of my pain, but through therapy, I learned that truthfully I didn’t want my abuser to be harmed in return. I wanted the cycle of abuse to end. That revelation allowed me to move past the anger and make a conscious choice to heal.
This conscious choice to heal is required of those that cause harm as well. However, shame, guilt, and fear can often make that choice extremely difficult.
Both Verso and Maelle struggle with shame and guilt. Maelle’s guilt and shame lay in her internalizing the blame Aline and Clea lay at her feet. Except, the fire is not Maelle’s fault, but that of the Writers that cause it. Her guilt and shame originate from actions that are not her own.
However, for Verso, his guilt and shame do originate from his own actions, for he did kill members of his prior expeditions, he did lie to people, and he did manipulate people for his own ends. However, it’s crucial to separate shame from guilt. In Kai Cheng Thom’s essay, shame and guilt is defined:
“Shame and social stigma are powerful emotional forces that can prevent us from holding ourselves accountable for being abusive. We don’t want to admit to “being that person,” so we don’t admit to having been abusive at all.
Some people might suggest that people who have been abusive ought to feel shame — after all, perpetuating abuse is wrong. I would argue, though, that this is where the difference between guilt and shame is key. Guilt is feeling bad about something you’ve done; shame is feeling bad about who you are. People who have been abusive should feel guilty for the specific acts of abuse they are responsible for. They should not feel shame about who they are because this means that abuse has become a part of their identity. It means they believe that they are fundamentally a bad person — in other words, “an abuser.”
But if you believe that you are an “abuser,” a bad person who hurts others, then you have already lost the struggle for change — because we cannot change who we are. If you believe that you are a fundamentally good person who has done hurtful or abusive things, then you open the possibility for change.”
When Thom says we “cannot change who we are,” this is in regard to our identities and personality. The “possibility for change” is in regard to our decisions, actions, and future decisions and actions. Those we can change, but we shouldn’t try to alter our personality and identity to be someone we are not. We should focus on how to make better decisions and to act in ways that are more healthy and holistic for us and those around us.
Verso, when he first introduces himself to Expedition 33, calls himself a liar. By doing so, he shows he internalized his actions as part of his identity. This makes it very difficult to hold oneself accountable and being open to the “possibility for change.” If he views lying as crucial to his identity, then why should he stop? It’s who he is, isn’t it? It’s a complete 180 from his journal entry where he refused to accept ‘traitor’ as being who he is.
But lying isn’t who he truly is. He’s, instead, taken a behavior and marked it as a personality trait. Truthfully, his personality isn’t a lying manipulator — we can see bits and pieces of who he is in the scenes where he plays a piano with Maelle, goes out of his way to help Sciel move past her fear of water, shares music with Lune, chats with Esquie, or hangs out with Monoco. He’s a bit silly, fun-loving, jokester, that wants to do the right thing but doesn’t know how. He’s trapped in a cycle of his own making, yet he’s unwilling to recognize his own cycle. Instead, he internalizes the lies as part of who he is, when it’s not — that’s his trauma speaking.
Until Verso can recognize his own cycle of violence and shame, he remains trapped in his cycle, unable to acknowledge his abuse and never able to progress toward healing. Even in his ending, when he fights Maelle to force her from the Canvas, his solution to his cycle is to annihilate himself and everyone in the Canvas. He refuses to see another way. Yet, until he recognizes that his harmful behaviors are not core to his personality, he won’t ever see how to stop his cycle of harm.
This is where Thom goes on to state that as much as those who cause harm shouldn’t “expect anyone to forgive you,” they should, however, forgive themselves:
“Being accountable is not about earning forgiveness. This is to say, it doesn’t matter how accountable you are — nobody has to forgive you for being abusive, least of all the person you have abused. In fact, using the process of “doing” accountability to manipulate or coerce someone into their forgiveness to you is an extension of the abuse dynamic. It center the abuser, not the survivor. One shouldn’t aim for forgiveness when holding oneself accountable. Rather self-accountability is about learning how we have harmed others, why we have harmed others, and how we can stop.
But… you do have to forgive yourself. Because you can’t stop hurting other people until you stop hurting yourself. When one is abusive, when one is hurting so much on the inside that it feels like the only way to make it stop is to hurt other people, it can be terrifying to face the hard truth of words like abuse and accountability. One might rather blame others, blame society, blame the people we love, instead of ourselves.
This is true, I think, of community as well as individuals. It is so much easier, so much simpler, to create hard lines between good and bad people, to create walls to shut the shadowy archetype of “the abuser” out instead of mirrors to look at the abuser within.
Perhaps this is why self-accountability tools like this list are so rare. It takes courage to be accountable. To decide to heal. But when we do decide, we discover incredible new possibilities. There is good and bad in everyone. Anyone can heal, given the right circumstances, and everyone can heal, given the same. You are capable of loving and being loved. Always. Always. Always.”
These are critical points for accountability. The process isn’t so we can “earn forgiveness” like it’s some sort of game achievement. Accountability is about learning, listening, seeking to understand why we did what we did, and finding solutions on how we can stop. Where we end the cycle of violence and instead move into a trajectory toward healing and choosing actions that cause the least harm and the most good.
And what is the most good? How do we know what is good?
To understand what ‘good’ means, we need to briefly explore ethics and morality. This game, thankfully, has already given us that exploration already in the Lumierians — Gustave and Lune in particular. I won’t dig too deeply into this as I feel that Lord Khoury does a much better job in his video here (which I recommend as he lays out an excellent case for why Maelle’s ending is a morally good one). I will simply briefly highlight Gustave’s and Lune’s use of Utilitarianism.
Consequences and Utilitarianism
Gustave, at the start of the game points out how the Gommage seems almost gentle, how it makes Lumiere seem complacent, but it is no less violent. He defines the act of violence and injustice, and in his temporal reality, Lumiere identified the best route to liberation is through confrontation with the Paintress.
Throughout the Prologue and Act 1, we are shown how Gustave lives his morals and how he determines actions to be morally good. These deliberations rely on what is known as utilitarianism. The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines this as:
“…utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one’s own good.”
Gustave’s moralism shows through the projects he describes — teaching his apprentices, Aquafarms, etc. — and in how he interacts with those around him. He understands quite well the consequences of possible actions, and chooses the ones that will do the most good.
For example, when Expedition 33 is separated, Gustave determines the right action is to seek Maelle. He evaluates the consequences of this, and although his emotions push for a specific end result, he still evaluates based on the known information at that time. As in, the note inscribed on the Indigo Tree, the lack of survivors at the Indigo Tree meeting point, and the knowledge of how difficult it is to survive alone.
GUSTAVE: It’s a lead, or only lead, whoever this is has Maelle. We have to go.
LUNE: No, not yet. Protocol is to regroup at rendevous point and wait three days. This message feels off. If it was an Expeditioner, they would have stayed here. Everyone knows the protocol.
GUSTAVE: Right, but they may have been in danger. Maybe this location has been compromised. Things change in the field.
LUNE: There’s a reason its protocol.
GUSTAVE: Protocol doesn’t cover every contingency. You know that.
LUNE: There’s a reason its Protocol. We designed it to yield the optimal result in the vast majority of situations.
GUSTAVE: Was our entire team dying part of that “optimal result?”
LUNE: …
GUSTAVE: Look, I’m going after Maelle. Protocol also states ‘never move solo.’ I’ll let you choose what protocol to break.Here we see how both Gustave and Lune lay out their reasoning for the preferred actions. Gustave focuses on the consequences and concludes going after Maelle will save the most lives based on their current information. Lune, who attempts to argue for the Protocol, finds herself faced with possible consequences that could either endanger Gustave — if he goes alone — or herself — if she stays and he goes — or the mission — if the team is split up.
Lune follows him because of the two protocols they are breaking — one results in a higher number of lives saved and better chance at surviving long enough to complete their mission. Thus, after evaluating what is known and the consequences of various actions, she determines the action that achieve the most good.
In survival, determining the consequences of actions that result in the most lives saved fits firmly in the utilitarianism worldview. Thus, in determining what actions are ‘good,’ it is crucial to seek to understand the consequences of that action for everyone — not just ourselves. This is where Verso falls short as his understanding of the consequences of his actions revolves around the impact on himself; he continues to assert his view, even when others protest and show the harm of it.
Part of that is because he doesn’t show a willingness to examine the situation fully with other people. He’s kept himself relatively isolated for decades, and sought to meet his needs on his own. Isolation can easily distort our thinking and lead us toward despair.
With the Lumierians, we see an alternate route. Gustave and Lune actively talk through the situation at the Indigo Tree. Gustave lays out his analysis and Lune does as well. Gustave, however, focuses on the lives he can actively save in that moment rather than the lives they do not know still live or not. Though this dialogue, the two examine consequences of their actions. Both go back and forth in acknowledging what the other is saying, and also responding to the concerns brought up. In the end, Gustave’s decision to go after Maelle is vindicated in his eyes, and he offers Lune a choice. Lune, in turn, honors the protocol that will save the most lives — staying with Gustave and saving someone that is likely still alive. Considering, they have no further data on anyone else surviving, going after Maelle ends up being justified as the ‘good’ decision through the consequences of their actions.
We see this same sort of analysis play out a few times in Act 1 with how the group analyzes the situation, examines consequences, and come to a decision. Gustave and Lune lead the charge here, and their example provides a litmus test for Maelle to use in trying to determine what decisions are ‘good.’
For another example, Gustave and Lune’s intense fight before they find Maelle:
GUSTAVE: I am not letting Maelle die out here. I’m taking her home.
LUNE: What? No, no, no, we have a mission —
GUSTAVE: Oh, fuck the mission! Fuck the mission, Lune. What are we gonna do? Tell me. What are we gonna do? We’re gonna take down the Paintress, just the three of us? My — my gun and your sparks?
LUNE: I didn’t take you for a coward.
GUSTAVE: I’m not a coward.
LUNE: You swore the oath. “When one falls, we continue.”
GUSTAVE: Yes, I know.
LUNE: When one falls. WHEN one falls. Not if. When. We knew not all of us would make it. But “We Continue.” As long even one of us stands, our fight is not over.
GUSTAVE: But I’m not afraid to fight, it’s just Maelle, she’s —
LUNE: Maelle swore the same oath!
GUSTAVE: I know that!
LUNE: She choose her life! Come on, we always said that the future of Lumiere was more important than any —
GUSTAVE: individual life, yes.
LUNE: Do you still believe that?Here Lune reminds Gustave of the consequences of swearing their oath. Consequences all of them knew before they swore the oath. She also makes it clear that Maelle also swore this oath, knowing the risks, and that she choose that. Lune is reminding Gustave of Maelle’s agency. Through this conversation, she’s challenging him on the consequences of what will happen if he takes Maelle back: he’d break his oath, he’d leave Lune here to continue alone, he’d violate Maelle’s agency, and he would put the future of Lumiere at risk.
This conversation pushes Gustave toward the ‘good’ decision, which is to honor Maelle’s agency. Something he will confirm in a later conversation after they are reunited with Maelle and have found Sciel with the Gestrals:
GUSTAVE: Maybe you should stay…
MAELLE: What?
GUSTAVE: It’s safer in the village.
MAELLE: And miss the change to meet Esquie? No way.
GUSTAVE: Maelle…
MAELLE: I’m okay. We stick together.This conversation proved Lune to be correct. The consequences Lune had laid out as her reasoning on the ‘good choice,’ made it clear that Maelle had chosen this life. Gustave here confirms it with Maelle herself, and he then honors that choice.
Thus, Gustave and Lune provide excellent examples of the use of utilitarianism for determining the morally ‘good’ choice, as well as how to handle conflict. They also show how the Canvas Lumierians honor the agency of others.
It’s through our dialogue with those around us that we come to understand possible consequences and how they may impact others. That dialog then allows us to generate ideas that cause the least harm to all involved and saves the most lives (or in less dire situations, helps the most people feel heard, understood, and agency honored). This can be difficult to do, and in times of danger, we often act on instinct because there isn’t enough time to deliberate on consequences.
However, after the danger is over, we must be willing to analyze what happened and take accountability for our actions. We must not take on the responsibility of other people’s actions, only take on our own. We need to listen to others, and they in turn listen to us. We need to be open to change behaviors if we cause harm, which we see Lune, Gustave, Maelle, and Sciel do on their journey. That’s part of holding one another accountable and choosing healing.
Maelle having the support of her Canvas family is critical to her own journey toward healing. The scene where Maelle has a waking nightmare in Act 1 after the Gestral Village, we see Gustave, Sciel, and Lune gather around her to comfort her. They bring down her panic, and stay at her side until she’s calm. This level of care is not shown by the Dessendre family toward Maelle. Thus, Maelle finds her strongest support system within the Canvas, away from an environment of abuse and neglect. This chosen family helps hold her accountable and supports her as she makes decisions to end the cycle of violence. To choose to heal.
Verso struggles to understand this lesson the entirety of the game. The only clue we are given that he may finally learn it is in Maelle’s ending, when Maelle offers a different solution to his desire to cease his immortal life. He still lives in her ending, but he’s grown old. His fingers find it harder to play the piano — hence the dissonance at first before he plays. Perhaps in this ending he learns how to be accountable and chooses healing. The game seems to imply it, but the game also leaves it open-ended.
In Verso’s ending, Verso doesn’t choose healing but instead chooses to take the agency from everyone involved — Maelle, the faded boy, the different Canvas peoples — and fades into annihilation. Maelle, then, returns to life as Alicia Dessendre, who is disabled and essentially institutionalized in her family’s manor. She has no support system, and her mother still looks at her with disdain. Clea still offers no support, only goes off to do her one-person war. In the ending, Renoir doesn’t even look at Alicia — only at Aline. Alicia stands isolated, and tries to smile, tries to see anything good in this, but instead, she hallucinates the family she’s lost. As they gommage away, I noticed how her shoulders droop and she holds Esquie tighter. A sign that her hope evaporates with them? Again, the game leaves it open-ended.
When still in an abusive environment, healing is out of reach, even if one chooses it, because the circumstances causing the trauma is ongoing. One must exit the abusive environment, but to do so often requires support of others to assist in finding a safer place to be. If there is no one there to provide the necessary support to heal, then it is incredibly difficult to actively heal.
Thus, healing from grief and from abuse both require breaking cycles, but to break those cycles, we need the necessarily family/friends and/or community support. It is not truly possible to do this when we are isolated, because isolation itself is a form of harm that can easily lead us into despair, as we saw with Painted Verso.
Breaking the cycle of violence can only happen when we have built up a community of people who love us for who we are. Then and only then, will we have the support to choose to heal, to hold ourselves accountable, to actively listen to others, and when needed alter our behaviors toward more healthy patterns.
This is not an easy process, and it will require hard work from all involved. Yet the payoff is a healthier existence and a chance to thrive rather than just survive.
#abuse #accountability #Characters #clairObscurExpedition33 #disability #GameAnalysis #gameNarrative #healing #healingJourney #justice #mentalHealth #narrativeAnalysis #responsibility #transformativeJustice #writing
-
Clair Obscur: To be accountable to those that come after
CROSSPOST FROM COMRADERY. Part of a three part series: Disability (part 1), Right to Exist (part 2), and Accountability and Healing (part 3).
In my prior essays, I related themes woven through Clair Obscur to show how it can parallel real world complexities and oppression.
For the character of Alicia and Gustave (and even Lune if we accept my assertion of her as neurodivergent), disability cords through the story and asks questions the game may not have intended. I explored in that essay how Disability was a class constructed by capitalism to control labor and those unable to labor, and through that I showed how disability has been used to denote evil and bad throughout American history. But Clair Obscur twists those tropes on their head and refuses to villianize the disabled within the game. Instead, Alicia, Gustave, and others are given complex journeys and heralded as heroes in a way. Yet, by the end, the final ending choice between Verso and Maelle felt as if the player was the judge determining the fate of the disabled person for them. I wrote:
Will we be given the care and support we need to thrive? Will we be given agency to choose our own fate and route to healing?
Clair Obscur offers that choice to the player, thus placing the fate of a disabled person in their hands. In a way, the player acts as the judge who determines the fate of a disabled person, to determine whether they ever access the care and benefits they need. It is a replica of how our real world works, and it forces a painful glimpse into the struggles of disabled people.
This essay led me to my next where I explored the nature of the Canvas people and whether they are real. I examined how this paralleled dehumanizing narratives that subjugate and destroy unique cultures. I laid down a map of the shifting temporal realities the game presents through the different main characters of each act: Gustave (Lumierian reality), Verso (immortal painted Dessendre reality), and Maelle (both Dessendre reality and Lumierian reality). How weaving these different realities forces us to contend with the nature of what is real and who is allowed to exist within that reality.
The conclusion I came to, which perhaps will not surprise anyone reading my writings, is that I chose the ending that gave agency to people and saved the most lives. I could not accept that the unique lives of those in the Canvas were less than the Dessendre family. Nor could I accept anyone deciding for a disabled person how they must exist and heal.
By exploring these darker aspects of Clair Obscur, I undoubtedly focused on the more abusive and manipulative aspects of the Dessendre family to show how unsupportive they’ve been to Alicia/Maelle. The evidence painted within the game left me uneasy about the Dessendre family, partly informed by my own traumas as a queer nonbinary disabled person. Yes, they do love each other but love does not mean abuse cannot happen or exist, which I argued in my essay on Disability. That darkness echoed trauma and pain that destroying the Canvas cannot truly heal. A cycle of violence doesn’t heal through the use of more violence, but only when the cycle is stopped.
One could argue that Verso sought to stop the cycle of grief, and isn’t that stopping the cycle of violence? But that negates the temporal reality of the Canvas people, who endured countless oppressive actions and outright genocide. Sacrificing a population of people in an effort to ‘heal’ one family only continues the cycle of violence, and it doesn’t solve the lack of support in the Dessendre world, which Verso’s ending never truly reconciles. Alicia is still isolated, still without a voice, still disabled in a world that has done little to meet any of her needs.
So then, do we ever exit the cycle of violence? And what would it look like to attempt such a thing?
In my Disability essay, I pointed out healing cannot begin until we exit the abusive/traumatic environment/situation. Part of healing involves the end of the cycle of violence, which differs based on who abused and who endured the abuse. Those that abuse must hold themselves accountable and engage in repair as well as work on their own healing. Those that endured abuse must work on their own healing, and recognize the best place for that, which might require them to not engage again the person who harmed them. Ending the cycle of violence and moving toward accountability and healing is not an easy process and the trajectory will differ based on who is involved.
Yet even with those differing paths, one must still hold oneself accountable in order to push forward in the healing process. We will backslide. We will mess up, but it is crucial to acknowledge when we cause harm or when we make a mistake, apologize, and do better. That’s all part of the accountability process.
So in this essay, I want to explore what accountability is and how it does and doesn’t manifest in the characters’ storylines. Whether the characters were able to truly end the cycle of violence and move forward into healing or if the game leaves those questions open-ended.
What is Accountability? And how do we do it?
Accountability within today’s culture, especially within America where I’m situated, is wrought with videos and images of call-out culture. Where people call others out publically the harm and demand repair. While this may be a useful tactic when facing off against the rich and powerful, it ultimately isn’t true accountability. Or at least not the kind that may lead to actual healing and change.
So when I speak of accountability, I do not mean that public spectacle. I instead mean conversations like what Maelle and Verso have in Clair Obscur. They happen on a personal level and/or within the community, and often are not on a public stage. They may instead happen behind closed doors with or without a mediator. The survivor may decide or not decide to be present, while the person who harmed them works toward healing and accountability. It’s a complex process that goes far, far beyond the initial identification of the harm.
In the first chapter of the anthology Beyond Suvival: Strategies and Stories from the Transformative Justice Movement, editors Ejeris Dixon and Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha writes:
“Transformative justice and community accountability are terms that describe ways to address violence without relying on police or prisons. These approaches often work to prevent violence, to intervene when harm is occurring, to hold people accountable, and to transform individuals and society to build safer communities. These strategies are some of hte only options that marginalized communities have to address harm.
The work of transformative justice can happen in a variety of ways. Some groups support survivors by helping them identify their needs and boundaries while ensuring their attackers agree to these boundaries and atone for the harm they caused. Other groups create safe spaces and sanctuaries to support people escaping from violence.”
Here they show how accountability is only one piece of a larger puzzle of addressing violence. Without accountability, much of the work to address and end the cycle of violence would fracture and fall apart, yet as crucial as it is, full healing requires far more than just accountability.
Ejeris Dixon goes on to add:
“Violence and oppression break community ties and breed fear and distrust. At its core, the work to create safety is to build meaningful, accountable relationships within our neighborhoods and communities.”
Without trust, one cannot build safety. Without safety, one struggles to be vulnerable. Without vulnerability, one struggles to heal. And without the choice to heal, one will fail to hold oneself accountable.
This isn’t to say these are steps in a process, but more they are interlinking threads that are woven into a larger tapestry. Each thread crucial to the final form, and the tapestry wouldn’t be the same without each thread and stitch. None of this is easy, but then healing isn’t ever easy.
Healing always requires a choice. Do we choose to heal? Do we choose to hold ourselves accountable to that journey? Do we choose to be accountable for our actions and engage in repair when we inevitably cause harm? How do we engage in repair? Are we willing to be responsible and listen to those harmed by us? To let those harmed take the lead? Can we separate shame from guilt? To not fear accountability but instead embrace it so all involved can move forward in healing?
Of course, asking those questions can feel daunting, and it’s why relationship-building is so crucial. Healing requires support of one’s family, friends, and/or community. We can’t really heal in isolation. In chapter three of Beyond Survival, Blythe Barnow speaks about how isolation harmed her ability to heal:
“In the end, that was the most damaging. Doing it alone. Believing it was all my responsibility. Not the assault. But the healing. The justice. The protection for nameless other girls. I leaned heavy into the skills I learned as a child, over responsibility, independence, sharp analysis, and self-sacrifice. Which meant I never asked for the support I was so desperate for.
Because what I needed, maybe more than his apology, was a community of people who could help me hold and honor the stories that led to this one, who could help me uproot the layers of silence learned through too much violence. I needed to be asked what I wanted and what I was hoping for. I needed someone to help me craft those letters, someone to remind me that I could list expectations. I needed someone who was going to sit with me through the fallout. Someone who could read the responses people sent me and tell me to wait before reading them myself. I needed someone beside me to reflect the ways my own trauma, old and new, was informing the process. I needed someone who could show me love that was deeper and more nuanced than just hating him.”
I relate deeply to Barnow’s words here because isolation can steal away our voice, where we put on a brave mask for others. Often society and even friends and family can put tremendous pressure on survivors to ‘move on’ from the harm, to not speak of it, to stay silent, but that too is part of the cycle of violence. If we cannot acknowledge violence happened, how can we ever stop it from replaying again and again? Many therapists and researchers have written of the cycle of domestic violence and how it can sometimes thread through families. Part of that relies on silence and isolation.
Breaking silence and isolation requires the support of others, and it’s not easy to do. Believe me, I’ve struggled with this my whole life, but I’ve made progress on my healing from abuse because of the support of dear friends and good therapists.
This is why Maelle and Verso are able to have any conversation that deals with accountability. Lune, Sciel, Esquie, and Monoco form a support system to help them break the cycle of silence and isolation. This chosen family gives Maelle the love she needs to learn and grow, and they attempt to offer this to Verso as well.
For example, exploring the Reacher area will lead to the peak, where Painted Alicia ignores her brother to speak with Maelle privately — here the color fades into greyscale. She leads Maelle into the cavern at the peak to show her the true axon, and also to express her thoughts to Maelle through gestures and their fencing match.
After Painted Alicia leads Maelle back to the others, the scene snaps back into color. Maelle offers Alicia “a new beginning,” and I think she meant to repaint Alicia’s face and restore her voice. However, Painted Alicia grasps Maelle’s hand and presses it against her, thus thwarting Maelle’s attempt to repaint her face. Instead, she gasps out her desire for Maelle to gommage her. Verso doesn’t have a chance to stop it, because Maelle does as Painted Alicia asks.
Verso responds by trying to stop Maelle, and ends up holding the red petal remains of Painted Alicia. Sciel is at his side to comfort him in his grief.
The conversation they have later at camp delves into the impact of Maelle’s act:
MAELLE: I’m sorry.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: It’s what she wanted. I owed her that much. We owed her that much. I honoured her wishes. That’s something neither you nor Renoir ever did. And not Maman either.
VERSO: … I didn’t get to say goodbye. You didn’t wait. You didn’t give me a chance to persuade her.
MAELLE: She knew what she wanted. You wouldn’t have been able to sway her.
VERSO: She’s not you. You don’t know that. I know her better than you do. But you didn’t even give me the chance to try. You just erased her.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’ve lost two brothers. You know what it’s like to lose your sibling and never get the chance to say goodbye.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: You Painters. You just do what you want, you don’t care how it affects the rest of us.
MAELLE: I do care. I know you’re hurting, but the person who made that decision wasn’t me. It was her. It would have been wrong to deny her just so you could try and talk her out of her decision.Here Maelle seeks to understand Verso and why he is upset. She wants him to understand her reasons, where she sought to honor Painted Alicia’s wishes. She argues here for Painted Alicia’s agency in this, and how taking away her agency wouldn’t have been right.
Verso lashes out because of his grief and pain, but his words here “you don’t care how it affects the rest of us,” doesn’t align with the truth of Painted Alicia and Maelle’s actions at the peak of Reacher. Painted Alicia had made her wishes known, where she did not wish to continue in the disabled body Aline had given her in punishment for an action she’d never done. Perhaps there could have been other ways for her to thrive, but Painted Alicia had tried for decades to find that. Yet, perhaps it is irony that she sought the same annihilation that Painted Verso secretly seeks.
Maelle tries, in her own way, to honor the agency of others. To offer them different solutions, but Painted Alicia didn’t want any other solution. She had taken Maelle’s hand to press against her and urged her to gommage her away.
Does Maelle come to understand what Verso is trying to articulate here? Because so far, she gives her reasons and argues for Painted Alicia’s agency. The scene continues:
VERSO: She’s the last of my family. I have no one left now.
MAELLE: You have me. You have us.
VERSO: MAELLE. I wasn’t ready.
MAELLE: I don’t understand. You were ready when you set Papa free. You expected that he would erase the Canvas and everyone in it. Isn’t that the same thing?
VERSO: It’s different! It’s different. Why did she do that?
MAELLE: You know why.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: But you’re right. I should have thought of you. I should have given you a chance to say goodbye. I’m truly sorry, Verso.
VERSO: … *cries* At least she’s free now.Maelle briefly gets defensive because she struggles to understand, but then she takes a moment to think. She may view the two events of setting Renoir free to erase everyone versus her honoring Alicia’s wishes to be erased as equivalent, but Verso does not. We then see Maelle hold herself accountable by putting herself in Verso’s shoes in an effort to understand. She admits that Verso is indeed right. She should have thought of him, and she apologizes. As one continues through the journey, Maelle does her best to honor this by doing better.
She also tries to show Verso that he does have people left. He has Maelle, Lune, Sciel, Monoco, and others as they all have been trying to reach out and build connections with him. He chooses to hold himself in isolation from them, whether he is conscious of it or not.
She actively does her best to hold herself accountable, to learn from her actions, and this shows how she wishes to end the cycle of harm. She wants everyone’s agency to be honored, for people to find what they need, and although she may offer different ways to do that, if the person ultimately rejects a solution, who is Maelle to refuse to honor their decision? For a sixteen-year-old, she’s remarkably mature here.
Verso, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to hold that same self-awareness, or if he did, he seems to have lost it. He’s so caught up in his cycle of violence, that he struggles to see any other solution as viable. To see this, let’s look at a conversation near the start of Act 3, when Maelle returns to the Canvas:
MAELLE: You should have helped me remember.
VERSO: Yeah… I wanted to, but I… I’m sorry.
MAELLE: I’m sorry too. If I’d listened to Maman… if I hadn’t trusted the Writers, Verso would still be alive, and you —
VERSO: Wouldn’t exist.
MAELLE: Wouldn’t be caught in the middle. Maman did a terrible thing, painting you into Verso’s Canvas. Giving you his memories. Pretending the fire only took me. But I’m glad you exist.
VERSO: Your father was right to erase everyone. It’s better this way.
MAELLE: Better for who? Verso would have never wanted his Canvas gone. He loved Esquie and his Gestrals and the Grandis.
VERSO: It was killing my … our mother, staying here so long in a make-believe world with her make-believe family.
MAELLE: It’s not make-believe. It’s not… you’re not.. To me…Here Verso sees only one solution: annihilation. However, his reasons for why he manipulated and lied to Maelle are just that — excuses. So he acknowledges the hurt he did and apologizes. For true accountability to happen, it’s not enough to simply apologize; one’s present and future behaviors will need changed to avoid replicating the harm and continuing the cycle of violence.
For Maelle, she also apologizes, but in this instance, what is there for her to apologize for? Perhaps she shouldn’t have trusted whoever the Writers were, but she is not responsible for them starting a fire and for Verso’s death. Maelle is only responsible for her own actions, not the actions of others. This shows how she’s internalized the shame and guilt Clea and Aline both shoved onto her; both needed someone to blame, and Alicia, the survivor, is a convenient person to lay down the blame. Maelle/Alicia is young and lacking the support to realize that she does not need to carry this blame as it is not hers to bear.
Painted Verso does not try to negate the blame Maelle/Alicia puts on herself. Instead, he tries to convince Maelle that it is better for those in the Canvas to not exist, for the Canvas to be destroyed, but Maelle refuses to accept that destruction of entire people’s is the right answer. She disagrees that everyone in the Canvas is make-believe. To her they are as real as herself. This ties into what I discussed in my Right to Exist essay.
I wrote there:
We have now returned to one of the most crucial questions in the game: What is the right decision in regards to the fate of the Canvas people and the fate of Alicia/Maelle? As I have hopefully shown thus far, erasing people’s temporal realities causes immense harm and is genocide; people have a right to exist, and sacrificing them for the ‘greater good of society’ (or in this case the Dessendre family) cannot ever be the morally right answer.
Necrosecurity, as I spoke of earlier, paints a bleak and death-filled reality, where healing cannot ever take place because denial and control is at its roots. [Defined as sacrificing a population for the greater ‘good’ of society.] Until people’s temporal realities are respected and their agency honored, healing will forever stay out of reach.
Thus, escaping pain by committing genocide is not healing. It’s a continuation of the cycle of violence. The marginalized populations facing genocide have a right to exist, and their temporal realities are as valid and important as the oppressor. Just as the temporal reality of the Canvas people are as valid and important as the Dessendre family.
Healing can only happen when the cycle of violence ends.
Verso tries to justify the death and destruction as necessary to end the cycle, but Maelle refuses to accept that reasoning. She believes Verso is wrong when he claims his self and those of the Canvas people are make-believe, and she believes they have a right to exist. She acknowledges harm happened to Painted Verso. She apologizes for her part in it. This is a step forward in the addressing of harm and ending the cycle: acknowledging what happened and why it wasn’t okay.
Again, Maelle cannot repair what her mother did because it’s not her burden to bear. Only Aline can take responsibility for her own actions. Maelle can only take responsibility for Maelle’s actions, which Maelle tries her best to do. She tries to hold herself accountable, which is something neither Clea nor Aline ever seem to do. This act of being accountable seems to have been taught to Maelle perhaps by Renoir, but far more likely it was Gustave, Lune, Sciel, and the Lumierians who taught her this.
She may have regained her memories from the real world, but that doesn’t mean she lost her memories of growing up as a Lumierian. She holds both in her head, as she will admit to Lune and Sciel after she brings them back:
MAELLE: I’m sorry. I didn’t — My memories — I would’ve told you if I’d known —
LUNE: Don’t apologize. You were trapped too. You lived among us. You’re one of us. Even if you’re also one of them.
MAELLE: It’s… so weird. I have memories of two childhoods. Two homes. Two Lumieres.
SCIEL: You’re not an orphan anymore. You just found your family. Don’t you want to be with them?
MAELLE: I love my family, but … they’re all gone. In one way of another. And you’re my family too. So are Gustave and Emma. And I didn’t see it at the time, but all the families who took turns taking care of me…Here Maelle, once again, tries to take on burdens that aren’t hers to hold. She had no memory of being a Paintress, so how could she have told them? Lune understands this and gently points this out to her. To root her in the facts of what they now know. She accepts who Maelle is — Maelle’s full self of being of Lune’s Lumiere but also of the Dessendre’s Lumiere — and provides comfort in this way.
Sciel, in turn, asks a crucial question, even though her voice aches with grief. “Don’t you want to be with them?”
Maelle’s answer is heart-rending, because truthfully, her family is gone. Clea is off fighting a one-person war with the Writers, Aline — Maelle’s mother — blames Maelle and casts her aside, Renoir may seek to bring Maelle back but he too has been neglectful of her, and Verso is gone. So what roots her in the Dessendre World? There she is disabled with no support system and half the family is abusive toward her (as I discuss in my Disability essay). So in a way, her Dessendre family is “gone” in the sense they do not truly support her, not like the Canvas Lumierians.
When Maelle blames herself for those that have harmed her or those she loved, she exhibits a common traumatic response; when she apologizes for actions that aren’t truly hers to own, that is also a traumatic response.
I know I’ve fallen into those trauma responses, where I had internalized the blame that it was my fault for the abuse done to me, my fault for the sexual assault. However, that blame is false. In reality, it wasn’t my fault as I did not do those actions. Those actions were done by other people to me. Just as Maelle did not paint Painted Verso, Aline did that. Just as Maelle didn’t start the fire, the Writers did that. Just as Maelle didn’t kill Verso, the fire and whoever started the fire did that. Just as Maelle didn’t lie to Lune and Sciel, she had no memories of her Dessendre life and thus no information to share; instead, Verso had that information and chose to not share it.
Maelle still tries to take accountability, but truthfully, it is not hers to bear. Lune gently teaches her that in that scene above.
Understanding these truths are hard when society and/or loved ones pressure us into thinking it’s our fault we were hurt. That’s just a falsehood to avoid accountability and to pressure survivors into silence, which effectively continues the cycle of violence.
To break out of that cycle, we must acknowledge that we are only responsible for our own actions and speech. Then we must separate out shame and guilt. We must choose to heal and continue toward healing no matter how hard that trajectory may become. But to even make that choice requires us to have support of others, to help us see when we are falling back into harmful thought processes that inhibit our ability to heal. Those that support us help us stay accountable to the process of healing.
Lune and Sciel both act as supporters for Maelle here. Lune, especially as she has also been hurt by Verso’s actions, seeks to hold Verso accountable. At this point in the game, Lune acts as a protective older sister to Maelle, while Sciel often falls into a motherly role. That’s part of how chosen families relate to one another — they fall into roles with one another, and those roles may change depending on the situation. Sometimes Maelle may be the more sisterly one to offer support to Lune or Sciel.
Chosen family can be a powerful support group and a crucial one, especially if one’s biological family has been abusive toward us. In the case of Maelle, some of her family members have been abusive toward her. So her chosen family provides the support for Maelle to work toward healing from that.
So what about Painted Verso? How does he hold himself accountable after this massive reveal? He hid the truth of who Maelle was from not only Maelle but everyone in the party. He manipulated them toward his end-goals. He chooses to talk to each individually, which the player can choose which character to start these conversations (or could choose to avoid them). If the player chooses to have these conversations, then how do they go?
Lune calls Painted Verso out for his lies:
LUNE: I was right not to trust you.
VERSO: And what would you have done in my position?
LUNE: I wouldn’t have betrayed my expedition. I would have warned them that everyone they cared about was about to be erased. That THEY were about to be erased. I would have told them the truth. Because after everything we’ve been through, we deserved that.
VERSO: So you’d choose your expedition over your mother?
LUNE: That’s your problem. You think in false dichotomies. It wasn’t an “either / or” a situation. Other solutions were possible, if you’d only trusted us enough to ask.
VERSO: Knowing what you know now, would you have helped me force my mother out of the Canvas?
LUNE: … *sighs*
VERSO: I don’t apologize for saving her. But I am sorry I broke your trust. And I will do everything I can to help bring everyone back.
LUNE: I guess we’ll see.Here Verso is intent on his reasons for his lies and manipulations. Lune, of course, points to the faults in his argument, because there might have been more solutions possible. Verso’s response is to put Lune on the spot, which when it comes to intense conversations like this? It’s very hard to consider alternatives when one is upset, so of course Lune couldn’t respond right away. She takes her time deliberating and analyzing possible solutions. Put her on the spot? And she falls quiet because she has not been given adequate time to process the information and analyze for other solutions. So Verso acts rather unfairly toward her, and then makes a promise to win back her trust.
For Sciel, she processes her anger and hurt differently. She may have chosen to ‘get over’ her anger, but the hurt in her voice betrays how she feels. She tries to keep her tone light, but the desperate hope still slips through. Their conversation ends with her saying:
SCIEL: As long as you help me bring Pierre back. You owe me.
VERSO: You got it.Once again, he makes a promise. Yet, his conversation with Maelle shows he may not honor the promise to Lune and Sciel:
MAELLE: We have to push Papa out of the Canvas before he erases everything.
VERSO: I’m surprised he hasn’t already.
MAELLE: He’s been weakened by his battle with Maman. That’s probably why he hasn’t come after us. But it won’t stop him for long.
VERSO: If you and your father keep fighting, you risk breaking the world again. Another Fracture, but this time, it might be you trapped inside the Monolith.
MAELLE: What’s the alternative?
VERSO: Maybe… maybe you should go home.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’re fighting each other but you’re all doing the same thing.
MAELLE: No.
VERSO: Aline wants her son back. Renoir wants you and Aline back. You want Gustave back. The cycle we needed to break wasn’t the Gommage. It’s your family’s cycle of grief.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: Our whole world carries the burden of your family’s grief.Although there is truth that the Canvas world carries the burden of the Dessendre’s family’s grief, he makes an assumption about Maelle’s motivations. Yes, Maelle may want Gustave back, but she earlier clarified that she doesn’t believe Painted Verso nor the Canvas people are ‘make-believe.’ She views them as real, and she refuses to let people die simply because her father decided they were a threat. So his assertion that it’s her continuing the cycle fails to understand the complexity in her motivations.
Instead, Verso tries to argue again why Maelle should leave the Canvas, but if she does, that means Renoir will finish erasing the Canvas and Lune and Sciel will never see their friends and family again. In fact, Lune and Sciel will cease to exist too. This conversation reveals that Verso is simply telling Lune and Sciel what they want to hear so that they can aid him in his goals. He isn’t holding himself accountable here. He’s manipulating everyone to push them toward the end-goal that he’s decided is best.
In doing this, he shows a lack of ability to understand and learn from the hurt and pain he’s done to others. He’s not really listening to them because he’s mapped out ways to carefully push each person into the actions he needs for his own goals. Thus, he’s continuing the cycle of violence.
Maelle has made it clear she wants the cycle of violence to end. She wants to save the Canvas people, because she believes they have a right to exist, that they are not ‘make-believe’ but real. Yet in these conversations, Verso turns up his charm and manipulation tactics to try to tweak the situation to his benefit. He wants Maelle to give up and leave the canvas so Renoir can erase it. He needs Lune and Sciel to work with them so that he can reach Renoir as he suspects that confrontation will be the only way he can push Maelle out of the Canvas.
Healing cannot happen in a manipulative environment that continues to cause harm to others. In the Beyond Survival Anthology, Kai Cheng Thom’s essay called ‘What to Do when You’ve Been Abusive,’ has a list of steps to assist people on that journey toward accountability and healing. The first step:
“‘Learn to Listen When Someone Says You Have Hurt Them.’ When one has been abusive, the very first — and one of the most difficult — skills of holding oneself accountable is learning to simply listen to the person or people whom one has harmed:
- Listening without becoming defensive.
- Listening without trying to equivocate or make excuses.
- Listening without minimizing or denying the extent of the harm.
- Listening without trying to make oneself the center of the story being told.
When someone, particularly a partner or loved one, tells you that you have hurt or abused them, it can be easy to understand this as an accusation or attack…”
Thom here lists what Verso struggles to do in these conversations. He listens but is also defensive with Lune about his actions and proceeds to make excuses for his actions. In a way, Verso struggles to not see these confrontation as an attack, but truthfully, Lune calling out the harm isn’t an attack, it’s a consequence. Pointing out harm isn’t an attack but a courageous moment of honesty and vulnerability. Whether Verso sees that gift of vulnerability is hard to say as his actions and words are conflict depending on the person to whom he speaks.
Verso tends to make himself the center of the story being told in both Lune and Maelle’s conversations. The only one he doesn’t do this with is Sciel, but then Sciel doesn’t really give him that chance. Sciel recognizes that he speaks to give his reasons, and she doesn’t want to hear it, so she instead takes the conversation toward what they will do next. It’s a masterful way of pivoting the conversation to a more active form of accountability — Sciel is essentially asking Verso, “So, you hurt us, what are you going to do to fix this? Here’s one solution.”
Verso accepts Sciel’s solution, but then his conversation with Maelle, he goes on the rampage. He points out her family’s cycle of grief continues to hurt this Canvas, but he also knows that if Maelle leaves, there is no possible way he can honor his promises to Sciel and Lune. He speaks of a cycle of grief that causes harm, which is important to acknowledge, yet he refuses to listen to what Maelle is saying. In turn, Maelle goes quiet, which she often does to think over what others have said.
Thus, Verso’s defensiveness with Lune and Maelle ends up being:
“… the cycle of violence talking. This is the script that rape culture has built for us: a script in which there must be a hero and a villain, a right and a wrong, an accuser and an accused. What if we understood being confronted about perpetuating abuse as an act of courage — even a gift — on the part of the survivor?
What if, instead of reacting immediately in our own defense, we instead took the time to listen, to really try to understand the harm we might have done to another person?
When we think of accountability in terms of listening and love instead of accusation and punishment, everything changes. Listenign without becoming defensive does not necessarily mean relinquishing one’s own truth. We must be able to make room for varying perspectives and multiple emotional truths in our hearts.”
Painted Verso doesn’t make room for varying perspectives or multiple emotional truths. He may take some responsibility for his actions, or at least acknowledges the harm his actions have done, where he takes on only what he has done — no more, no less, but he doesn’t truly grow from that.
Thom writes how taking responsibility for the abuse is a crucial step, but one must also “accept that your reasons are not excuses.”
There is no reason good enough to excuse abusive behavior. Reasons help us understand abuse, but they do not excuse it. Accepting this is essential to transforming culpability into accountability and turning justice into healing.
Painted Verso spends a lot of time giving his reasons and expecting that to excuse his actions. Lune will have none of it as his reasons doesn’t excuse his lying and manipulative actions. He didn’t just betray them but also lied to them and manipulated them in harmful ways. Can Verso recognize the harm and truly be accountable?
This is where support of others can be crucial. Thom writes:
“When having a dialogue with someone who has been abused, it’s essential to give the survivor the space to take the lead in expressive their needs and setting boundaries. You should also take time to think about your own needs and boundaries without making the person you have harmed take care of you. This is why having support in the community is crucial. If basic needs are going unmet, no one can heal from abuse, nor can anyone truly be accountable.
If you have abused someone, it’s not up to you to decide how the process of healing or accountability should work. This doesn’t mean that you don’t get to have rights or boundaries, or that you can’t contribute actively to the process. It means that you don’t get to say that the person you have hurt is “crazy” or that what they are expressing doesn’t matter.
Instead, it might be good idea to try asking the person who has confronted you questions like these: what do you need right now? Is there anything I can do to make this feel better? How much contact would you like to have with me going forward? If we share a community, how should I navigate situations where we might end up int he same place? How does this conversation feel for you, right now?
At the same time, it’s important to understand that the needs of survivors of abuse can change over time, and that survivors may not always know right away — or ever — what their needs are.
Being accountable and responsible for abuse means being patient, flexible, and reflective about the process of having dialogue with the survivor.”
It’s crucial to note here that Thom is not saying that the survivor is an expert on accountability or that they should have full control over the process. Thom adds:
“I feel strongly that as long as punishment remains at the center of our thinking around accountability and justice, survivor-led processes are doomed to fall into the trap of individuals desperately trying to avoid accountability out of fear. Survivor-led, to me, means that survivors get to lead their own process of recovery, that survivors are given space to tell their stories and speak their needs (which criminal justice usually does not allow).
It does not mean that people who have been deeply wounded are suddenly handed full responsibility for a community dialogue and rehabilitation process. Survivor-led does not mean that the community gets to abdicate its responsibility for providing support, safety, expertise, and leadership in making healing happen.”
There are multiple paths in the accountability and healing process: the survivor, the one who caused harm, and the community. These paths may intersect at times, but Thom is arguing that none should exert control over the other’s path. Instead, listening, understanding, honoring boundaries, and opening onself up to changing present and future behaviors is what ‘survivor-led’ should mean.
Thom also makes it clear that the community itself needs to be involved to lay the groundwork to meet the needs of those within this process. Support by building safety, sharing expertise to help guide, and providing leadership to keep those involved accountable are all needed to assist in the healing process here.
Community support allows those involved to have someone with which to work through their emotions and thoughts. By working through emotions and thoughts, one can come to understand one’s own behaviors, emotions, actions, and through that find a path forward. This work means they are also holding themself accountable in the sense they are continuing to move forward on the path toward healing. Supportive friends, family, and community members can assist in helping those in this process stay on the healing path — that’s another type of accountability.
Supportive community is is what Painted Verso lacks. He does not allow anyone to truly be in community with him, and those that try are held at arm’s length with him manipulating events toward his own ends. Whether he ever allowed community to help him work through his trauma and pain relies on his own shared stories, of which seem suspect since what he says to one person doesn’t always align with what he says to another of the same event. The best we have is a journal entry from a prior expedition where he expresses his pain and hopes — hopes he doesn’t seem to have in Maelle’s time.
VERSO’S JOURNAL:
I miss you. I don’t have the right to miss you but I do. I wish I could talk to you. Tell you. Fuck. I don’t know what I would tell you. Just ask that you forgive me. Julie, forgive me. I’m not… I’m not a traitor. I’m not. I’m trying to save… I’m trying to save us all. But you’re right. I am a coward. I’m a fucking coward. You deserved to know why. But I couldn’t. I couldn’t face you properly. Not and still do what had to be done. Papa believes you are Clea’s creation, and even if you’re not, we can no longer trust you. But I think you just wanted answers.
Why? Why couldn’t you just let it go? Why did you convince them to abduct me? Interrogate me? No. I shouldn’t say that. You thought I was a traitor. You were doing what you thought was right, just like we are. I swear to you, I’m doing what’s right. I should have known when you started questioning things that you wouldn’t be fooled. But how could I even explain? You’d have thought I’d gone mad. Doppelgangers. Countless worlds. But Papa’s right. We can’t take the risk. Too much is at stake. Too much. It had to be done. It had to. Clea already took our sister. If we want to save our family, our world, our people, we can’t take any chances. And once we free Maman, she… she’ll bring you back. It won’t be forever. I promise. We deserve to live. All of us. We deserve to exist.
In this journal, Verso admits to his pain and how much he misses Julie, who seems to be a loved one. He justifies his actions, but also shows a willingness to understand why Julie did what she thought was right. He does his best to not internalize the hurtful words that Julie and her expedition likely threw at him — traitor for one. However, he makes a crucial mistake here by assuming Julie’s reactions to the actual truth. He doesn’t allow her to have agency, and instead took that from her by keeping her in the dark. This fueled distrust, especially as he acknowledges Julie had started to question things and notice what doesn’t make sense. Julie wanted answers, and Verso, here at least, acknowledges that she did deserve to know why things transpired the way they did.
He also asserts that they “deserve to exist.” Yet, in Maelle’s time, he seems to have changed his mind entirely as he spends far too much energy trying to convince Maelle to let the Canvas be erased. In his ending, he goes to great lengths to make sure the Canvas is erased. So he breaks all of his promises, and decides that no one deserves to exist in the Canvas. That they are not real and thus it is okay to erase populations.
Why does he come to this conclusion? Partly due to the massive amount of death he witnesses over the decades, and also because he doesn’t have a community to hold him accountable. When one is isolated like Painted Verso, it is all too easy to fall into despair and a desire for annihilation. This is why those who are suicidal shouldn’t be left alone, but need supportive family and friends to help them heal and find new meaning in life.
In Maelle’s ending, Maelle will try to give Verso that opportunity when she offers him the choice of “if you could grow old, would you… find a reason to smile?”
She’s trying to break the cycle of violence by making sure Verso doesn’t have to live the immortal life he so abhors. So she offers solutions that doesn’t end in a genocide of peoples or Painted Verso’s death. Despite the harm Verso has done, Maelle seeks to humanize him and offer him a compromise. Her ending hints strongly that he accepts her alternate solution and seems to find some hope in it, as he does indeed grow old.
This humanization of the person causing harm is also critical to the healing process. The survivor of abuse doesn’t have to be the one to humanize the one causing harm, but those in the community ought to be able to step in for that.
In another essay in the Beyond Survival Anthology, there is an excerpt from the handbook, Ending Child Sexual Abuse:
“We see that abuse happens when one person believes, consciously or unconsciously, that their needs, wants, and preferences take precedence over others. People engaging in abusive behaviors are often numb to, or seemingly unable to feel, the impacts of their behaviors on others.
A process of accountability and transformation requires that the person who has been harmful:
- Stop doing the harm.
- Feels empathy and remorse for the pain and impact of their actions.
- Takes measures, like restitution or reparations, to address the harm caused.
- Takes measures to prevent future harm.
- Works to understand the root causes of their harmful behavior.
- Engages in the ongoing work of accountability, healing, and integration.
- Take action and organizes to support others to heal or to be part of changing community and social conditions that allow for CSA and other forms of violence.”
Here the list shows how difficult healing can be, and how scary it is to make the choice to heal. Yet, it’s crucial for ending the cycle of violence to not dehumanize anyone involved. Dehumanization continues the cycle of violence. As the handbook excerpt says:
“It is important to center the needs of those most directly impacted by the harm in a situation. We also hold that recognizing and attending to the humanity of those who harm is a central aspect of transforming our families, communities, and society. Seeing and dignifying the healing needs of people who abuse also runs counter to the idea that some people “out there” are “monsters” who are expendable or need to be “weeded out.” By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we challenge the dehumanizing logic that is central to systems of oppression, domination, and abuse. By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we maintain our commitment to a vision of true liberation.”
Part of this process means those who cause harm need to understand that not all consequences are “harm.” Consequences to their actions are often necessary and may not be a form of “harm.” For example, Lune calling out the harm of Verso’s lies is the consequence of his actions. She lost trust in him is another consequence. Him having to earn back that trust is yet another consequence. None of these consequences are “harms” done to Verso. It’s simply part of the accountability process.
Humanizing those involved are absolutely critical to ending the cycle of violence. When people are dehumanized, they are stripped of who they are, and this causes harm to all involved. If the cycle of violence is to be ended, then those involved must be humanized and their dignity honored.
This is incredibly difficult to do at times. As a survivor of abuse, I struggled greatly with wanting my abuser to feel the weight of my pain, but through therapy, I learned that truthfully I didn’t want my abuser to be harmed in return. I wanted the cycle of abuse to end. That revelation allowed me to move past the anger and make a conscious choice to heal.
This conscious choice to heal is required of those that cause harm as well. However, shame, guilt, and fear can often make that choice extremely difficult.
Both Verso and Maelle struggle with shame and guilt. Maelle’s guilt and shame lay in her internalizing the blame Aline and Clea lay at her feet. Except, the fire is not Maelle’s fault, but that of the Writers that cause it. Her guilt and shame originate from actions that are not her own.
However, for Verso, his guilt and shame do originate from his own actions, for he did kill members of his prior expeditions, he did lie to people, and he did manipulate people for his own ends. However, it’s crucial to separate shame from guilt. In Kai Cheng Thom’s essay, shame and guilt is defined:
“Shame and social stigma are powerful emotional forces that can prevent us from holding ourselves accountable for being abusive. We don’t want to admit to “being that person,” so we don’t admit to having been abusive at all.
Some people might suggest that people who have been abusive ought to feel shame — after all, perpetuating abuse is wrong. I would argue, though, that this is where the difference between guilt and shame is key. Guilt is feeling bad about something you’ve done; shame is feeling bad about who you are. People who have been abusive should feel guilty for the specific acts of abuse they are responsible for. They should not feel shame about who they are because this means that abuse has become a part of their identity. It means they believe that they are fundamentally a bad person — in other words, “an abuser.”
But if you believe that you are an “abuser,” a bad person who hurts others, then you have already lost the struggle for change — because we cannot change who we are. If you believe that you are a fundamentally good person who has done hurtful or abusive things, then you open the possibility for change.”
When Thom says we “cannot change who we are,” this is in regard to our identities and personality. The “possibility for change” is in regard to our decisions, actions, and future decisions and actions. Those we can change, but we shouldn’t try to alter our personality and identity to be someone we are not. We should focus on how to make better decisions and to act in ways that are more healthy and holistic for us and those around us.
Verso, when he first introduces himself to Expedition 33, calls himself a liar. By doing so, he shows he internalized his actions as part of his identity. This makes it very difficult to hold oneself accountable and being open to the “possibility for change.” If he views lying as crucial to his identity, then why should he stop? It’s who he is, isn’t it? It’s a complete 180 from his journal entry where he refused to accept ‘traitor’ as being who he is.
But lying isn’t who he truly is. He’s, instead, taken a behavior and marked it as a personality trait. Truthfully, his personality isn’t a lying manipulator — we can see bits and pieces of who he is in the scenes where he plays a piano with Maelle, goes out of his way to help Sciel move past her fear of water, shares music with Lune, chats with Esquie, or hangs out with Monoco. He’s a bit silly, fun-loving, jokester, that wants to do the right thing but doesn’t know how. He’s trapped in a cycle of his own making, yet he’s unwilling to recognize his own cycle. Instead, he internalizes the lies as part of who he is, when it’s not — that’s his trauma speaking.
Until Verso can recognize his own cycle of violence and shame, he remains trapped in his cycle, unable to acknowledge his abuse and never able to progress toward healing. Even in his ending, when he fights Maelle to force her from the Canvas, his solution to his cycle is to annihilate himself and everyone in the Canvas. He refuses to see another way. Yet, until he recognizes that his harmful behaviors are not core to his personality, he won’t ever see how to stop his cycle of harm.
This is where Thom goes on to state that as much as those who cause harm shouldn’t “expect anyone to forgive you,” they should, however, forgive themselves:
“Being accountable is not about earning forgiveness. This is to say, it doesn’t matter how accountable you are — nobody has to forgive you for being abusive, least of all the person you have abused. In fact, using the process of “doing” accountability to manipulate or coerce someone into their forgiveness to you is an extension of the abuse dynamic. It center the abuser, not the survivor. One shouldn’t aim for forgiveness when holding oneself accountable. Rather self-accountability is about learning how we have harmed others, why we have harmed others, and how we can stop.
But… you do have to forgive yourself. Because you can’t stop hurting other people until you stop hurting yourself. When one is abusive, when one is hurting so much on the inside that it feels like the only way to make it stop is to hurt other people, it can be terrifying to face the hard truth of words like abuse and accountability. One might rather blame others, blame society, blame the people we love, instead of ourselves.
This is true, I think, of community as well as individuals. It is so much easier, so much simpler, to create hard lines between good and bad people, to create walls to shut the shadowy archetype of “the abuser” out instead of mirrors to look at the abuser within.
Perhaps this is why self-accountability tools like this list are so rare. It takes courage to be accountable. To decide to heal. But when we do decide, we discover incredible new possibilities. There is good and bad in everyone. Anyone can heal, given the right circumstances, and everyone can heal, given the same. You are capable of loving and being loved. Always. Always. Always.”
These are critical points for accountability. The process isn’t so we can “earn forgiveness” like it’s some sort of game achievement. Accountability is about learning, listening, seeking to understand why we did what we did, and finding solutions on how we can stop. Where we end the cycle of violence and instead move into a trajectory toward healing and choosing actions that cause the least harm and the most good.
And what is the most good? How do we know what is good?
To understand what ‘good’ means, we need to briefly explore ethics and morality. This game, thankfully, has already given us that exploration already in the Lumierians — Gustave and Lune in particular. I won’t dig too deeply into this as I feel that Lord Khoury does a much better job in his video here (which I recommend as he lays out an excellent case for why Maelle’s ending is a morally good one). I will simply briefly highlight Gustave’s and Lune’s use of Utilitarianism.
Consequences and Utilitarianism
Gustave, at the start of the game points out how the Gommage seems almost gentle, how it makes Lumiere seem complacent, but it is no less violent. He defines the act of violence and injustice, and in his temporal reality, Lumiere identified the best route to liberation is through confrontation with the Paintress.
Throughout the Prologue and Act 1, we are shown how Gustave lives his morals and how he determines actions to be morally good. These deliberations rely on what is known as utilitarianism. The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines this as:
“…utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one’s own good.”
Gustave’s moralism shows through the projects he describes — teaching his apprentices, Aquafarms, etc. — and in how he interacts with those around him. He understands quite well the consequences of possible actions, and chooses the ones that will do the most good.
For example, when Expedition 33 is separated, Gustave determines the right action is to seek Maelle. He evaluates the consequences of this, and although his emotions push for a specific end result, he still evaluates based on the known information at that time. As in, the note inscribed on the Indigo Tree, the lack of survivors at the Indigo Tree meeting point, and the knowledge of how difficult it is to survive alone.
GUSTAVE: It’s a lead, or only lead, whoever this is has Maelle. We have to go.
LUNE: No, not yet. Protocol is to regroup at rendevous point and wait three days. This message feels off. If it was an Expeditioner, they would have stayed here. Everyone knows the protocol.
GUSTAVE: Right, but they may have been in danger. Maybe this location has been compromised. Things change in the field.
LUNE: There’s a reason its protocol.
GUSTAVE: Protocol doesn’t cover every contingency. You know that.
LUNE: There’s a reason its Protocol. We designed it to yield the optimal result in the vast majority of situations.
GUSTAVE: Was our entire team dying part of that “optimal result?”
LUNE: …
GUSTAVE: Look, I’m going after Maelle. Protocol also states ‘never move solo.’ I’ll let you choose what protocol to break.Here we see how both Gustave and Lune lay out their reasoning for the preferred actions. Gustave focuses on the consequences and concludes going after Maelle will save the most lives based on their current information. Lune, who attempts to argue for the Protocol, finds herself faced with possible consequences that could either endanger Gustave — if he goes alone — or herself — if she stays and he goes — or the mission — if the team is split up.
Lune follows him because of the two protocols they are breaking — one results in a higher number of lives saved and better chance at surviving long enough to complete their mission. Thus, after evaluating what is known and the consequences of various actions, she determines the action that achieve the most good.
In survival, determining the consequences of actions that result in the most lives saved fits firmly in the utilitarianism worldview. Thus, in determining what actions are ‘good,’ it is crucial to seek to understand the consequences of that action for everyone — not just ourselves. This is where Verso falls short as his understanding of the consequences of his actions revolves around the impact on himself; he continues to assert his view, even when others protest and show the harm of it.
Part of that is because he doesn’t show a willingness to examine the situation fully with other people. He’s kept himself relatively isolated for decades, and sought to meet his needs on his own. Isolation can easily distort our thinking and lead us toward despair.
With the Lumierians, we see an alternate route. Gustave and Lune actively talk through the situation at the Indigo Tree. Gustave lays out his analysis and Lune does as well. Gustave, however, focuses on the lives he can actively save in that moment rather than the lives they do not know still live or not. Though this dialogue, the two examine consequences of their actions. Both go back and forth in acknowledging what the other is saying, and also responding to the concerns brought up. In the end, Gustave’s decision to go after Maelle is vindicated in his eyes, and he offers Lune a choice. Lune, in turn, honors the protocol that will save the most lives — staying with Gustave and saving someone that is likely still alive. Considering, they have no further data on anyone else surviving, going after Maelle ends up being justified as the ‘good’ decision through the consequences of their actions.
We see this same sort of analysis play out a few times in Act 1 with how the group analyzes the situation, examines consequences, and come to a decision. Gustave and Lune lead the charge here, and their example provides a litmus test for Maelle to use in trying to determine what decisions are ‘good.’
For another example, Gustave and Lune’s intense fight before they find Maelle:
GUSTAVE: I am not letting Maelle die out here. I’m taking her home.
LUNE: What? No, no, no, we have a mission —
GUSTAVE: Oh, fuck the mission! Fuck the mission, Lune. What are we gonna do? Tell me. What are we gonna do? We’re gonna take down the Paintress, just the three of us? My — my gun and your sparks?
LUNE: I didn’t take you for a coward.
GUSTAVE: I’m not a coward.
LUNE: You swore the oath. “When one falls, we continue.”
GUSTAVE: Yes, I know.
LUNE: When one falls. WHEN one falls. Not if. When. We knew not all of us would make it. But “We Continue.” As long even one of us stands, our fight is not over.
GUSTAVE: But I’m not afraid to fight, it’s just Maelle, she’s —
LUNE: Maelle swore the same oath!
GUSTAVE: I know that!
LUNE: She choose her life! Come on, we always said that the future of Lumiere was more important than any —
GUSTAVE: individual life, yes.
LUNE: Do you still believe that?Here Lune reminds Gustave of the consequences of swearing their oath. Consequences all of them knew before they swore the oath. She also makes it clear that Maelle also swore this oath, knowing the risks, and that she choose that. Lune is reminding Gustave of Maelle’s agency. Through this conversation, she’s challenging him on the consequences of what will happen if he takes Maelle back: he’d break his oath, he’d leave Lune here to continue alone, he’d violate Maelle’s agency, and he would put the future of Lumiere at risk.
This conversation pushes Gustave toward the ‘good’ decision, which is to honor Maelle’s agency. Something he will confirm in a later conversation after they are reunited with Maelle and have found Sciel with the Gestrals:
GUSTAVE: Maybe you should stay…
MAELLE: What?
GUSTAVE: It’s safer in the village.
MAELLE: And miss the change to meet Esquie? No way.
GUSTAVE: Maelle…
MAELLE: I’m okay. We stick together.This conversation proved Lune to be correct. The consequences Lune had laid out as her reasoning on the ‘good choice,’ made it clear that Maelle had chosen this life. Gustave here confirms it with Maelle herself, and he then honors that choice.
Thus, Gustave and Lune provide excellent examples of the use of utilitarianism for determining the morally ‘good’ choice, as well as how to handle conflict. They also show how the Canvas Lumierians honor the agency of others.
It’s through our dialogue with those around us that we come to understand possible consequences and how they may impact others. That dialog then allows us to generate ideas that cause the least harm to all involved and saves the most lives (or in less dire situations, helps the most people feel heard, understood, and agency honored). This can be difficult to do, and in times of danger, we often act on instinct because there isn’t enough time to deliberate on consequences.
However, after the danger is over, we must be willing to analyze what happened and take accountability for our actions. We must not take on the responsibility of other people’s actions, only take on our own. We need to listen to others, and they in turn listen to us. We need to be open to change behaviors if we cause harm, which we see Lune, Gustave, Maelle, and Sciel do on their journey. That’s part of holding one another accountable and choosing healing.
Maelle having the support of her Canvas family is critical to her own journey toward healing. The scene where Maelle has a waking nightmare in Act 1 after the Gestral Village, we see Gustave, Sciel, and Lune gather around her to comfort her. They bring down her panic, and stay at her side until she’s calm. This level of care is not shown by the Dessendre family toward Maelle. Thus, Maelle finds her strongest support system within the Canvas, away from an environment of abuse and neglect. This chosen family helps hold her accountable and supports her as she makes decisions to end the cycle of violence. To choose to heal.
Verso struggles to understand this lesson the entirety of the game. The only clue we are given that he may finally learn it is in Maelle’s ending, when Maelle offers a different solution to his desire to cease his immortal life. He still lives in her ending, but he’s grown old. His fingers find it harder to play the piano — hence the dissonance at first before he plays. Perhaps in this ending he learns how to be accountable and chooses healing. The game seems to imply it, but the game also leaves it open-ended.
In Verso’s ending, Verso doesn’t choose healing but instead chooses to take the agency from everyone involved — Maelle, the faded boy, the different Canvas peoples — and fades into annihilation. Maelle, then, returns to life as Alicia Dessendre, who is disabled and essentially institutionalized in her family’s manor. She has no support system, and her mother still looks at her with disdain. Clea still offers no support, only goes off to do her one-person war. In the ending, Renoir doesn’t even look at Alicia — only at Aline. Alicia stands isolated, and tries to smile, tries to see anything good in this, but instead, she hallucinates the family she’s lost. As they gommage away, I noticed how her shoulders droop and she holds Esquie tighter. A sign that her hope evaporates with them? Again, the game leaves it open-ended.
When still in an abusive environment, healing is out of reach, even if one chooses it, because the circumstances causing the trauma is ongoing. One must exit the abusive environment, but to do so often requires support of others to assist in finding a safer place to be. If there is no one there to provide the necessary support to heal, then it is incredibly difficult to actively heal.
Thus, healing from grief and from abuse both require breaking cycles, but to break those cycles, we need the necessarily family/friends and/or community support. It is not truly possible to do this when we are isolated, because isolation itself is a form of harm that can easily lead us into despair, as we saw with Painted Verso.
Breaking the cycle of violence can only happen when we have built up a community of people who love us for who we are. Then and only then, will we have the support to choose to heal, to hold ourselves accountable, to actively listen to others, and when needed alter our behaviors toward more healthy patterns.
This is not an easy process, and it will require hard work from all involved. Yet the payoff is a healthier existence and a chance to thrive rather than just survive.
#abuse #accountability #Characters #clairObscurExpedition33 #disability #GameAnalysis #gameNarrative #healing #healingJourney #justice #mentalHealth #narrativeAnalysis #responsibility #transformativeJustice #writing
-
Clair Obscur: To be accountable to those that come after
CROSSPOST FROM COMRADERY. Part of a three part series: Disability (part 1), Right to Exist (part 2), and Accountability and Healing (part 3).
In my prior essays, I related themes woven through Clair Obscur to show how it can parallel real world complexities and oppression.
For the character of Alicia and Gustave (and even Lune if we accept my assertion of her as neurodivergent), disability cords through the story and asks questions the game may not have intended. I explored in that essay how Disability was a class constructed by capitalism to control labor and those unable to labor, and through that I showed how disability has been used to denote evil and bad throughout American history. But Clair Obscur twists those tropes on their head and refuses to villianize the disabled within the game. Instead, Alicia, Gustave, and others are given complex journeys and heralded as heroes in a way. Yet, by the end, the final ending choice between Verso and Maelle felt as if the player was the judge determining the fate of the disabled person for them. I wrote:
Will we be given the care and support we need to thrive? Will we be given agency to choose our own fate and route to healing?
Clair Obscur offers that choice to the player, thus placing the fate of a disabled person in their hands. In a way, the player acts as the judge who determines the fate of a disabled person, to determine whether they ever access the care and benefits they need. It is a replica of how our real world works, and it forces a painful glimpse into the struggles of disabled people.
This essay led me to my next where I explored the nature of the Canvas people and whether they are real. I examined how this paralleled dehumanizing narratives that subjugate and destroy unique cultures. I laid down a map of the shifting temporal realities the game presents through the different main characters of each act: Gustave (Lumierian reality), Verso (immortal painted Dessendre reality), and Maelle (both Dessendre reality and Lumierian reality). How weaving these different realities forces us to contend with the nature of what is real and who is allowed to exist within that reality.
The conclusion I came to, which perhaps will not surprise anyone reading my writings, is that I chose the ending that gave agency to people and saved the most lives. I could not accept that the unique lives of those in the Canvas were less than the Dessendre family. Nor could I accept anyone deciding for a disabled person how they must exist and heal.
By exploring these darker aspects of Clair Obscur, I undoubtedly focused on the more abusive and manipulative aspects of the Dessendre family to show how unsupportive they’ve been to Alicia/Maelle. The evidence painted within the game left me uneasy about the Dessendre family, partly informed by my own traumas as a queer nonbinary disabled person. Yes, they do love each other but love does not mean abuse cannot happen or exist, which I argued in my essay on Disability. That darkness echoed trauma and pain that destroying the Canvas cannot truly heal. A cycle of violence doesn’t heal through the use of more violence, but only when the cycle is stopped.
One could argue that Verso sought to stop the cycle of grief, and isn’t that stopping the cycle of violence? But that negates the temporal reality of the Canvas people, who endured countless oppressive actions and outright genocide. Sacrificing a population of people in an effort to ‘heal’ one family only continues the cycle of violence, and it doesn’t solve the lack of support in the Dessendre world, which Verso’s ending never truly reconciles. Alicia is still isolated, still without a voice, still disabled in a world that has done little to meet any of her needs.
So then, do we ever exit the cycle of violence? And what would it look like to attempt such a thing?
In my Disability essay, I pointed out healing cannot begin until we exit the abusive/traumatic environment/situation. Part of healing involves the end of the cycle of violence, which differs based on who abused and who endured the abuse. Those that abuse must hold themselves accountable and engage in repair as well as work on their own healing. Those that endured abuse must work on their own healing, and recognize the best place for that, which might require them to not engage again the person who harmed them. Ending the cycle of violence and moving toward accountability and healing is not an easy process and the trajectory will differ based on who is involved.
Yet even with those differing paths, one must still hold oneself accountable in order to push forward in the healing process. We will backslide. We will mess up, but it is crucial to acknowledge when we cause harm or when we make a mistake, apologize, and do better. That’s all part of the accountability process.
So in this essay, I want to explore what accountability is and how it does and doesn’t manifest in the characters’ storylines. Whether the characters were able to truly end the cycle of violence and move forward into healing or if the game leaves those questions open-ended.
What is Accountability? And how do we do it?
Accountability within today’s culture, especially within America where I’m situated, is wrought with videos and images of call-out culture. Where people call others out publically the harm and demand repair. While this may be a useful tactic when facing off against the rich and powerful, it ultimately isn’t true accountability. Or at least not the kind that may lead to actual healing and change.
So when I speak of accountability, I do not mean that public spectacle. I instead mean conversations like what Maelle and Verso have in Clair Obscur. They happen on a personal level and/or within the community, and often are not on a public stage. They may instead happen behind closed doors with or without a mediator. The survivor may decide or not decide to be present, while the person who harmed them works toward healing and accountability. It’s a complex process that goes far, far beyond the initial identification of the harm.
In the first chapter of the anthology Beyond Suvival: Strategies and Stories from the Transformative Justice Movement, editors Ejeris Dixon and Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha writes:
“Transformative justice and community accountability are terms that describe ways to address violence without relying on police or prisons. These approaches often work to prevent violence, to intervene when harm is occurring, to hold people accountable, and to transform individuals and society to build safer communities. These strategies are some of hte only options that marginalized communities have to address harm.
The work of transformative justice can happen in a variety of ways. Some groups support survivors by helping them identify their needs and boundaries while ensuring their attackers agree to these boundaries and atone for the harm they caused. Other groups create safe spaces and sanctuaries to support people escaping from violence.”
Here they show how accountability is only one piece of a larger puzzle of addressing violence. Without accountability, much of the work to address and end the cycle of violence would fracture and fall apart, yet as crucial as it is, full healing requires far more than just accountability.
Ejeris Dixon goes on to add:
“Violence and oppression break community ties and breed fear and distrust. At its core, the work to create safety is to build meaningful, accountable relationships within our neighborhoods and communities.”
Without trust, one cannot build safety. Without safety, one struggles to be vulnerable. Without vulnerability, one struggles to heal. And without the choice to heal, one will fail to hold oneself accountable.
This isn’t to say these are steps in a process, but more they are interlinking threads that are woven into a larger tapestry. Each thread crucial to the final form, and the tapestry wouldn’t be the same without each thread and stitch. None of this is easy, but then healing isn’t ever easy.
Healing always requires a choice. Do we choose to heal? Do we choose to hold ourselves accountable to that journey? Do we choose to be accountable for our actions and engage in repair when we inevitably cause harm? How do we engage in repair? Are we willing to be responsible and listen to those harmed by us? To let those harmed take the lead? Can we separate shame from guilt? To not fear accountability but instead embrace it so all involved can move forward in healing?
Of course, asking those questions can feel daunting, and it’s why relationship-building is so crucial. Healing requires support of one’s family, friends, and/or community. We can’t really heal in isolation. In chapter three of Beyond Survival, Blythe Barnow speaks about how isolation harmed her ability to heal:
“In the end, that was the most damaging. Doing it alone. Believing it was all my responsibility. Not the assault. But the healing. The justice. The protection for nameless other girls. I leaned heavy into the skills I learned as a child, over responsibility, independence, sharp analysis, and self-sacrifice. Which meant I never asked for the support I was so desperate for.
Because what I needed, maybe more than his apology, was a community of people who could help me hold and honor the stories that led to this one, who could help me uproot the layers of silence learned through too much violence. I needed to be asked what I wanted and what I was hoping for. I needed someone to help me craft those letters, someone to remind me that I could list expectations. I needed someone who was going to sit with me through the fallout. Someone who could read the responses people sent me and tell me to wait before reading them myself. I needed someone beside me to reflect the ways my own trauma, old and new, was informing the process. I needed someone who could show me love that was deeper and more nuanced than just hating him.”
I relate deeply to Barnow’s words here because isolation can steal away our voice, where we put on a brave mask for others. Often society and even friends and family can put tremendous pressure on survivors to ‘move on’ from the harm, to not speak of it, to stay silent, but that too is part of the cycle of violence. If we cannot acknowledge violence happened, how can we ever stop it from replaying again and again? Many therapists and researchers have written of the cycle of domestic violence and how it can sometimes thread through families. Part of that relies on silence and isolation.
Breaking silence and isolation requires the support of others, and it’s not easy to do. Believe me, I’ve struggled with this my whole life, but I’ve made progress on my healing from abuse because of the support of dear friends and good therapists.
This is why Maelle and Verso are able to have any conversation that deals with accountability. Lune, Sciel, Esquie, and Monoco form a support system to help them break the cycle of silence and isolation. This chosen family gives Maelle the love she needs to learn and grow, and they attempt to offer this to Verso as well.
For example, exploring the Reacher area will lead to the peak, where Painted Alicia ignores her brother to speak with Maelle privately — here the color fades into greyscale. She leads Maelle into the cavern at the peak to show her the true axon, and also to express her thoughts to Maelle through gestures and their fencing match.
After Painted Alicia leads Maelle back to the others, the scene snaps back into color. Maelle offers Alicia “a new beginning,” and I think she meant to repaint Alicia’s face and restore her voice. However, Painted Alicia grasps Maelle’s hand and presses it against her, thus thwarting Maelle’s attempt to repaint her face. Instead, she gasps out her desire for Maelle to gommage her. Verso doesn’t have a chance to stop it, because Maelle does as Painted Alicia asks.
Verso responds by trying to stop Maelle, and ends up holding the red petal remains of Painted Alicia. Sciel is at his side to comfort him in his grief.
The conversation they have later at camp delves into the impact of Maelle’s act:
MAELLE: I’m sorry.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: It’s what she wanted. I owed her that much. We owed her that much. I honoured her wishes. That’s something neither you nor Renoir ever did. And not Maman either.
VERSO: … I didn’t get to say goodbye. You didn’t wait. You didn’t give me a chance to persuade her.
MAELLE: She knew what she wanted. You wouldn’t have been able to sway her.
VERSO: She’s not you. You don’t know that. I know her better than you do. But you didn’t even give me the chance to try. You just erased her.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’ve lost two brothers. You know what it’s like to lose your sibling and never get the chance to say goodbye.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: You Painters. You just do what you want, you don’t care how it affects the rest of us.
MAELLE: I do care. I know you’re hurting, but the person who made that decision wasn’t me. It was her. It would have been wrong to deny her just so you could try and talk her out of her decision.Here Maelle seeks to understand Verso and why he is upset. She wants him to understand her reasons, where she sought to honor Painted Alicia’s wishes. She argues here for Painted Alicia’s agency in this, and how taking away her agency wouldn’t have been right.
Verso lashes out because of his grief and pain, but his words here “you don’t care how it affects the rest of us,” doesn’t align with the truth of Painted Alicia and Maelle’s actions at the peak of Reacher. Painted Alicia had made her wishes known, where she did not wish to continue in the disabled body Aline had given her in punishment for an action she’d never done. Perhaps there could have been other ways for her to thrive, but Painted Alicia had tried for decades to find that. Yet, perhaps it is irony that she sought the same annihilation that Painted Verso secretly seeks.
Maelle tries, in her own way, to honor the agency of others. To offer them different solutions, but Painted Alicia didn’t want any other solution. She had taken Maelle’s hand to press against her and urged her to gommage her away.
Does Maelle come to understand what Verso is trying to articulate here? Because so far, she gives her reasons and argues for Painted Alicia’s agency. The scene continues:
VERSO: She’s the last of my family. I have no one left now.
MAELLE: You have me. You have us.
VERSO: MAELLE. I wasn’t ready.
MAELLE: I don’t understand. You were ready when you set Papa free. You expected that he would erase the Canvas and everyone in it. Isn’t that the same thing?
VERSO: It’s different! It’s different. Why did she do that?
MAELLE: You know why.
VERSO: …
MAELLE: But you’re right. I should have thought of you. I should have given you a chance to say goodbye. I’m truly sorry, Verso.
VERSO: … *cries* At least she’s free now.Maelle briefly gets defensive because she struggles to understand, but then she takes a moment to think. She may view the two events of setting Renoir free to erase everyone versus her honoring Alicia’s wishes to be erased as equivalent, but Verso does not. We then see Maelle hold herself accountable by putting herself in Verso’s shoes in an effort to understand. She admits that Verso is indeed right. She should have thought of him, and she apologizes. As one continues through the journey, Maelle does her best to honor this by doing better.
She also tries to show Verso that he does have people left. He has Maelle, Lune, Sciel, Monoco, and others as they all have been trying to reach out and build connections with him. He chooses to hold himself in isolation from them, whether he is conscious of it or not.
She actively does her best to hold herself accountable, to learn from her actions, and this shows how she wishes to end the cycle of harm. She wants everyone’s agency to be honored, for people to find what they need, and although she may offer different ways to do that, if the person ultimately rejects a solution, who is Maelle to refuse to honor their decision? For a sixteen-year-old, she’s remarkably mature here.
Verso, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to hold that same self-awareness, or if he did, he seems to have lost it. He’s so caught up in his cycle of violence, that he struggles to see any other solution as viable. To see this, let’s look at a conversation near the start of Act 3, when Maelle returns to the Canvas:
MAELLE: You should have helped me remember.
VERSO: Yeah… I wanted to, but I… I’m sorry.
MAELLE: I’m sorry too. If I’d listened to Maman… if I hadn’t trusted the Writers, Verso would still be alive, and you —
VERSO: Wouldn’t exist.
MAELLE: Wouldn’t be caught in the middle. Maman did a terrible thing, painting you into Verso’s Canvas. Giving you his memories. Pretending the fire only took me. But I’m glad you exist.
VERSO: Your father was right to erase everyone. It’s better this way.
MAELLE: Better for who? Verso would have never wanted his Canvas gone. He loved Esquie and his Gestrals and the Grandis.
VERSO: It was killing my … our mother, staying here so long in a make-believe world with her make-believe family.
MAELLE: It’s not make-believe. It’s not… you’re not.. To me…Here Verso sees only one solution: annihilation. However, his reasons for why he manipulated and lied to Maelle are just that — excuses. So he acknowledges the hurt he did and apologizes. For true accountability to happen, it’s not enough to simply apologize; one’s present and future behaviors will need changed to avoid replicating the harm and continuing the cycle of violence.
For Maelle, she also apologizes, but in this instance, what is there for her to apologize for? Perhaps she shouldn’t have trusted whoever the Writers were, but she is not responsible for them starting a fire and for Verso’s death. Maelle is only responsible for her own actions, not the actions of others. This shows how she’s internalized the shame and guilt Clea and Aline both shoved onto her; both needed someone to blame, and Alicia, the survivor, is a convenient person to lay down the blame. Maelle/Alicia is young and lacking the support to realize that she does not need to carry this blame as it is not hers to bear.
Painted Verso does not try to negate the blame Maelle/Alicia puts on herself. Instead, he tries to convince Maelle that it is better for those in the Canvas to not exist, for the Canvas to be destroyed, but Maelle refuses to accept that destruction of entire people’s is the right answer. She disagrees that everyone in the Canvas is make-believe. To her they are as real as herself. This ties into what I discussed in my Right to Exist essay.
I wrote there:
We have now returned to one of the most crucial questions in the game: What is the right decision in regards to the fate of the Canvas people and the fate of Alicia/Maelle? As I have hopefully shown thus far, erasing people’s temporal realities causes immense harm and is genocide; people have a right to exist, and sacrificing them for the ‘greater good of society’ (or in this case the Dessendre family) cannot ever be the morally right answer.
Necrosecurity, as I spoke of earlier, paints a bleak and death-filled reality, where healing cannot ever take place because denial and control is at its roots. [Defined as sacrificing a population for the greater ‘good’ of society.] Until people’s temporal realities are respected and their agency honored, healing will forever stay out of reach.
Thus, escaping pain by committing genocide is not healing. It’s a continuation of the cycle of violence. The marginalized populations facing genocide have a right to exist, and their temporal realities are as valid and important as the oppressor. Just as the temporal reality of the Canvas people are as valid and important as the Dessendre family.
Healing can only happen when the cycle of violence ends.
Verso tries to justify the death and destruction as necessary to end the cycle, but Maelle refuses to accept that reasoning. She believes Verso is wrong when he claims his self and those of the Canvas people are make-believe, and she believes they have a right to exist. She acknowledges harm happened to Painted Verso. She apologizes for her part in it. This is a step forward in the addressing of harm and ending the cycle: acknowledging what happened and why it wasn’t okay.
Again, Maelle cannot repair what her mother did because it’s not her burden to bear. Only Aline can take responsibility for her own actions. Maelle can only take responsibility for Maelle’s actions, which Maelle tries her best to do. She tries to hold herself accountable, which is something neither Clea nor Aline ever seem to do. This act of being accountable seems to have been taught to Maelle perhaps by Renoir, but far more likely it was Gustave, Lune, Sciel, and the Lumierians who taught her this.
She may have regained her memories from the real world, but that doesn’t mean she lost her memories of growing up as a Lumierian. She holds both in her head, as she will admit to Lune and Sciel after she brings them back:
MAELLE: I’m sorry. I didn’t — My memories — I would’ve told you if I’d known —
LUNE: Don’t apologize. You were trapped too. You lived among us. You’re one of us. Even if you’re also one of them.
MAELLE: It’s… so weird. I have memories of two childhoods. Two homes. Two Lumieres.
SCIEL: You’re not an orphan anymore. You just found your family. Don’t you want to be with them?
MAELLE: I love my family, but … they’re all gone. In one way of another. And you’re my family too. So are Gustave and Emma. And I didn’t see it at the time, but all the families who took turns taking care of me…Here Maelle, once again, tries to take on burdens that aren’t hers to hold. She had no memory of being a Paintress, so how could she have told them? Lune understands this and gently points this out to her. To root her in the facts of what they now know. She accepts who Maelle is — Maelle’s full self of being of Lune’s Lumiere but also of the Dessendre’s Lumiere — and provides comfort in this way.
Sciel, in turn, asks a crucial question, even though her voice aches with grief. “Don’t you want to be with them?”
Maelle’s answer is heart-rending, because truthfully, her family is gone. Clea is off fighting a one-person war with the Writers, Aline — Maelle’s mother — blames Maelle and casts her aside, Renoir may seek to bring Maelle back but he too has been neglectful of her, and Verso is gone. So what roots her in the Dessendre World? There she is disabled with no support system and half the family is abusive toward her (as I discuss in my Disability essay). So in a way, her Dessendre family is “gone” in the sense they do not truly support her, not like the Canvas Lumierians.
When Maelle blames herself for those that have harmed her or those she loved, she exhibits a common traumatic response; when she apologizes for actions that aren’t truly hers to own, that is also a traumatic response.
I know I’ve fallen into those trauma responses, where I had internalized the blame that it was my fault for the abuse done to me, my fault for the sexual assault. However, that blame is false. In reality, it wasn’t my fault as I did not do those actions. Those actions were done by other people to me. Just as Maelle did not paint Painted Verso, Aline did that. Just as Maelle didn’t start the fire, the Writers did that. Just as Maelle didn’t kill Verso, the fire and whoever started the fire did that. Just as Maelle didn’t lie to Lune and Sciel, she had no memories of her Dessendre life and thus no information to share; instead, Verso had that information and chose to not share it.
Maelle still tries to take accountability, but truthfully, it is not hers to bear. Lune gently teaches her that in that scene above.
Understanding these truths are hard when society and/or loved ones pressure us into thinking it’s our fault we were hurt. That’s just a falsehood to avoid accountability and to pressure survivors into silence, which effectively continues the cycle of violence.
To break out of that cycle, we must acknowledge that we are only responsible for our own actions and speech. Then we must separate out shame and guilt. We must choose to heal and continue toward healing no matter how hard that trajectory may become. But to even make that choice requires us to have support of others, to help us see when we are falling back into harmful thought processes that inhibit our ability to heal. Those that support us help us stay accountable to the process of healing.
Lune and Sciel both act as supporters for Maelle here. Lune, especially as she has also been hurt by Verso’s actions, seeks to hold Verso accountable. At this point in the game, Lune acts as a protective older sister to Maelle, while Sciel often falls into a motherly role. That’s part of how chosen families relate to one another — they fall into roles with one another, and those roles may change depending on the situation. Sometimes Maelle may be the more sisterly one to offer support to Lune or Sciel.
Chosen family can be a powerful support group and a crucial one, especially if one’s biological family has been abusive toward us. In the case of Maelle, some of her family members have been abusive toward her. So her chosen family provides the support for Maelle to work toward healing from that.
So what about Painted Verso? How does he hold himself accountable after this massive reveal? He hid the truth of who Maelle was from not only Maelle but everyone in the party. He manipulated them toward his end-goals. He chooses to talk to each individually, which the player can choose which character to start these conversations (or could choose to avoid them). If the player chooses to have these conversations, then how do they go?
Lune calls Painted Verso out for his lies:
LUNE: I was right not to trust you.
VERSO: And what would you have done in my position?
LUNE: I wouldn’t have betrayed my expedition. I would have warned them that everyone they cared about was about to be erased. That THEY were about to be erased. I would have told them the truth. Because after everything we’ve been through, we deserved that.
VERSO: So you’d choose your expedition over your mother?
LUNE: That’s your problem. You think in false dichotomies. It wasn’t an “either / or” a situation. Other solutions were possible, if you’d only trusted us enough to ask.
VERSO: Knowing what you know now, would you have helped me force my mother out of the Canvas?
LUNE: … *sighs*
VERSO: I don’t apologize for saving her. But I am sorry I broke your trust. And I will do everything I can to help bring everyone back.
LUNE: I guess we’ll see.Here Verso is intent on his reasons for his lies and manipulations. Lune, of course, points to the faults in his argument, because there might have been more solutions possible. Verso’s response is to put Lune on the spot, which when it comes to intense conversations like this? It’s very hard to consider alternatives when one is upset, so of course Lune couldn’t respond right away. She takes her time deliberating and analyzing possible solutions. Put her on the spot? And she falls quiet because she has not been given adequate time to process the information and analyze for other solutions. So Verso acts rather unfairly toward her, and then makes a promise to win back her trust.
For Sciel, she processes her anger and hurt differently. She may have chosen to ‘get over’ her anger, but the hurt in her voice betrays how she feels. She tries to keep her tone light, but the desperate hope still slips through. Their conversation ends with her saying:
SCIEL: As long as you help me bring Pierre back. You owe me.
VERSO: You got it.Once again, he makes a promise. Yet, his conversation with Maelle shows he may not honor the promise to Lune and Sciel:
MAELLE: We have to push Papa out of the Canvas before he erases everything.
VERSO: I’m surprised he hasn’t already.
MAELLE: He’s been weakened by his battle with Maman. That’s probably why he hasn’t come after us. But it won’t stop him for long.
VERSO: If you and your father keep fighting, you risk breaking the world again. Another Fracture, but this time, it might be you trapped inside the Monolith.
MAELLE: What’s the alternative?
VERSO: Maybe… maybe you should go home.
MAELLE: Verso…
VERSO: You’re fighting each other but you’re all doing the same thing.
MAELLE: No.
VERSO: Aline wants her son back. Renoir wants you and Aline back. You want Gustave back. The cycle we needed to break wasn’t the Gommage. It’s your family’s cycle of grief.
MAELLE: …
VERSO: Our whole world carries the burden of your family’s grief.Although there is truth that the Canvas world carries the burden of the Dessendre’s family’s grief, he makes an assumption about Maelle’s motivations. Yes, Maelle may want Gustave back, but she earlier clarified that she doesn’t believe Painted Verso nor the Canvas people are ‘make-believe.’ She views them as real, and she refuses to let people die simply because her father decided they were a threat. So his assertion that it’s her continuing the cycle fails to understand the complexity in her motivations.
Instead, Verso tries to argue again why Maelle should leave the Canvas, but if she does, that means Renoir will finish erasing the Canvas and Lune and Sciel will never see their friends and family again. In fact, Lune and Sciel will cease to exist too. This conversation reveals that Verso is simply telling Lune and Sciel what they want to hear so that they can aid him in his goals. He isn’t holding himself accountable here. He’s manipulating everyone to push them toward the end-goal that he’s decided is best.
In doing this, he shows a lack of ability to understand and learn from the hurt and pain he’s done to others. He’s not really listening to them because he’s mapped out ways to carefully push each person into the actions he needs for his own goals. Thus, he’s continuing the cycle of violence.
Maelle has made it clear she wants the cycle of violence to end. She wants to save the Canvas people, because she believes they have a right to exist, that they are not ‘make-believe’ but real. Yet in these conversations, Verso turns up his charm and manipulation tactics to try to tweak the situation to his benefit. He wants Maelle to give up and leave the canvas so Renoir can erase it. He needs Lune and Sciel to work with them so that he can reach Renoir as he suspects that confrontation will be the only way he can push Maelle out of the Canvas.
Healing cannot happen in a manipulative environment that continues to cause harm to others. In the Beyond Survival Anthology, Kai Cheng Thom’s essay called ‘What to Do when You’ve Been Abusive,’ has a list of steps to assist people on that journey toward accountability and healing. The first step:
“‘Learn to Listen When Someone Says You Have Hurt Them.’ When one has been abusive, the very first — and one of the most difficult — skills of holding oneself accountable is learning to simply listen to the person or people whom one has harmed:
- Listening without becoming defensive.
- Listening without trying to equivocate or make excuses.
- Listening without minimizing or denying the extent of the harm.
- Listening without trying to make oneself the center of the story being told.
When someone, particularly a partner or loved one, tells you that you have hurt or abused them, it can be easy to understand this as an accusation or attack…”
Thom here lists what Verso struggles to do in these conversations. He listens but is also defensive with Lune about his actions and proceeds to make excuses for his actions. In a way, Verso struggles to not see these confrontation as an attack, but truthfully, Lune calling out the harm isn’t an attack, it’s a consequence. Pointing out harm isn’t an attack but a courageous moment of honesty and vulnerability. Whether Verso sees that gift of vulnerability is hard to say as his actions and words are conflict depending on the person to whom he speaks.
Verso tends to make himself the center of the story being told in both Lune and Maelle’s conversations. The only one he doesn’t do this with is Sciel, but then Sciel doesn’t really give him that chance. Sciel recognizes that he speaks to give his reasons, and she doesn’t want to hear it, so she instead takes the conversation toward what they will do next. It’s a masterful way of pivoting the conversation to a more active form of accountability — Sciel is essentially asking Verso, “So, you hurt us, what are you going to do to fix this? Here’s one solution.”
Verso accepts Sciel’s solution, but then his conversation with Maelle, he goes on the rampage. He points out her family’s cycle of grief continues to hurt this Canvas, but he also knows that if Maelle leaves, there is no possible way he can honor his promises to Sciel and Lune. He speaks of a cycle of grief that causes harm, which is important to acknowledge, yet he refuses to listen to what Maelle is saying. In turn, Maelle goes quiet, which she often does to think over what others have said.
Thus, Verso’s defensiveness with Lune and Maelle ends up being:
“… the cycle of violence talking. This is the script that rape culture has built for us: a script in which there must be a hero and a villain, a right and a wrong, an accuser and an accused. What if we understood being confronted about perpetuating abuse as an act of courage — even a gift — on the part of the survivor?
What if, instead of reacting immediately in our own defense, we instead took the time to listen, to really try to understand the harm we might have done to another person?
When we think of accountability in terms of listening and love instead of accusation and punishment, everything changes. Listenign without becoming defensive does not necessarily mean relinquishing one’s own truth. We must be able to make room for varying perspectives and multiple emotional truths in our hearts.”
Painted Verso doesn’t make room for varying perspectives or multiple emotional truths. He may take some responsibility for his actions, or at least acknowledges the harm his actions have done, where he takes on only what he has done — no more, no less, but he doesn’t truly grow from that.
Thom writes how taking responsibility for the abuse is a crucial step, but one must also “accept that your reasons are not excuses.”
There is no reason good enough to excuse abusive behavior. Reasons help us understand abuse, but they do not excuse it. Accepting this is essential to transforming culpability into accountability and turning justice into healing.
Painted Verso spends a lot of time giving his reasons and expecting that to excuse his actions. Lune will have none of it as his reasons doesn’t excuse his lying and manipulative actions. He didn’t just betray them but also lied to them and manipulated them in harmful ways. Can Verso recognize the harm and truly be accountable?
This is where support of others can be crucial. Thom writes:
“When having a dialogue with someone who has been abused, it’s essential to give the survivor the space to take the lead in expressive their needs and setting boundaries. You should also take time to think about your own needs and boundaries without making the person you have harmed take care of you. This is why having support in the community is crucial. If basic needs are going unmet, no one can heal from abuse, nor can anyone truly be accountable.
If you have abused someone, it’s not up to you to decide how the process of healing or accountability should work. This doesn’t mean that you don’t get to have rights or boundaries, or that you can’t contribute actively to the process. It means that you don’t get to say that the person you have hurt is “crazy” or that what they are expressing doesn’t matter.
Instead, it might be good idea to try asking the person who has confronted you questions like these: what do you need right now? Is there anything I can do to make this feel better? How much contact would you like to have with me going forward? If we share a community, how should I navigate situations where we might end up int he same place? How does this conversation feel for you, right now?
At the same time, it’s important to understand that the needs of survivors of abuse can change over time, and that survivors may not always know right away — or ever — what their needs are.
Being accountable and responsible for abuse means being patient, flexible, and reflective about the process of having dialogue with the survivor.”
It’s crucial to note here that Thom is not saying that the survivor is an expert on accountability or that they should have full control over the process. Thom adds:
“I feel strongly that as long as punishment remains at the center of our thinking around accountability and justice, survivor-led processes are doomed to fall into the trap of individuals desperately trying to avoid accountability out of fear. Survivor-led, to me, means that survivors get to lead their own process of recovery, that survivors are given space to tell their stories and speak their needs (which criminal justice usually does not allow).
It does not mean that people who have been deeply wounded are suddenly handed full responsibility for a community dialogue and rehabilitation process. Survivor-led does not mean that the community gets to abdicate its responsibility for providing support, safety, expertise, and leadership in making healing happen.”
There are multiple paths in the accountability and healing process: the survivor, the one who caused harm, and the community. These paths may intersect at times, but Thom is arguing that none should exert control over the other’s path. Instead, listening, understanding, honoring boundaries, and opening onself up to changing present and future behaviors is what ‘survivor-led’ should mean.
Thom also makes it clear that the community itself needs to be involved to lay the groundwork to meet the needs of those within this process. Support by building safety, sharing expertise to help guide, and providing leadership to keep those involved accountable are all needed to assist in the healing process here.
Community support allows those involved to have someone with which to work through their emotions and thoughts. By working through emotions and thoughts, one can come to understand one’s own behaviors, emotions, actions, and through that find a path forward. This work means they are also holding themself accountable in the sense they are continuing to move forward on the path toward healing. Supportive friends, family, and community members can assist in helping those in this process stay on the healing path — that’s another type of accountability.
Supportive community is is what Painted Verso lacks. He does not allow anyone to truly be in community with him, and those that try are held at arm’s length with him manipulating events toward his own ends. Whether he ever allowed community to help him work through his trauma and pain relies on his own shared stories, of which seem suspect since what he says to one person doesn’t always align with what he says to another of the same event. The best we have is a journal entry from a prior expedition where he expresses his pain and hopes — hopes he doesn’t seem to have in Maelle’s time.
VERSO’S JOURNAL:
I miss you. I don’t have the right to miss you but I do. I wish I could talk to you. Tell you. Fuck. I don’t know what I would tell you. Just ask that you forgive me. Julie, forgive me. I’m not… I’m not a traitor. I’m not. I’m trying to save… I’m trying to save us all. But you’re right. I am a coward. I’m a fucking coward. You deserved to know why. But I couldn’t. I couldn’t face you properly. Not and still do what had to be done. Papa believes you are Clea’s creation, and even if you’re not, we can no longer trust you. But I think you just wanted answers.
Why? Why couldn’t you just let it go? Why did you convince them to abduct me? Interrogate me? No. I shouldn’t say that. You thought I was a traitor. You were doing what you thought was right, just like we are. I swear to you, I’m doing what’s right. I should have known when you started questioning things that you wouldn’t be fooled. But how could I even explain? You’d have thought I’d gone mad. Doppelgangers. Countless worlds. But Papa’s right. We can’t take the risk. Too much is at stake. Too much. It had to be done. It had to. Clea already took our sister. If we want to save our family, our world, our people, we can’t take any chances. And once we free Maman, she… she’ll bring you back. It won’t be forever. I promise. We deserve to live. All of us. We deserve to exist.
In this journal, Verso admits to his pain and how much he misses Julie, who seems to be a loved one. He justifies his actions, but also shows a willingness to understand why Julie did what she thought was right. He does his best to not internalize the hurtful words that Julie and her expedition likely threw at him — traitor for one. However, he makes a crucial mistake here by assuming Julie’s reactions to the actual truth. He doesn’t allow her to have agency, and instead took that from her by keeping her in the dark. This fueled distrust, especially as he acknowledges Julie had started to question things and notice what doesn’t make sense. Julie wanted answers, and Verso, here at least, acknowledges that she did deserve to know why things transpired the way they did.
He also asserts that they “deserve to exist.” Yet, in Maelle’s time, he seems to have changed his mind entirely as he spends far too much energy trying to convince Maelle to let the Canvas be erased. In his ending, he goes to great lengths to make sure the Canvas is erased. So he breaks all of his promises, and decides that no one deserves to exist in the Canvas. That they are not real and thus it is okay to erase populations.
Why does he come to this conclusion? Partly due to the massive amount of death he witnesses over the decades, and also because he doesn’t have a community to hold him accountable. When one is isolated like Painted Verso, it is all too easy to fall into despair and a desire for annihilation. This is why those who are suicidal shouldn’t be left alone, but need supportive family and friends to help them heal and find new meaning in life.
In Maelle’s ending, Maelle will try to give Verso that opportunity when she offers him the choice of “if you could grow old, would you… find a reason to smile?”
She’s trying to break the cycle of violence by making sure Verso doesn’t have to live the immortal life he so abhors. So she offers solutions that doesn’t end in a genocide of peoples or Painted Verso’s death. Despite the harm Verso has done, Maelle seeks to humanize him and offer him a compromise. Her ending hints strongly that he accepts her alternate solution and seems to find some hope in it, as he does indeed grow old.
This humanization of the person causing harm is also critical to the healing process. The survivor of abuse doesn’t have to be the one to humanize the one causing harm, but those in the community ought to be able to step in for that.
In another essay in the Beyond Survival Anthology, there is an excerpt from the handbook, Ending Child Sexual Abuse:
“We see that abuse happens when one person believes, consciously or unconsciously, that their needs, wants, and preferences take precedence over others. People engaging in abusive behaviors are often numb to, or seemingly unable to feel, the impacts of their behaviors on others.
A process of accountability and transformation requires that the person who has been harmful:
- Stop doing the harm.
- Feels empathy and remorse for the pain and impact of their actions.
- Takes measures, like restitution or reparations, to address the harm caused.
- Takes measures to prevent future harm.
- Works to understand the root causes of their harmful behavior.
- Engages in the ongoing work of accountability, healing, and integration.
- Take action and organizes to support others to heal or to be part of changing community and social conditions that allow for CSA and other forms of violence.”
Here the list shows how difficult healing can be, and how scary it is to make the choice to heal. Yet, it’s crucial for ending the cycle of violence to not dehumanize anyone involved. Dehumanization continues the cycle of violence. As the handbook excerpt says:
“It is important to center the needs of those most directly impacted by the harm in a situation. We also hold that recognizing and attending to the humanity of those who harm is a central aspect of transforming our families, communities, and society. Seeing and dignifying the healing needs of people who abuse also runs counter to the idea that some people “out there” are “monsters” who are expendable or need to be “weeded out.” By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we challenge the dehumanizing logic that is central to systems of oppression, domination, and abuse. By standing for everyone’s need for healing, we maintain our commitment to a vision of true liberation.”
Part of this process means those who cause harm need to understand that not all consequences are “harm.” Consequences to their actions are often necessary and may not be a form of “harm.” For example, Lune calling out the harm of Verso’s lies is the consequence of his actions. She lost trust in him is another consequence. Him having to earn back that trust is yet another consequence. None of these consequences are “harms” done to Verso. It’s simply part of the accountability process.
Humanizing those involved are absolutely critical to ending the cycle of violence. When people are dehumanized, they are stripped of who they are, and this causes harm to all involved. If the cycle of violence is to be ended, then those involved must be humanized and their dignity honored.
This is incredibly difficult to do at times. As a survivor of abuse, I struggled greatly with wanting my abuser to feel the weight of my pain, but through therapy, I learned that truthfully I didn’t want my abuser to be harmed in return. I wanted the cycle of abuse to end. That revelation allowed me to move past the anger and make a conscious choice to heal.
This conscious choice to heal is required of those that cause harm as well. However, shame, guilt, and fear can often make that choice extremely difficult.
Both Verso and Maelle struggle with shame and guilt. Maelle’s guilt and shame lay in her internalizing the blame Aline and Clea lay at her feet. Except, the fire is not Maelle’s fault, but that of the Writers that cause it. Her guilt and shame originate from actions that are not her own.
However, for Verso, his guilt and shame do originate from his own actions, for he did kill members of his prior expeditions, he did lie to people, and he did manipulate people for his own ends. However, it’s crucial to separate shame from guilt. In Kai Cheng Thom’s essay, shame and guilt is defined:
“Shame and social stigma are powerful emotional forces that can prevent us from holding ourselves accountable for being abusive. We don’t want to admit to “being that person,” so we don’t admit to having been abusive at all.
Some people might suggest that people who have been abusive ought to feel shame — after all, perpetuating abuse is wrong. I would argue, though, that this is where the difference between guilt and shame is key. Guilt is feeling bad about something you’ve done; shame is feeling bad about who you are. People who have been abusive should feel guilty for the specific acts of abuse they are responsible for. They should not feel shame about who they are because this means that abuse has become a part of their identity. It means they believe that they are fundamentally a bad person — in other words, “an abuser.”
But if you believe that you are an “abuser,” a bad person who hurts others, then you have already lost the struggle for change — because we cannot change who we are. If you believe that you are a fundamentally good person who has done hurtful or abusive things, then you open the possibility for change.”
When Thom says we “cannot change who we are,” this is in regard to our identities and personality. The “possibility for change” is in regard to our decisions, actions, and future decisions and actions. Those we can change, but we shouldn’t try to alter our personality and identity to be someone we are not. We should focus on how to make better decisions and to act in ways that are more healthy and holistic for us and those around us.
Verso, when he first introduces himself to Expedition 33, calls himself a liar. By doing so, he shows he internalized his actions as part of his identity. This makes it very difficult to hold oneself accountable and being open to the “possibility for change.” If he views lying as crucial to his identity, then why should he stop? It’s who he is, isn’t it? It’s a complete 180 from his journal entry where he refused to accept ‘traitor’ as being who he is.
But lying isn’t who he truly is. He’s, instead, taken a behavior and marked it as a personality trait. Truthfully, his personality isn’t a lying manipulator — we can see bits and pieces of who he is in the scenes where he plays a piano with Maelle, goes out of his way to help Sciel move past her fear of water, shares music with Lune, chats with Esquie, or hangs out with Monoco. He’s a bit silly, fun-loving, jokester, that wants to do the right thing but doesn’t know how. He’s trapped in a cycle of his own making, yet he’s unwilling to recognize his own cycle. Instead, he internalizes the lies as part of who he is, when it’s not — that’s his trauma speaking.
Until Verso can recognize his own cycle of violence and shame, he remains trapped in his cycle, unable to acknowledge his abuse and never able to progress toward healing. Even in his ending, when he fights Maelle to force her from the Canvas, his solution to his cycle is to annihilate himself and everyone in the Canvas. He refuses to see another way. Yet, until he recognizes that his harmful behaviors are not core to his personality, he won’t ever see how to stop his cycle of harm.
This is where Thom goes on to state that as much as those who cause harm shouldn’t “expect anyone to forgive you,” they should, however, forgive themselves:
“Being accountable is not about earning forgiveness. This is to say, it doesn’t matter how accountable you are — nobody has to forgive you for being abusive, least of all the person you have abused. In fact, using the process of “doing” accountability to manipulate or coerce someone into their forgiveness to you is an extension of the abuse dynamic. It center the abuser, not the survivor. One shouldn’t aim for forgiveness when holding oneself accountable. Rather self-accountability is about learning how we have harmed others, why we have harmed others, and how we can stop.
But… you do have to forgive yourself. Because you can’t stop hurting other people until you stop hurting yourself. When one is abusive, when one is hurting so much on the inside that it feels like the only way to make it stop is to hurt other people, it can be terrifying to face the hard truth of words like abuse and accountability. One might rather blame others, blame society, blame the people we love, instead of ourselves.
This is true, I think, of community as well as individuals. It is so much easier, so much simpler, to create hard lines between good and bad people, to create walls to shut the shadowy archetype of “the abuser” out instead of mirrors to look at the abuser within.
Perhaps this is why self-accountability tools like this list are so rare. It takes courage to be accountable. To decide to heal. But when we do decide, we discover incredible new possibilities. There is good and bad in everyone. Anyone can heal, given the right circumstances, and everyone can heal, given the same. You are capable of loving and being loved. Always. Always. Always.”
These are critical points for accountability. The process isn’t so we can “earn forgiveness” like it’s some sort of game achievement. Accountability is about learning, listening, seeking to understand why we did what we did, and finding solutions on how we can stop. Where we end the cycle of violence and instead move into a trajectory toward healing and choosing actions that cause the least harm and the most good.
And what is the most good? How do we know what is good?
To understand what ‘good’ means, we need to briefly explore ethics and morality. This game, thankfully, has already given us that exploration already in the Lumierians — Gustave and Lune in particular. I won’t dig too deeply into this as I feel that Lord Khoury does a much better job in his video here (which I recommend as he lays out an excellent case for why Maelle’s ending is a morally good one). I will simply briefly highlight Gustave’s and Lune’s use of Utilitarianism.
Consequences and Utilitarianism
Gustave, at the start of the game points out how the Gommage seems almost gentle, how it makes Lumiere seem complacent, but it is no less violent. He defines the act of violence and injustice, and in his temporal reality, Lumiere identified the best route to liberation is through confrontation with the Paintress.
Throughout the Prologue and Act 1, we are shown how Gustave lives his morals and how he determines actions to be morally good. These deliberations rely on what is known as utilitarianism. The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines this as:
“…utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one’s own good.”
Gustave’s moralism shows through the projects he describes — teaching his apprentices, Aquafarms, etc. — and in how he interacts with those around him. He understands quite well the consequences of possible actions, and chooses the ones that will do the most good.
For example, when Expedition 33 is separated, Gustave determines the right action is to seek Maelle. He evaluates the consequences of this, and although his emotions push for a specific end result, he still evaluates based on the known information at that time. As in, the note inscribed on the Indigo Tree, the lack of survivors at the Indigo Tree meeting point, and the knowledge of how difficult it is to survive alone.
GUSTAVE: It’s a lead, or only lead, whoever this is has Maelle. We have to go.
LUNE: No, not yet. Protocol is to regroup at rendevous point and wait three days. This message feels off. If it was an Expeditioner, they would have stayed here. Everyone knows the protocol.
GUSTAVE: Right, but they may have been in danger. Maybe this location has been compromised. Things change in the field.
LUNE: There’s a reason its protocol.
GUSTAVE: Protocol doesn’t cover every contingency. You know that.
LUNE: There’s a reason its Protocol. We designed it to yield the optimal result in the vast majority of situations.
GUSTAVE: Was our entire team dying part of that “optimal result?”
LUNE: …
GUSTAVE: Look, I’m going after Maelle. Protocol also states ‘never move solo.’ I’ll let you choose what protocol to break.Here we see how both Gustave and Lune lay out their reasoning for the preferred actions. Gustave focuses on the consequences and concludes going after Maelle will save the most lives based on their current information. Lune, who attempts to argue for the Protocol, finds herself faced with possible consequences that could either endanger Gustave — if he goes alone — or herself — if she stays and he goes — or the mission — if the team is split up.
Lune follows him because of the two protocols they are breaking — one results in a higher number of lives saved and better chance at surviving long enough to complete their mission. Thus, after evaluating what is known and the consequences of various actions, she determines the action that achieve the most good.
In survival, determining the consequences of actions that result in the most lives saved fits firmly in the utilitarianism worldview. Thus, in determining what actions are ‘good,’ it is crucial to seek to understand the consequences of that action for everyone — not just ourselves. This is where Verso falls short as his understanding of the consequences of his actions revolves around the impact on himself; he continues to assert his view, even when others protest and show the harm of it.
Part of that is because he doesn’t show a willingness to examine the situation fully with other people. He’s kept himself relatively isolated for decades, and sought to meet his needs on his own. Isolation can easily distort our thinking and lead us toward despair.
With the Lumierians, we see an alternate route. Gustave and Lune actively talk through the situation at the Indigo Tree. Gustave lays out his analysis and Lune does as well. Gustave, however, focuses on the lives he can actively save in that moment rather than the lives they do not know still live or not. Though this dialogue, the two examine consequences of their actions. Both go back and forth in acknowledging what the other is saying, and also responding to the concerns brought up. In the end, Gustave’s decision to go after Maelle is vindicated in his eyes, and he offers Lune a choice. Lune, in turn, honors the protocol that will save the most lives — staying with Gustave and saving someone that is likely still alive. Considering, they have no further data on anyone else surviving, going after Maelle ends up being justified as the ‘good’ decision through the consequences of their actions.
We see this same sort of analysis play out a few times in Act 1 with how the group analyzes the situation, examines consequences, and come to a decision. Gustave and Lune lead the charge here, and their example provides a litmus test for Maelle to use in trying to determine what decisions are ‘good.’
For another example, Gustave and Lune’s intense fight before they find Maelle:
GUSTAVE: I am not letting Maelle die out here. I’m taking her home.
LUNE: What? No, no, no, we have a mission —
GUSTAVE: Oh, fuck the mission! Fuck the mission, Lune. What are we gonna do? Tell me. What are we gonna do? We’re gonna take down the Paintress, just the three of us? My — my gun and your sparks?
LUNE: I didn’t take you for a coward.
GUSTAVE: I’m not a coward.
LUNE: You swore the oath. “When one falls, we continue.”
GUSTAVE: Yes, I know.
LUNE: When one falls. WHEN one falls. Not if. When. We knew not all of us would make it. But “We Continue.” As long even one of us stands, our fight is not over.
GUSTAVE: But I’m not afraid to fight, it’s just Maelle, she’s —
LUNE: Maelle swore the same oath!
GUSTAVE: I know that!
LUNE: She choose her life! Come on, we always said that the future of Lumiere was more important than any —
GUSTAVE: individual life, yes.
LUNE: Do you still believe that?Here Lune reminds Gustave of the consequences of swearing their oath. Consequences all of them knew before they swore the oath. She also makes it clear that Maelle also swore this oath, knowing the risks, and that she choose that. Lune is reminding Gustave of Maelle’s agency. Through this conversation, she’s challenging him on the consequences of what will happen if he takes Maelle back: he’d break his oath, he’d leave Lune here to continue alone, he’d violate Maelle’s agency, and he would put the future of Lumiere at risk.
This conversation pushes Gustave toward the ‘good’ decision, which is to honor Maelle’s agency. Something he will confirm in a later conversation after they are reunited with Maelle and have found Sciel with the Gestrals:
GUSTAVE: Maybe you should stay…
MAELLE: What?
GUSTAVE: It’s safer in the village.
MAELLE: And miss the change to meet Esquie? No way.
GUSTAVE: Maelle…
MAELLE: I’m okay. We stick together.This conversation proved Lune to be correct. The consequences Lune had laid out as her reasoning on the ‘good choice,’ made it clear that Maelle had chosen this life. Gustave here confirms it with Maelle herself, and he then honors that choice.
Thus, Gustave and Lune provide excellent examples of the use of utilitarianism for determining the morally ‘good’ choice, as well as how to handle conflict. They also show how the Canvas Lumierians honor the agency of others.
It’s through our dialogue with those around us that we come to understand possible consequences and how they may impact others. That dialog then allows us to generate ideas that cause the least harm to all involved and saves the most lives (or in less dire situations, helps the most people feel heard, understood, and agency honored). This can be difficult to do, and in times of danger, we often act on instinct because there isn’t enough time to deliberate on consequences.
However, after the danger is over, we must be willing to analyze what happened and take accountability for our actions. We must not take on the responsibility of other people’s actions, only take on our own. We need to listen to others, and they in turn listen to us. We need to be open to change behaviors if we cause harm, which we see Lune, Gustave, Maelle, and Sciel do on their journey. That’s part of holding one another accountable and choosing healing.
Maelle having the support of her Canvas family is critical to her own journey toward healing. The scene where Maelle has a waking nightmare in Act 1 after the Gestral Village, we see Gustave, Sciel, and Lune gather around her to comfort her. They bring down her panic, and stay at her side until she’s calm. This level of care is not shown by the Dessendre family toward Maelle. Thus, Maelle finds her strongest support system within the Canvas, away from an environment of abuse and neglect. This chosen family helps hold her accountable and supports her as she makes decisions to end the cycle of violence. To choose to heal.
Verso struggles to understand this lesson the entirety of the game. The only clue we are given that he may finally learn it is in Maelle’s ending, when Maelle offers a different solution to his desire to cease his immortal life. He still lives in her ending, but he’s grown old. His fingers find it harder to play the piano — hence the dissonance at first before he plays. Perhaps in this ending he learns how to be accountable and chooses healing. The game seems to imply it, but the game also leaves it open-ended.
In Verso’s ending, Verso doesn’t choose healing but instead chooses to take the agency from everyone involved — Maelle, the faded boy, the different Canvas peoples — and fades into annihilation. Maelle, then, returns to life as Alicia Dessendre, who is disabled and essentially institutionalized in her family’s manor. She has no support system, and her mother still looks at her with disdain. Clea still offers no support, only goes off to do her one-person war. In the ending, Renoir doesn’t even look at Alicia — only at Aline. Alicia stands isolated, and tries to smile, tries to see anything good in this, but instead, she hallucinates the family she’s lost. As they gommage away, I noticed how her shoulders droop and she holds Esquie tighter. A sign that her hope evaporates with them? Again, the game leaves it open-ended.
When still in an abusive environment, healing is out of reach, even if one chooses it, because the circumstances causing the trauma is ongoing. One must exit the abusive environment, but to do so often requires support of others to assist in finding a safer place to be. If there is no one there to provide the necessary support to heal, then it is incredibly difficult to actively heal.
Thus, healing from grief and from abuse both require breaking cycles, but to break those cycles, we need the necessarily family/friends and/or community support. It is not truly possible to do this when we are isolated, because isolation itself is a form of harm that can easily lead us into despair, as we saw with Painted Verso.
Breaking the cycle of violence can only happen when we have built up a community of people who love us for who we are. Then and only then, will we have the support to choose to heal, to hold ourselves accountable, to actively listen to others, and when needed alter our behaviors toward more healthy patterns.
This is not an easy process, and it will require hard work from all involved. Yet the payoff is a healthier existence and a chance to thrive rather than just survive.
#abuse #accountability #Characters #clairObscurExpedition33 #disability #GameAnalysis #gameNarrative #healing #healingJourney #justice #mentalHealth #narrativeAnalysis #responsibility #transformativeJustice #writing
-
Wednesday Reads: Packed News Day
Good Afternoon!!
Donald Trump is not happy. He’s not happy with Israel because they kept bombing Iran after Trump has announced a cease fire. He’s not happy because the U.S. intelligence community has found that his bombing raid on Iran didn’t destroy their nuclear capabilities. He’s not happy that he will likely never get the Nobel Peace Prize that he desperately wants.
Yesterday, Trump spoke to the press on the way to Marine One to travel to the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He appeared disheveled, wearing a rumpled suit with no tie. In angrily criticizing Israel and Iran for not abiding by his cease fire announcement, he broke another presidential norm by swearing in public.
Tamara Keith at NPR: Breaking another presidential norm, Trump drops the f-bomb on camera.
President Trump on Tuesday emphatically dropped an f-bomb, on camera, expressing frustration that Israel and Iran appeared to be violating the ceasefire that he just celebrated going into effect.
“We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f*** they’re doing,” Trump said to reporters as he left the White House.
More than any other president, Trump has been known to use coarse language in speeches and other public appearances. But even for him, this on-camera utterance of the f-word was new. American presidents have typically refrained from using it publicly, even when angry or frustrated.
“Politics is sometimes a dirty and ugly business, and so people use language there that might be better preserved in the locker room — but in no instance do I recall a president openly using this term in a public forum,” said Russell Riley, a presidential historian at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia.
William Vallancourt at The Daily Beast: Why Trump Dropped Iran F-Bomb as ‘Perfect War’ Crumbled: Biographer.
Donald Trump’s f-bomb outburst Tuesday morning over the botched Iran-Israel ceasefire was due to the two embattled countries “ruining” the president’s “perfect war,” journalist Michael Wolff argued on The Daily Beast Podcast.
Trump drops the “F” bomb on the way to Marine One
Wolff also told host Joanna Coles that the context behind Trump’s comment—“You basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f— they’re doing!”—was that the president, unlike his predecessors, doesn’t intend on shepherding the conflict through to its end.
“The difference between all those other people getting sucked into these extended and incredibly damaging commitments is that they have the attention span to do that,“ Wolff said. ”He does not. So in a sense, that’s the weird silver lining. He’s not going to go forward with this.”
“And I don’t see him going down and becoming a wartime president and seeing this as something that he has to see to the end,” Wolff explained. “Trump’s whole impulse is exactly the opposite of that.” [….]
“Many wars are provoked by headlines, by propaganda, by people advocating for their position, trying to push people into wars. That’s certainly what the neocons did for so long,” he said. “But this is kind of the opposite; this is war to create a headline, and the headline is, ‘We won.’”
It’s all part of Trump’s childish personality. He bombed Iran and announced that their nuclear sites were “obliterated.” Right before he had to head to NATO meeting, it came out that that wasn’t true. He’s still publicly insisting that Iran’s nuclear program is dead, but he knows now that it’s a lie.
Trump’s Insane Claims about the Iran Strikes and His Wished-For Cease Fire
Thomas Wright at The Atlantic (gift link): The Problem With Trump’s Cease-Fire. Abandoning diplomacy could make Iranian nuclear progress harder to stop.
Last night, President Donald Trump announced a “total and complete” cease-fire between Israel and Iran. Iran’s nuclear program, Trump said, had been “obliterated” and “totally destroyed” by the U.S. strikes, and Iran’s retaliation was “very weak” and resulted in “hardly any damage.”
If the cease-fire holds, this episode would appear to mark a major foreign-policy victory for the president. But Trump may have made a crucial mistake that could bring about the very outcome that successive American presidents have sought to prevent: an Iranian nuclear weapon.
The problem is that the cease-fire is not linked to a diplomatic agreement with Iran on the future of its nuclear program. Trump apparently sees no need for further negotiation, because the military strikes were, to him, an unqualified success. But as the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Sunday morning, assessing the damage to the sites will take some time. A preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency found that the strikes had failed to destroy some core components of the nuclear program, CNN reported today.
If parts of the program survived, or if Iran stockpiled and hid enriched uranium in advance of the strikes, then Tehran’s next steps seem clear. It will end cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Without eyes and ears on the ground, the international community will lose the ability to monitor Iran’s program. Iran could then choose to build a bomb covertly.
There is a worrisome parallel here to North Korea, which ended cooperation with the IAEA, pulled out of the NPT, and slowly resumed production of highly enriched uranium. A few years later, Pyongyang tested a nuclear device, much to everyone’s surprise.
The Iranian regime may conclude that withdrawing from the NPT is its most effective form of retaliation.
Our childish “president” doesn’t have the patience to deal with anything except instant gratification.
Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillis, and Zachary Cohen at CNN: Exclusive: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say.
The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by seven people briefed on it.
The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said.
Discouraged looking Trump arrives at NATO summit, still no tie.
The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also said on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear ambitions “have been obliterated.”
Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.” Another source said that the intelligence assessed enriched uranium was moved out of the sites prior to the US strikes….
The White House acknowledged the existence of the assessment but said they disagreed with it.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”
Trump, who’s in the Netherlands attending this week’s NATO summit, pushed back on CNN’s report in a Truth Social post. “One of the most successful military strikes in history,” Trump wrote in the all-caps post adding, “The nuclear sites in Iran are completely destroyed!”
Netanyahu must be trying to suck up to Trump, because Israel has released their evaluation of the U.S. strikes.
BBC: Israeli nuclear body says strikes rendered Iran’s Fordo nuclear site ‘inoperable.’
The Israeli government’s nuclear authority says US and Israeli strikes on Iran have rendered the Fordo underground enrichment site “inoperable”.
In a statement the Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) says the “devastating” strike “destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure”.
“We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years,” it says.
The IAEC adds that the “achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material”.
The statement was initially shared by the White House, which distributed it to reporters earlier. It was later released by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Asawin Suebsaeng and Andrew Perez at Rolling Stone: Trump Is Desperately Trying to Bomb and Shitpost His Way to Peace.
As he embarked on his attacks on Iran, President Donald Trump was clear that his initial bombing run would be followed by unbelievable destruction, if the government in Tehran angered him too much. But then after giving war a chance, he was clear that he wanted “peace” for all nations involved. Then, he toyed with the idea of a “regime change” war. And then he announced a supposed cease-fire. But then he got very mad on the internet that nobody was following his huffy cease-fire demands. Then, he got really mad online, again. And then… who the hell knows? Even senior members of his own administration sometimes don’t seem to know what to make of this Trumpian blitz of war and supposed peace.
One thing is for sure: Trump wants you to believe that he can shitpost, bully, and even bomb his way to lasting, durable peace.
For years, Trump has wanted to win a Nobel Peace Prize, and both in and out of office, he has routinely brought up the topic of this elusive honor, people close to him say. However, you do not need to take their word for it, largely because the president often complains in public and on the internet about not getting a Nobel Peace Prize that he can mount in his office.
One reason for that is, despite his anti-neocon rhetoric, Trump has developed a markedly pro-war track record during both of his administrations, and the body count to go with it. His warfare against Iran is just the latest exhibit in that long record.
To this day, Trump still gets visibly upset when the issue is brought up in private conversations, according to a source who’s discussed it with him recently in this presidency, and he will lament that he might have to “save the whole world” in order to win the prize this term — but even doing that, he believes, might not be enough to win over the Norwegian committee due to perceived anti-Trump bias.
Suebsaeng and Perez write that the bombing of Iran is not necessarily popular with members of his administration.
But even within Trump’s second administration — which he packed full of yes-men, yes-women, and venal MAGAheads — there is some degree of hurt feelings over Trump’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites over the weekend, even if no one expects this disappointment to lead to resignations or anything useful, rather than anonymous venting to reporters.
Vice President J.D. Vance, a former Trump critic, has said repeatedly that one of the things that drew him to his new boss was Trump’s professed commitment to “ending endless wars,” and bucking the GOP’s old guard on militarism overseas. Trump’s big talk on being the “candidate of peace” was, of course, always a gigantic fraud, and Vance is still assuming the role of committed Trump uber-loyalist, backing Trump’s war to the hilt.
One quietly frustrated Trump appointee told Rolling Stone that the president’s haphazard Iran bombing policy reflects the kind of “warmonger shit that we’re supposed to be against.” But as this week progressed, this source said that “at least he’s a lazy warmonger.”
Trump’s one accomplishment at the NATO summit is that NATO countries have agreed to spend 5% of their GDP on military preparedness.
Trump at the NATO Summit
Speaking at the NATO summit, Trump continued obsessing over the bombing and the intel assessment that it didn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear capability.
Will Neal at The Daily Beast: Trump Lashes Out at ‘Scum’ for Revealing Bombing Was Botched.
President Donald Trump lashed out at “scum” who revealed his much-championed strikes against Iran were likely far less effective than he claims.
Speaking at a NATO summit in the Netherlands on Wednesday, Trump also conceded that the report from his own intelligence community was “correct,” even while continuing to insist that his strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities caused “total obliteration” and having previously dismissed the report as fake news.
Trump speaks at the NATO summit.
“CNN is scum, MSDNC is scum, the New York Times is scum. They’re bad people, they’re sick,” Trump raged Wednesday.
“What they’ve done is they’ve tried to make this unbelievable victory into something less,” Trump went on. “The generals and all of the people who did a good job, they get demeaned by these idiots at CNN, who can’t get ratings. The place is dying, nobody even wants to waste their time going on any of their shows, so they form what [sic] The New York Times, which is dying also. Without Trump, you wouldn’t have a New York Times.”
It follows after both publications reported leaked findings from a classified military intelligence report that suggested Trump’s weekend strikes against three separate nuclear sites in Iran fell far short of an “obliteration,” as Trump claims, and had likely only set the country’s nuclear program back by a mere matter of months.
The coverage of the leaked documents had already prompted a flurry of typically bellicose Truth Social posts from Trump stretching into the small hours of the night.
“FAKE NEWS CNN, TOGETHER WITH THE FAILING NEW YORK TIMES, HAVE TEAMED UP IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEMEAN ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL MILITARY STRIKES IN HISTORY,” he wrote, adding: “THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED! BOTH THE TIMES AND CNN ARE GETTING SLAMMED BY THE PUBLIC!
In his NATO speech, Trump actually compared the bombing of Iran to Hiroshima!
Immigration News and Opinion
Immigration is also in the news today, because the corrupt Supreme Court has handed Trump permission to ship immigrants to third countries with no due process.
Liz Dye at Public Notice: SCOTUS clears the path for Trump’s network of global gulags.
With one anodyne paragraph, the Court simultaneously cut the legs out from under lower court judges and consigned countless immigrants to be renditioned to a system of global gulags.
It’s a decision that will have long lasting corrosive effects on American civil society and respect for the courts.
“I cannot join so gross an abuse of the Court’s equitable discretion,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her impassioned dissent.
The case involves a challenge to third country removals — that is, immigrants who cannot be repatriated to their home countries and are instead being dumped in some other nation which will accept them.
Immigration protesters in front of Supreme Court
Like most of the people swept up in Trump’s deportation dragnet, the vast majority of affected immigrants were released into the community years ago and have been doing harm to no one — a reality the administration tries to hide by blasting out mugshots of the tiny minority of deportees with serious criminal records.
But The Intercept reports that, in its bloodthirsty quest to shove out as many people as fast as possible, the White House “explored, sought, or struck deals with at least 19 countries: Angola, Benin, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Eswatini, Equatorial Guinea, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Kosovo, Libya, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Panama, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.”
On March 23, a group of detainees sued in the District Court of Massachusetts seeking an injunction barring the government from deporting them to third countries without notice and an opportunity to object under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Citing the Supreme Court’s rulings in the Alien Enemies Act cases, Judge Brian Murphy reasoned that telling people as they are being loaded onto planes that they’re about to be dropped in a country they’ve never seen clearly violates due process:
“This case presents a simple question: before the United States forcibly sends someone to a country other than their country of origin, must that person be told where they are going and be given a chance to tell the United States that they might be killed if sent there? Defendants argue that the United States may send a deportable alien to a country not of their origin, not where an immigration judge has ordered, where they may be immediately tortured and killed, without providing that person any opportunity to tell the deporting authorities that they face grave danger or death because of such a deportation. All nine sitting justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, the Assistant Solicitor General of the United States, Congress, common sense, basic decency, and this Court all disagree.”
Judge Murphy ordered the government to provide detainees written notice “in a language the alien can understand,” with “meaningful opportunity for the alien to raise a fear of return for eligibility for CAT protections and … if the alien is not found to have demonstrated ‘reasonable fear,’ provide meaningful opportunity, and a minimum of 15 days, for that alien to seek to move to reopen immigration proceedings to challenge the potential third-country removal.”
Read the whole thing at the link. See also, Adam Bonica at On Data and Democracy: The Supreme Court Is at War With Its Own Judiciary.
Pricilla Alvarez at CNN: Exclusive: New Trump administration plan could end asylum claims and speed deportations for hundreds of thousands of migrants.
The Trump administration is planning to dismiss asylum claims for potentially hundreds of thousands of migrants in the United States and then make them immediately deportable as part of the president’s sweeping immigration crackdown, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
It marks the latest in a series of moves by the administration to bar migrants from receiving protections in the US. As federal authorities come under pressure to deliver historic immigration arrest numbers, administration officials have quietly been working on efforts to make more people eligible for removal.
Masked ICE agents
The people being targeted in this case are those who entered the US unlawfully and later applied for asylum, the sources said. Their cases are expected to be closed, therefore leaving them at risk of deportation. It could affect hundreds of thousands of asylum applicants.
Over the last decade, the majority of applicants who applied for asylum with US Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, self-reported how they entered the US, with around 25 percent saying they entered the US unlawfully. That amounts to at least a quarter of a million people, according to a federal report analyzing asylees in 2023. The others entered legally via a port of entry through various visas.
Under US law, people who are seeking protection from violence or persecution in their home country can claim asylum to remain in the United States. Trump effectively sealed off access to claiming asylum at the US southern border upon taking office.
There are currently around 1.45 million people with pending affirmative asylum applications, federal data shows. People who are not in deportation proceedings can apply for affirmative asylum through USCIS.
USCIS — which falls under the Department of Homeland Security and is responsible for managing federal immigration benefits — has also been delegated the authority by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to place those individuals in fast-track deportation proceedings as well as “take additional actions to enforce civil and criminal violations of the immigration laws,” according to a memo obtained by CNN. That marks an unprecedented departure from decades-long protocol for USCIS.
They have already been doing this by asking immigration judges to dismiss people’s cases and then having ICE grab them as they leave the courtroom. Read more CNN.
Julia Ainsley and Laura Strickler at NBC News: Despite promise to remove ‘worst of the worst,’ ICE has arrested only 6% of known immigrant murderers.
After six months of aggressive immigration enforcement and promises to focus on deporting violent criminals, the Trump administration has arrested and detained a small fraction of the undocumented immigrants already known to Immigration and Customs Enforcement as having been convicted of sexual assault and homicide, internal ICE data obtained by NBC News shows.
The data is a tally of every person booked by ICE from Oct. 1 through May 31, part of which was during the Biden administration. It shows a total of 185,042 people arrested and booked into ICE facilities during that time; 65,041 of them have been convicted of crimes. The most common categories of crimes they committed were immigration and traffic offenses.
Almost half of the people currently in ICE custody have neither been convicted of nor charged with any crime, other ICE data shows.
Last fall, ICE told Congress that 13,099 people convicted of homicide and 15,811 people convicted of sexual assault were on its non-detained docket, meaning it knew who they were but did not have them in custody. A spokesperson said at the time that ICE had some information about but did not know the exact whereabouts of all the immigrants on the non-detained docket and that some could have left the United States or could be in prison.
Running for president at the time, Donald Trump used those figures to criticize his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.
“These are hard, tough, vicious criminals that are free to roam in our country,” Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan.
One more, from Sherrilyn Ifill at Sherrilyn’s Newsletter: Masked Terror.
At this point, we have all seen the videos. Men dressed in plaid shirts, jeans and boots descending on constructions sites, chasing migrants in fields, lurking in courthouse hallways at courthouses, knocking on doors of homes, and surrounding cars. We see them wrestling men and women to the ground. Beating them in some instances. Chasing them. Jumping out of cars and descending. Surrounding unarmed women. Pointing their guns and demanding that people exit their cars. They have shown up at elementary schools demanding to see children of migrants.[i] They purport to be working for the Department of Homeland Security. They are ICE agents, we surmise. But often we don’t know. Because these men, for the most part, display no badges or names.
Masked ICE agents in Seattle courthouse
And they are masked. Their masks are not “government issue” or of the N-95 variety with which we became familiar during COVID. Often these masks are just large, black or green pieces of cloth, or bandanas covering the entire face, save for the eyes. A hat pushed down low also appears to be part of the required uniform.
Despite strong opposition from ordinary Americans to the appearance of a force that many liken to “secret police” in totalitarian regimes, Republican senators have doubled down on ICE agent anonymity, introducing legislation that would make it a felony to release the names of ICE agents.[ii]
There is something particularly menacing about being attacked by faceless people. The mask not only terrorizes the victim of the attack, but it also uniquely empowers the perpetrator. We see this in many of the videos as those who claim to be federal officers, speak crudely and cruelly, and behave with unspeakable brutality against unarmed laborers and their families. The mask prevents their victims from identifying the “officers.” But perhaps the anonymity offered by the mask also encourages these agents to obscure their own humanity from each other and from themselves.
This country has a unique history with the particular terror of masked attackers. The Ku Klux Klan, the violent white supremacist organization terrorized Black people in the American South in the first years after the end of the Civil War and through much of the 20th century. So rampant was Klan violence in the years immediately after the Civil War, that it threatened to derail the promise of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 and was designed to ensure that Black people would equal citizens in post-Civil War America.
Read the rest at the link.
That’s it for me today. What’s on your mind?
#FBomb #IranNuclearSites #IranIsraelCeaseFire #maskeedICEAgents #NATOSummit #NobelPeacePrize
-
Wednesday Reads: Packed News Day
Good Afternoon!!
Donald Trump is not happy. He’s not happy with Israel because they kept bombing Iran after Trump has announced a cease fire. He’s not happy because the U.S. intelligence community has found that his bombing raid on Iran didn’t destroy their nuclear capabilities. He’s not happy that he will likely never get the Nobel Peace Prize that he desperately wants.
Yesterday, Trump spoke to the press on the way to Marine One to travel to the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He appeared disheveled, wearing a rumpled suit with no tie. In angrily criticizing Israel and Iran for not abiding by his cease fire announcement, he broke another presidential norm by swearing in public.
Tamara Keith at NPR: Breaking another presidential norm, Trump drops the f-bomb on camera.
President Trump on Tuesday emphatically dropped an f-bomb, on camera, expressing frustration that Israel and Iran appeared to be violating the ceasefire that he just celebrated going into effect.
“We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f*** they’re doing,” Trump said to reporters as he left the White House.
More than any other president, Trump has been known to use coarse language in speeches and other public appearances. But even for him, this on-camera utterance of the f-word was new. American presidents have typically refrained from using it publicly, even when angry or frustrated.
“Politics is sometimes a dirty and ugly business, and so people use language there that might be better preserved in the locker room — but in no instance do I recall a president openly using this term in a public forum,” said Russell Riley, a presidential historian at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia.
William Vallancourt at The Daily Beast: Why Trump Dropped Iran F-Bomb as ‘Perfect War’ Crumbled: Biographer.
Donald Trump’s f-bomb outburst Tuesday morning over the botched Iran-Israel ceasefire was due to the two embattled countries “ruining” the president’s “perfect war,” journalist Michael Wolff argued on The Daily Beast Podcast.
Trump drops the “F” bomb on the way to Marine One
Wolff also told host Joanna Coles that the context behind Trump’s comment—“You basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f— they’re doing!”—was that the president, unlike his predecessors, doesn’t intend on shepherding the conflict through to its end.
“The difference between all those other people getting sucked into these extended and incredibly damaging commitments is that they have the attention span to do that,“ Wolff said. ”He does not. So in a sense, that’s the weird silver lining. He’s not going to go forward with this.”
“And I don’t see him going down and becoming a wartime president and seeing this as something that he has to see to the end,” Wolff explained. “Trump’s whole impulse is exactly the opposite of that.” [….]
“Many wars are provoked by headlines, by propaganda, by people advocating for their position, trying to push people into wars. That’s certainly what the neocons did for so long,” he said. “But this is kind of the opposite; this is war to create a headline, and the headline is, ‘We won.’”
It’s all part of Trump’s childish personality. He bombed Iran and announced that their nuclear sites were “obliterated.” Right before he had to head to NATO meeting, it came out that that wasn’t true. He’s still publicly insisting that Iran’s nuclear program is dead, but he knows now that it’s a lie.
Trump’s Insane Claims about the Iran Strikes and His Wished-For Cease Fire
Thomas Wright at The Atlantic (gift link): The Problem With Trump’s Cease-Fire. Abandoning diplomacy could make Iranian nuclear progress harder to stop.
Last night, President Donald Trump announced a “total and complete” cease-fire between Israel and Iran. Iran’s nuclear program, Trump said, had been “obliterated” and “totally destroyed” by the U.S. strikes, and Iran’s retaliation was “very weak” and resulted in “hardly any damage.”
If the cease-fire holds, this episode would appear to mark a major foreign-policy victory for the president. But Trump may have made a crucial mistake that could bring about the very outcome that successive American presidents have sought to prevent: an Iranian nuclear weapon.
The problem is that the cease-fire is not linked to a diplomatic agreement with Iran on the future of its nuclear program. Trump apparently sees no need for further negotiation, because the military strikes were, to him, an unqualified success. But as the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Sunday morning, assessing the damage to the sites will take some time. A preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency found that the strikes had failed to destroy some core components of the nuclear program, CNN reported today.
If parts of the program survived, or if Iran stockpiled and hid enriched uranium in advance of the strikes, then Tehran’s next steps seem clear. It will end cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Without eyes and ears on the ground, the international community will lose the ability to monitor Iran’s program. Iran could then choose to build a bomb covertly.
There is a worrisome parallel here to North Korea, which ended cooperation with the IAEA, pulled out of the NPT, and slowly resumed production of highly enriched uranium. A few years later, Pyongyang tested a nuclear device, much to everyone’s surprise.
The Iranian regime may conclude that withdrawing from the NPT is its most effective form of retaliation.
Our childish “president” doesn’t have the patience to deal with anything except instant gratification.
Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillis, and Zachary Cohen at CNN: Exclusive: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say.
The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by seven people briefed on it.
The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said.
Discouraged looking Trump arrives at NATO summit, still no tie.
The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also said on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear ambitions “have been obliterated.”
Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.” Another source said that the intelligence assessed enriched uranium was moved out of the sites prior to the US strikes….
The White House acknowledged the existence of the assessment but said they disagreed with it.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”
Trump, who’s in the Netherlands attending this week’s NATO summit, pushed back on CNN’s report in a Truth Social post. “One of the most successful military strikes in history,” Trump wrote in the all-caps post adding, “The nuclear sites in Iran are completely destroyed!”
Netanyahu must be trying to suck up to Trump, because Israel has released their evaluation of the U.S. strikes.
BBC: Israeli nuclear body says strikes rendered Iran’s Fordo nuclear site ‘inoperable.’
The Israeli government’s nuclear authority says US and Israeli strikes on Iran have rendered the Fordo underground enrichment site “inoperable”.
In a statement the Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) says the “devastating” strike “destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure”.
“We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years,” it says.
The IAEC adds that the “achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material”.
The statement was initially shared by the White House, which distributed it to reporters earlier. It was later released by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Asawin Suebsaeng and Andrew Perez at Rolling Stone: Trump Is Desperately Trying to Bomb and Shitpost His Way to Peace.
As he embarked on his attacks on Iran, President Donald Trump was clear that his initial bombing run would be followed by unbelievable destruction, if the government in Tehran angered him too much. But then after giving war a chance, he was clear that he wanted “peace” for all nations involved. Then, he toyed with the idea of a “regime change” war. And then he announced a supposed cease-fire. But then he got very mad on the internet that nobody was following his huffy cease-fire demands. Then, he got really mad online, again. And then… who the hell knows? Even senior members of his own administration sometimes don’t seem to know what to make of this Trumpian blitz of war and supposed peace.
One thing is for sure: Trump wants you to believe that he can shitpost, bully, and even bomb his way to lasting, durable peace.
For years, Trump has wanted to win a Nobel Peace Prize, and both in and out of office, he has routinely brought up the topic of this elusive honor, people close to him say. However, you do not need to take their word for it, largely because the president often complains in public and on the internet about not getting a Nobel Peace Prize that he can mount in his office.
One reason for that is, despite his anti-neocon rhetoric, Trump has developed a markedly pro-war track record during both of his administrations, and the body count to go with it. His warfare against Iran is just the latest exhibit in that long record.
To this day, Trump still gets visibly upset when the issue is brought up in private conversations, according to a source who’s discussed it with him recently in this presidency, and he will lament that he might have to “save the whole world” in order to win the prize this term — but even doing that, he believes, might not be enough to win over the Norwegian committee due to perceived anti-Trump bias.
Suebsaeng and Perez write that the bombing of Iran is not necessarily popular with members of his administration.
But even within Trump’s second administration — which he packed full of yes-men, yes-women, and venal MAGAheads — there is some degree of hurt feelings over Trump’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites over the weekend, even if no one expects this disappointment to lead to resignations or anything useful, rather than anonymous venting to reporters.
Vice President J.D. Vance, a former Trump critic, has said repeatedly that one of the things that drew him to his new boss was Trump’s professed commitment to “ending endless wars,” and bucking the GOP’s old guard on militarism overseas. Trump’s big talk on being the “candidate of peace” was, of course, always a gigantic fraud, and Vance is still assuming the role of committed Trump uber-loyalist, backing Trump’s war to the hilt.
One quietly frustrated Trump appointee told Rolling Stone that the president’s haphazard Iran bombing policy reflects the kind of “warmonger shit that we’re supposed to be against.” But as this week progressed, this source said that “at least he’s a lazy warmonger.”
Trump’s one accomplishment at the NATO summit is that NATO countries have agreed to spend 5% of their GDP on military preparedness.
Trump at the NATO Summit
Speaking at the NATO summit, Trump continued obsessing over the bombing and the intel assessment that it didn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear capability.
Will Neal at The Daily Beast: Trump Lashes Out at ‘Scum’ for Revealing Bombing Was Botched.
President Donald Trump lashed out at “scum” who revealed his much-championed strikes against Iran were likely far less effective than he claims.
Speaking at a NATO summit in the Netherlands on Wednesday, Trump also conceded that the report from his own intelligence community was “correct,” even while continuing to insist that his strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities caused “total obliteration” and having previously dismissed the report as fake news.
Trump speaks at the NATO summit.
“CNN is scum, MSDNC is scum, the New York Times is scum. They’re bad people, they’re sick,” Trump raged Wednesday.
“What they’ve done is they’ve tried to make this unbelievable victory into something less,” Trump went on. “The generals and all of the people who did a good job, they get demeaned by these idiots at CNN, who can’t get ratings. The place is dying, nobody even wants to waste their time going on any of their shows, so they form what [sic] The New York Times, which is dying also. Without Trump, you wouldn’t have a New York Times.”
It follows after both publications reported leaked findings from a classified military intelligence report that suggested Trump’s weekend strikes against three separate nuclear sites in Iran fell far short of an “obliteration,” as Trump claims, and had likely only set the country’s nuclear program back by a mere matter of months.
The coverage of the leaked documents had already prompted a flurry of typically bellicose Truth Social posts from Trump stretching into the small hours of the night.
“FAKE NEWS CNN, TOGETHER WITH THE FAILING NEW YORK TIMES, HAVE TEAMED UP IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEMEAN ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL MILITARY STRIKES IN HISTORY,” he wrote, adding: “THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED! BOTH THE TIMES AND CNN ARE GETTING SLAMMED BY THE PUBLIC!
In his NATO speech, Trump actually compared the bombing of Iran to Hiroshima!
Immigration News and Opinion
Immigration is also in the news today, because the corrupt Supreme Court has handed Trump permission to ship immigrants to third countries with no due process.
Liz Dye at Public Notice: SCOTUS clears the path for Trump’s network of global gulags.
With one anodyne paragraph, the Court simultaneously cut the legs out from under lower court judges and consigned countless immigrants to be renditioned to a system of global gulags.
It’s a decision that will have long lasting corrosive effects on American civil society and respect for the courts.
“I cannot join so gross an abuse of the Court’s equitable discretion,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her impassioned dissent.
The case involves a challenge to third country removals — that is, immigrants who cannot be repatriated to their home countries and are instead being dumped in some other nation which will accept them.
Immigration protesters in front of Supreme Court
Like most of the people swept up in Trump’s deportation dragnet, the vast majority of affected immigrants were released into the community years ago and have been doing harm to no one — a reality the administration tries to hide by blasting out mugshots of the tiny minority of deportees with serious criminal records.
But The Intercept reports that, in its bloodthirsty quest to shove out as many people as fast as possible, the White House “explored, sought, or struck deals with at least 19 countries: Angola, Benin, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Eswatini, Equatorial Guinea, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Kosovo, Libya, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Panama, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.”
On March 23, a group of detainees sued in the District Court of Massachusetts seeking an injunction barring the government from deporting them to third countries without notice and an opportunity to object under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Citing the Supreme Court’s rulings in the Alien Enemies Act cases, Judge Brian Murphy reasoned that telling people as they are being loaded onto planes that they’re about to be dropped in a country they’ve never seen clearly violates due process:
“This case presents a simple question: before the United States forcibly sends someone to a country other than their country of origin, must that person be told where they are going and be given a chance to tell the United States that they might be killed if sent there? Defendants argue that the United States may send a deportable alien to a country not of their origin, not where an immigration judge has ordered, where they may be immediately tortured and killed, without providing that person any opportunity to tell the deporting authorities that they face grave danger or death because of such a deportation. All nine sitting justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, the Assistant Solicitor General of the United States, Congress, common sense, basic decency, and this Court all disagree.”
Judge Murphy ordered the government to provide detainees written notice “in a language the alien can understand,” with “meaningful opportunity for the alien to raise a fear of return for eligibility for CAT protections and … if the alien is not found to have demonstrated ‘reasonable fear,’ provide meaningful opportunity, and a minimum of 15 days, for that alien to seek to move to reopen immigration proceedings to challenge the potential third-country removal.”
Read the whole thing at the link. See also, Adam Bonica at On Data and Democracy: The Supreme Court Is at War With Its Own Judiciary.
Pricilla Alvarez at CNN: Exclusive: New Trump administration plan could end asylum claims and speed deportations for hundreds of thousands of migrants.
The Trump administration is planning to dismiss asylum claims for potentially hundreds of thousands of migrants in the United States and then make them immediately deportable as part of the president’s sweeping immigration crackdown, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
It marks the latest in a series of moves by the administration to bar migrants from receiving protections in the US. As federal authorities come under pressure to deliver historic immigration arrest numbers, administration officials have quietly been working on efforts to make more people eligible for removal.
Masked ICE agents
The people being targeted in this case are those who entered the US unlawfully and later applied for asylum, the sources said. Their cases are expected to be closed, therefore leaving them at risk of deportation. It could affect hundreds of thousands of asylum applicants.
Over the last decade, the majority of applicants who applied for asylum with US Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, self-reported how they entered the US, with around 25 percent saying they entered the US unlawfully. That amounts to at least a quarter of a million people, according to a federal report analyzing asylees in 2023. The others entered legally via a port of entry through various visas.
Under US law, people who are seeking protection from violence or persecution in their home country can claim asylum to remain in the United States. Trump effectively sealed off access to claiming asylum at the US southern border upon taking office.
There are currently around 1.45 million people with pending affirmative asylum applications, federal data shows. People who are not in deportation proceedings can apply for affirmative asylum through USCIS.
USCIS — which falls under the Department of Homeland Security and is responsible for managing federal immigration benefits — has also been delegated the authority by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to place those individuals in fast-track deportation proceedings as well as “take additional actions to enforce civil and criminal violations of the immigration laws,” according to a memo obtained by CNN. That marks an unprecedented departure from decades-long protocol for USCIS.
They have already been doing this by asking immigration judges to dismiss people’s cases and then having ICE grab them as they leave the courtroom. Read more CNN.
Julia Ainsley and Laura Strickler at NBC News: Despite promise to remove ‘worst of the worst,’ ICE has arrested only 6% of known immigrant murderers.
After six months of aggressive immigration enforcement and promises to focus on deporting violent criminals, the Trump administration has arrested and detained a small fraction of the undocumented immigrants already known to Immigration and Customs Enforcement as having been convicted of sexual assault and homicide, internal ICE data obtained by NBC News shows.
The data is a tally of every person booked by ICE from Oct. 1 through May 31, part of which was during the Biden administration. It shows a total of 185,042 people arrested and booked into ICE facilities during that time; 65,041 of them have been convicted of crimes. The most common categories of crimes they committed were immigration and traffic offenses.
Almost half of the people currently in ICE custody have neither been convicted of nor charged with any crime, other ICE data shows.
Last fall, ICE told Congress that 13,099 people convicted of homicide and 15,811 people convicted of sexual assault were on its non-detained docket, meaning it knew who they were but did not have them in custody. A spokesperson said at the time that ICE had some information about but did not know the exact whereabouts of all the immigrants on the non-detained docket and that some could have left the United States or could be in prison.
Running for president at the time, Donald Trump used those figures to criticize his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.
“These are hard, tough, vicious criminals that are free to roam in our country,” Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan.
One more, from Sherrilyn Ifill at Sherrilyn’s Newsletter: Masked Terror.
At this point, we have all seen the videos. Men dressed in plaid shirts, jeans and boots descending on constructions sites, chasing migrants in fields, lurking in courthouse hallways at courthouses, knocking on doors of homes, and surrounding cars. We see them wrestling men and women to the ground. Beating them in some instances. Chasing them. Jumping out of cars and descending. Surrounding unarmed women. Pointing their guns and demanding that people exit their cars. They have shown up at elementary schools demanding to see children of migrants.[i] They purport to be working for the Department of Homeland Security. They are ICE agents, we surmise. But often we don’t know. Because these men, for the most part, display no badges or names.
Masked ICE agents in Seattle courthouse
And they are masked. Their masks are not “government issue” or of the N-95 variety with which we became familiar during COVID. Often these masks are just large, black or green pieces of cloth, or bandanas covering the entire face, save for the eyes. A hat pushed down low also appears to be part of the required uniform.
Despite strong opposition from ordinary Americans to the appearance of a force that many liken to “secret police” in totalitarian regimes, Republican senators have doubled down on ICE agent anonymity, introducing legislation that would make it a felony to release the names of ICE agents.[ii]
There is something particularly menacing about being attacked by faceless people. The mask not only terrorizes the victim of the attack, but it also uniquely empowers the perpetrator. We see this in many of the videos as those who claim to be federal officers, speak crudely and cruelly, and behave with unspeakable brutality against unarmed laborers and their families. The mask prevents their victims from identifying the “officers.” But perhaps the anonymity offered by the mask also encourages these agents to obscure their own humanity from each other and from themselves.
This country has a unique history with the particular terror of masked attackers. The Ku Klux Klan, the violent white supremacist organization terrorized Black people in the American South in the first years after the end of the Civil War and through much of the 20th century. So rampant was Klan violence in the years immediately after the Civil War, that it threatened to derail the promise of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 and was designed to ensure that Black people would equal citizens in post-Civil War America.
Read the rest at the link.
That’s it for me today. What’s on your mind?
#FBomb #IranNuclearSites #IranIsraelCeaseFire #maskeedICEAgents #NATOSummit #NobelPeacePrize
-
@Ben Pate 🤘🏻 Allow me to take a look at this from a Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte point of view.The Sin of Overwhelming Complexity: Instance Selection Paralysis
The only way to really combat this effectively is by hiding the whole concept of servers/instances at first, railroading everyone to a server and only letting them know about decentralisation and servers/instances after the fact.
In theory, this could be doable with Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and even better than with Mastodon with its themed servers. It wouldn't make sense to offer Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte servers for certain topics or target audiences, seeing as the whole thing would become moot the very moment when you make your first clone on another server. Simply build a kind of "automatic on-boarder" that sends everyone to the geographically closest open-registration server.
In practice, that'd be a bad idea, but for a different reason than on Mastodon. And that's how these servers tend to be very different. Not in topic. Not in target audiences. Not in rules. But in features. Hubzilla is modular, (streams) is modular, Forte is modular, and each admin decides differently on which "apps" to activate. Then you want to join Hubzilla for one cool feature, but the on-boarder railroads you to a server where that very feature isn't even activated.
Sure, the on-boarder could include the option to select certain features that you absolutely must have in your new home and then pick a server that has them. But that'd be extra hassle and extra confusing.
Besides, where'd you put that on-boarder? On the official Hubzilla website? Haha, no can do. The official Hubzilla website is a webpage on a Hubzilla channel itself. It's all just dumb old static HTML with a CSS. If it's even HTML and not Markdown or BBcode, that is. You couldn't add scripts to it if you tried.
Oh, and (streams) and Forte don't even have official websites. And (streams) will never have one, seeing as it's officially and intentionally nameless, brandless and totally not even a project. Their "websites" are readme files in their code repositories on Codeberg.The Sin of Inconsistent Navigation: Timeline Turmoil
The streams on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are quite a bit different from Mastodon timelines.
First of all, what you usually don't have on public servers is the counterpart to Mastodon's local timeline and Mastodon's federated timeline. On all three, this would be only one stream, the "public stream" or "pubstream". It can be switched by the admin to either what'd be local or what'd be federated. However, public servers usually have it off entirely. Unavailable even to local users. That's because the admins don't want to be held liable for what's happening on the pubstream.
Technically speaking, you only have one stream on a public server, and that's your channel stream. It's much more efficient than a Mastodon timeline because it always shows entire conversations by default instead of detached single-message piecemeal, and because it has a counter for unread messages which even lists these unread messages for you to directly go to the corresponding conversation. But that's another story.
However, your channel stream can be viewed on your channel page, conversation by conversation, or it can be viewed on the stream page as an actual stream with all conversations shown in a feed/timeline-like fashion, one upon another, and with its own set of built-in filters such as "only my own messages" or "only conversations started by members of one particular privacy group/access list" or "only conversations from one particular group actor". It's actually much more convenient than any Mastodon timeline, but for those who want a Twitter clone for dumb-dumbs, it can be very overwhelming.
Yes, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are much more complex in handling than, say, snac2. But they're also much more complex in features than snac2. That power is their USP. And that power must be harnessed somehow.The Sin of Remote Interaction Purgatory: Federation Gymnastics
Sure, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte have some of the best built-in search systems in the whole Fediverse. They can pull almost everything onto your channel stream just by searching for it. And if it has replies, chances are they pull these in as well.
But still, they're geared towards desktop users. They still require copy-paste. Phone users don't copy paste. Most of them don't even know the very concept of copy-paste. For most of those who do, copy-paste is much too fumbly if the input device available to them is a 6" touch screen.
You can't blame them, though. This is next to impossible to do any differently. I mean, you won't see a button magically appear with which you can pull in just that one post or comment you want to pull in.
Rather, the issue is that they can only reel in almost everything. Sometimes the search returns nothing, like a void. Sometimes the search runs indefinitely without any kind of result. This may be because someone has blocked your channel, because someone has blocked your entire server, because the server someone is on has blocked you or your entire server, because Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte doesn't understand the URI pasted into the search field or whatever.
So this is made worse by Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte not knowing what they can search for, what they can't and why not.
Connecting with someone whom you encounter on your channel stream is fairly easy. Connections can be initiated with only two clicks. Either you click their long name, and you're taken to a pretty much distraction-less local "intermediate page" with a striking green button that's labelled "+ Connect". Or if you don't want to leave the channel page, you hover your mouse cursor over their profile picture, click on the little white arrow that appears, and you get a small menu that offers you the "Connect" option as well. Granted, even some veterans don't know the latter trick because it isn't immediately advertised on the channel page.
Also, sure, you don't simply follow them right off the bat with nothing else to do like on Mastodon. You're taken to your Connections page, and you have to configure the connection (you don't have to do that on Mastodon because you can't configure connections on Mastodon).
Following accounts/channels from the directory is a bit easier. The green "+ Connect" button is there right away (unless you're already connected). However, Hubzilla's directory only lists channels based on the Nomad protocol, i.e. Hubzilla and (streams) channels, because ActivityPub is only implemented in an optional, off-by-default-for-new-channels add-on whereas it's in the core and on by default on (streams) and the only available protocol on Forte.
Importing contents or following actors when seeing them locally on other servers without copy-pasting and searching can be done. It requires OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, however, and it requires it to be implemented on all servers of all Fediverse server applications from Mastodon to WordPress to Ghost to Flipboard. Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are the only Fediverse server applications with full (client-side and server-side) OpenWebAuth implementations. But that's of little use if the rest of the Fediverse doesn't have server-side implementations, and Mastodon has even silently rejected a mere client-side implementation already developed to a pull request two years ago.The Sin of DM Disasters Waiting to Happen
I think this is less of an issue on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte because they handle DMs differently from Mastodon (which "the Fediverse" actually refers to in the article).
On all three, DMs are integrated into their extensive, fine-grained permissions system in which everything is only public if it's really public. The difference between a post and a DM is not just a switch.
If I want to DM you, I can either tag you@!{[email protected]}rather than@[url=https://mastodon.social/@benpate]Ben Pate 🤘🏻[/url]. Then you're a) the only one to whom the message is sent (it literally doesn't even go out to any other server than mastodon.social plus my clone on hub.hubzilla.de as can be seen in the delivery report) and b) the only one who is granted permission to view the message.
Or I can use the padlock icon and select you from the opening list as the sole recipient. The very moment that I select certain recipients, the post I'm composing quits being public, and the padlock icon switches from open to closed. This isn't a one-click or two-click toggle. You don't do that casually. It's basically configuration. It requires so many mouse clicks that you do it consciously and intentionally. If you want to post in private, you have to really want to post in private.
Better yet: You can default to posting only to a certain limited target audience. In fact, by default on a brand-new channel, you only post to the members of one privacy group/access list (which is a Mastodon list on coke and 'roids). You have to manually reconfigure your new channel if you want to post to the general public by default.
If you preview your post, you can see whether it's a direct message to one or multiple single connections (envelope icon next to your long name), a limited-permissions message to one or multiple privacy groups/access lists/group actors (closed padlock icon) or actually public (no icon).
Even better yet: Posts to group actors generally aren't public. Posts to at least Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups and Forte groups are never public. They do not go out to your followers as well unless they're connected to the same group. And this is independent from whether a group is public or private. You can't accidentially post to a group actor in public, and if you do, you don't post to that group actor at all, at least not in a way that makes the group actor forward your post to its other connections.
Granted, what does not happen is your background switching from your background colour or background image (which can be user-configured) to red #800000 or a yellow-and-back chevron pattern when you change visibility and permissions to something that isn't public.The Sin of Ghost Conversations and Phantom Follower Counts
And again, when @Tim Chambers says, "the Fediverse", he almost exclusively means Mastodon. He writes as if the entire Fediverse handled conversations as terribly as Mastodon, as if the entire Fediverse was as blissfully unaware of enclosed conversations as Mastodon. Which is not the case.
Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, as well as their ancestor Friendica, handle conversations in ways that exceed Mastodon users' imaginations and wildest dreams by magnitudes. Unlike Mastodon, they know threaded conversations, and they see them as enclosed objects where only the start post counts as a post, and everything else counts as a comment.
This means that once you've received a post on your stream, you will also receive all comments on that post, regardless of whether or not you follow the commenters, regardless of whether or not they mention you. That's because all four reel in the comments not from the commentors, but from the original poster who is perceived as the owner of the thread. Only blocks or channel-wide filters can prevent comments from coming in.
Beyond that, (streams) was the first to introduce Conversation Containers. Forte inherited them from (streams), and when they were defined in FEP-171b, Hubzilla implemented them, too.
Here on Hubzilla, I can see all comments in this thread because my channel has fetched them directly from @Johannes Ernst. And I can actually see them right away because that's the default view here on Hubzilla, rather than Mastodon's piecemeal.
Even if you import a post manually using the search feature (and you better import the actual start post), AFAIK existing comments will eventually be backfilled. Comments that come in after importing will definitely end up on your stream as part of the thread.
So this is not a shortcoming of the Fediverse. The Fediverse has been able to do better for 15 years. It's a shortcoming of Mastodon.
The only "issue" here may be that it sometimes takes some time for a comment to show up for some reasons. But unless there are blocks or filters in play, it eventually will.The Sin of Invisible Discovery: The Content Mirage
I'm not going to pick on the audacious implication that "Eugen and team" invented the Fediverse.
But Tim writes like literally everyone wants "the Fediverse" (read, actually Mastodon) to be literally Twitter without Musk.
Also:- Friendica has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2010. Five and a half years longer than Mastodon has even existed.
- Hubzilla has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2011 when it was forked from Free-Friendika. It has inherited full-text search from Friendica.
- (streams) and Forte have had full-blown full-text search since their respective inception in 2021 and 2024, both having inherited it themselves.
Oh, and none of them has an explicit opt-in switch to soothe panicking Twitter converts because panicking Twitter converts have never been the primary target audience of either of them.
Instead, on Hubzilla, whether someone can find your content depends on whether they've got permission to view it in the first place ("Can view my channel stream and posts"). If it's public, they have it. Full stop. Public is public is public. Stop whining. You've made it public, now deal with everything being able to see it.
(streams) and Forte behave the same. In addition, they have an extra permission: "Grant search access to your channel stream and posts". This controls who may search your channel stream using your own local search feature while visiting your channel locally. Something that isn't even possible on Mastodon.
As for not having any content on my channel stream before I connect to anyone: I, for one, do not want some algorithm to force content upon me that I'm not interested in. Full. Frigging. Stop. I want to have full and exclusive control over what I see and what I don't.The Sin of User Discovery Hell
Can it really be that Mastodon's directory is so much worse than Friendica's, Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's directories? I guess it is because it really only lists local accounts on that one particular server. A side-effect of Mastodon being a microblogging service and Twitter clone. And not a full-blown, fully-featured social network and Facebook alternative. No, seriously, it isn't that.
Friendica is. It was designed as such. It was designed to take Facebook's place, and not by aping and cloning Facebook, but by being better than Facebook.
The directory on each node is decentralised. It lists all actors known to that node. What's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view: It takes the keywords in the profiles into account. Better even: It ranks suggestions by the number of matching keywords.
Want something centralised instead? Try the Friendica Directory. Looking for people? Looking for news accounts? Looking for groups? There are specialised tabs for that. Friendica can tell them apart, and so can the Friendica Directory.
Caveat: The Friendica Directory only lists Friendica accounts. Friendica's built-in directory should list everything it knows. I haven't used Friendica in many years, but I guess this even includes diaspora* accounts because why not?
Hubzilla has indirectly inherited its directory from Friendica. This is the directory on Netzgemeinde, the biggest Hubzilla hub.
Again, it lists local as well as federated channels. You can choose whether to see only local channels ("This Website Only") or federated channels as well. You can choose whether channels flagged NSFW shall be listed or not ("Safe Mode"). You can choose to only have group actors listed that let themselves be listed ("Public Forums Only"). You have a cloud of keywords from the keyword lists in the profiles that you can filter by (Mastodon doesn't even have keyword lists in profiles). You have full-text search for names and keywords. There's even a Facebook-style suggestion mode that proposes connections to you with a ranking based on your keywords and their keywords as well as the number of common connections, and that still has the same filters.
Caveat this time: Hubzilla's directory only supports the one sole protocol built into Hubzilla's core. And that's Zot6. This means that Hubzilla's directory only lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels because Hubzilla and (streams) are the only Fediverse server applications that support Zot6.
(streams) and Forte have inherited their directories again. And they probably have the most powerful decentralised directories in the entire Fediverse. I'd give you a link, but (streams) directories generally aren't public; only local channels can access them.
These directories are similar to the ones on Hubzilla. You see local and federated actors, and you can choose to only see local actors ("This Website Only"). You can choose to only see group actors ("Groups Only"). You can choose to not see channels flagged NSFW ("Safe Mode"). What's new: Inactive actors can be kept out, too ("Recently Updated").
Now it comes: (streams) has ActivityPub built into its core, and it's on by default on new channels. Forte is entirely based on ActivityPub.
This means that their directories can list anything from anywhere that uses ActivityPub. "Groups Only" gives you Guppe groups, Lemmy communities, /kbin and Mbin magazines, PieFed communities, Mobilizon groups, Flipboard magazines, Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups, Forte groups etc., all on one list.
(streams) has a slight edge over Forte here because it also lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off such as the Streams Users Tea Garden where ActivityPub was turned off with the very intention to keep Mastodon out.
If there was a gigantic Forte server, as big as mastodon.social, and its directory was accessible to the public, that directory would be the best directory in the Fediverse for anything really. If it was on (streams), it would list more, but it would confuse some users of e.g. Mastodon who'd try to follow Hubzilla or (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off. Forte simply doesn't list these because it can't find them.
A global directory of everything sounds like a good idea, but it's next to impossible to implement.
Either the directory would go look for actors itself. In order to do that, it would have to know within a split-second not only whenever a new actor is created somewhere so it can index that actor right away, but also whenever a new server is spun up so that the admin actor can be indexed, and that server can be watched. How is it supposed to know all that?
Well, or the directory, a single, monolithic, centralised website, would have to be hard-coded into all Fediverse server software. That way, each server could immediately report newly created actors to the central directory upon their creation.
For starters, this would make the whole Fediverse depend on one single centralised website under the control of, if bad comes to worse, one person.
Besides, this would be a privacy nightmare. Let's suppose I create a new (streams) channel that's supposed to be private. Its existence and all its properties would be sent to the central directory before I can set it to private and restrict its permissions. This wouldn't be so bad on Hubzilla because I'd make the channel private before I turn on PubCrawl and make the channel accessible to the directory in the first place because the directory would only understand ActivityPub.
Of course, the directory would mostly be built against Mastodon. It would not understand the permissions systems implemented on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and it might happily siphon off the profiles of channels where access to the profile is restricted and make them publicly accessible. On the other hand, this is likely to mean that the directory couldn't read most of Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's profile text fields anyway because Mastodon doesn't have them.
But such a centralised directory wouldn't make connecting to other users that much easier and more convenient. You'd still have to copy and paste URLs or IDs into your local search and search for them (unless you're on Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte where you can connect to URLs directly). At the very least, you should be able to go to the centralised directory and follow anyone just by clicking or tapping them. That, however, would require OpenWebAuth support on both your home server and that directory.
Ideally, that directory would be firmly built into all instances of all Fediverse software from snac2 to Mastodon to Hubzilla, even replacing any existing directory to confuse people less. But that would make the Fediverse even more dependent on one central website and its owner, something which should be avoided at all cost.
Lastly, nothing can ever be built into all instances of all Fediverse software. Remember that there's software with living instances that's barely being developed such as Plume. There's even software with living instances that's been officially pronounced dead such as Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. How are Firefish servers supposed to implement such a feature if nobody maintains Firefish anymore, and even the code repository was deleted?
CC: @Risotto Bias
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #Friendica #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #OpenWebAuth #SingleSignOn #NomadicIdentity #Search #FullTextSearch #Directory #Permissions #Privacy #Conversations #ThreadedConversations #FEP_171b #ConversationContainers -
@Ben Pate 🤘🏻 Allow me to take a look at this from a Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte point of view.The Sin of Overwhelming Complexity: Instance Selection Paralysis
The only way to really combat this effectively is by hiding the whole concept of servers/instances at first, railroading everyone to a server and only letting them know about decentralisation and servers/instances after the fact.
In theory, this could be doable with Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and even better than with Mastodon with its themed servers. It wouldn't make sense to offer Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte servers for certain topics or target audiences, seeing as the whole thing would become moot the very moment when you make your first clone on another server. Simply build a kind of "automatic on-boarder" that sends everyone to the geographically closest open-registration server.
In practice, that'd be a bad idea, but for a different reason than on Mastodon. And that's how these servers tend to be very different. Not in topic. Not in target audiences. Not in rules. But in features. Hubzilla is modular, (streams) is modular, Forte is modular, and each admin decides differently on which "apps" to activate. Then you want to join Hubzilla for one cool feature, but the on-boarder railroads you to a server where that very feature isn't even activated.
Sure, the on-boarder could include the option to select certain features that you absolutely must have in your new home and then pick a server that has them. But that'd be extra hassle and extra confusing.
Besides, where'd you put that on-boarder? On the official Hubzilla website? Haha, no can do. The official Hubzilla website is a webpage on a Hubzilla channel itself. It's all just dumb old static HTML with a CSS. If it's even HTML and not Markdown or BBcode, that is. You couldn't add scripts to it if you tried.
Oh, and (streams) and Forte don't even have official websites. And (streams) will never have one, seeing as it's officially and intentionally nameless, brandless and totally not even a project. Their "websites" are readme files in their code repositories on Codeberg.The Sin of Inconsistent Navigation: Timeline Turmoil
The streams on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are quite a bit different from Mastodon timelines.
First of all, what you usually don't have on public servers is the counterpart to Mastodon's local timeline and Mastodon's federated timeline. On all three, this would be only one stream, the "public stream" or "pubstream". It can be switched by the admin to either what'd be local or what'd be federated. However, public servers usually have it off entirely. Unavailable even to local users. That's because the admins don't want to be held liable for what's happening on the pubstream.
Technically speaking, you only have one stream on a public server, and that's your channel stream. It's much more efficient than a Mastodon timeline because it always shows entire conversations by default instead of detached single-message piecemeal, and because it has a counter for unread messages which even lists these unread messages for you to directly go to the corresponding conversation. But that's another story.
However, your channel stream can be viewed on your channel page, conversation by conversation, or it can be viewed on the stream page as an actual stream with all conversations shown in a feed/timeline-like fashion, one upon another, and with its own set of built-in filters such as "only my own messages" or "only conversations started by members of one particular privacy group/access list" or "only conversations from one particular group actor". It's actually much more convenient than any Mastodon timeline, but for those who want a Twitter clone for dumb-dumbs, it can be very overwhelming.
Yes, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are much more complex in handling than, say, snac2. But they're also much more complex in features than snac2. That power is their USP. And that power must be harnessed somehow.The Sin of Remote Interaction Purgatory: Federation Gymnastics
Sure, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte have some of the best built-in search systems in the whole Fediverse. They can pull almost everything onto your channel stream just by searching for it. And if it has replies, chances are they pull these in as well.
But still, they're geared towards desktop users. They still require copy-paste. Phone users don't copy paste. Most of them don't even know the very concept of copy-paste. For most of those who do, copy-paste is much too fumbly if the input device available to them is a 6" touch screen.
You can't blame them, though. This is next to impossible to do any differently. I mean, you won't see a button magically appear with which you can pull in just that one post or comment you want to pull in.
Rather, the issue is that they can only reel in almost everything. Sometimes the search returns nothing, like a void. Sometimes the search runs indefinitely without any kind of result. This may be because someone has blocked your channel, because someone has blocked your entire server, because the server someone is on has blocked you or your entire server, because Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte doesn't understand the URI pasted into the search field or whatever.
So this is made worse by Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte not knowing what they can search for, what they can't and why not.
Connecting with someone whom you encounter on your channel stream is fairly easy. Connections can be initiated with only two clicks. Either you click their long name, and you're taken to a pretty much distraction-less local "intermediate page" with a striking green button that's labelled "+ Connect". Or if you don't want to leave the channel page, you hover your mouse cursor over their profile picture, click on the little white arrow that appears, and you get a small menu that offers you the "Connect" option as well. Granted, even some veterans don't know the latter trick because it isn't immediately advertised on the channel page.
Also, sure, you don't simply follow them right off the bat with nothing else to do like on Mastodon. You're taken to your Connections page, and you have to configure the connection (you don't have to do that on Mastodon because you can't configure connections on Mastodon).
Following accounts/channels from the directory is a bit easier. The green "+ Connect" button is there right away (unless you're already connected). However, Hubzilla's directory only lists channels based on the Nomad protocol, i.e. Hubzilla and (streams) channels, because ActivityPub is only implemented in an optional, off-by-default-for-new-channels add-on whereas it's in the core and on by default on (streams) and the only available protocol on Forte.
Importing contents or following actors when seeing them locally on other servers without copy-pasting and searching can be done. It requires OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, however, and it requires it to be implemented on all servers of all Fediverse server applications from Mastodon to WordPress to Ghost to Flipboard. Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are the only Fediverse server applications with full (client-side and server-side) OpenWebAuth implementations. But that's of little use if the rest of the Fediverse doesn't have server-side implementations, and Mastodon has even silently rejected a mere client-side implementation already developed to a pull request two years ago.The Sin of DM Disasters Waiting to Happen
I think this is less of an issue on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte because they handle DMs differently from Mastodon (which "the Fediverse" actually refers to in the article).
On all three, DMs are integrated into their extensive, fine-grained permissions system in which everything is only public if it's really public. The difference between a post and a DM is not just a switch.
If I want to DM you, I can either tag you@!{[email protected]}rather than@[url=https://mastodon.social/@benpate]Ben Pate 🤘🏻[/url]. Then you're a) the only one to whom the message is sent (it literally doesn't even go out to any other server than mastodon.social plus my clone on hub.hubzilla.de as can be seen in the delivery report) and b) the only one who is granted permission to view the message.
Or I can use the padlock icon and select you from the opening list as the sole recipient. The very moment that I select certain recipients, the post I'm composing quits being public, and the padlock icon switches from open to closed. This isn't a one-click or two-click toggle. You don't do that casually. It's basically configuration. It requires so many mouse clicks that you do it consciously and intentionally. If you want to post in private, you have to really want to post in private.
Better yet: You can default to posting only to a certain limited target audience. In fact, by default on a brand-new channel, you only post to the members of one privacy group/access list (which is a Mastodon list on coke and 'roids). You have to manually reconfigure your new channel if you want to post to the general public by default.
If you preview your post, you can see whether it's a direct message to one or multiple single connections (envelope icon next to your long name), a limited-permissions message to one or multiple privacy groups/access lists/group actors (closed padlock icon) or actually public (no icon).
Even better yet: Posts to group actors generally aren't public. Posts to at least Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups and Forte groups are never public. They do not go out to your followers as well unless they're connected to the same group. And this is independent from whether a group is public or private. You can't accidentially post to a group actor in public, and if you do, you don't post to that group actor at all, at least not in a way that makes the group actor forward your post to its other connections.
Granted, what does not happen is your background switching from your background colour or background image (which can be user-configured) to red #800000 or a yellow-and-back chevron pattern when you change visibility and permissions to something that isn't public.The Sin of Ghost Conversations and Phantom Follower Counts
And again, when @Tim Chambers says, "the Fediverse", he almost exclusively means Mastodon. He writes as if the entire Fediverse handled conversations as terribly as Mastodon, as if the entire Fediverse was as blissfully unaware of enclosed conversations as Mastodon. Which is not the case.
Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, as well as their ancestor Friendica, handle conversations in ways that exceed Mastodon users' imaginations and wildest dreams by magnitudes. Unlike Mastodon, they know threaded conversations, and they see them as enclosed objects where only the start post counts as a post, and everything else counts as a comment.
This means that once you've received a post on your stream, you will also receive all comments on that post, regardless of whether or not you follow the commenters, regardless of whether or not they mention you. That's because all four reel in the comments not from the commentors, but from the original poster who is perceived as the owner of the thread. Only blocks or channel-wide filters can prevent comments from coming in.
Beyond that, (streams) was the first to introduce Conversation Containers. Forte inherited them from (streams), and when they were defined in FEP-171b, Hubzilla implemented them, too.
Here on Hubzilla, I can see all comments in this thread because my channel has fetched them directly from @Johannes Ernst. And I can actually see them right away because that's the default view here on Hubzilla, rather than Mastodon's piecemeal.
Even if you import a post manually using the search feature (and you better import the actual start post), AFAIK existing comments will eventually be backfilled. Comments that come in after importing will definitely end up on your stream as part of the thread.
So this is not a shortcoming of the Fediverse. The Fediverse has been able to do better for 15 years. It's a shortcoming of Mastodon.
The only "issue" here may be that it sometimes takes some time for a comment to show up for some reasons. But unless there are blocks or filters in play, it eventually will.The Sin of Invisible Discovery: The Content Mirage
I'm not going to pick on the audacious implication that "Eugen and team" invented the Fediverse.
But Tim writes like literally everyone wants "the Fediverse" (read, actually Mastodon) to be literally Twitter without Musk.
Also:- Friendica has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2010. Five and a half years longer than Mastodon has even existed.
- Hubzilla has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2011 when it was forked from Free-Friendika. It has inherited full-text search from Friendica.
- (streams) and Forte have had full-blown full-text search since their respective inception in 2021 and 2024, both having inherited it themselves.
Oh, and none of them has an explicit opt-in switch to soothe panicking Twitter converts because panicking Twitter converts have never been the primary target audience of either of them.
Instead, on Hubzilla, whether someone can find your content depends on whether they've got permission to view it in the first place ("Can view my channel stream and posts"). If it's public, they have it. Full stop. Public is public is public. Stop whining. You've made it public, now deal with everything being able to see it.
(streams) and Forte behave the same. In addition, they have an extra permission: "Grant search access to your channel stream and posts". This controls who may search your channel stream using your own local search feature while visiting your channel locally. Something that isn't even possible on Mastodon.
As for not having any content on my channel stream before I connect to anyone: I, for one, do not want some algorithm to force content upon me that I'm not interested in. Full. Frigging. Stop. I want to have full and exclusive control over what I see and what I don't.The Sin of User Discovery Hell
Can it really be that Mastodon's directory is so much worse than Friendica's, Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's directories? I guess it is because it really only lists local accounts on that one particular server. A side-effect of Mastodon being a microblogging service and Twitter clone. And not a full-blown, fully-featured social network and Facebook alternative. No, seriously, it isn't that.
Friendica is. It was designed as such. It was designed to take Facebook's place, and not by aping and cloning Facebook, but by being better than Facebook.
The directory on each node is decentralised. It lists all actors known to that node. What's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view: It takes the keywords in the profiles into account. Better even: It ranks suggestions by the number of matching keywords.
Want something centralised instead? Try the Friendica Directory. Looking for people? Looking for news accounts? Looking for groups? There are specialised tabs for that. Friendica can tell them apart, and so can the Friendica Directory.
Caveat: The Friendica Directory only lists Friendica accounts. Friendica's built-in directory should list everything it knows. I haven't used Friendica in many years, but I guess this even includes diaspora* accounts because why not?
Hubzilla has indirectly inherited its directory from Friendica. This is the directory on Netzgemeinde, the biggest Hubzilla hub.
Again, it lists local as well as federated channels. You can choose whether to see only local channels ("This Website Only") or federated channels as well. You can choose whether channels flagged NSFW shall be listed or not ("Safe Mode"). You can choose to only have group actors listed that let themselves be listed ("Public Forums Only"). You have a cloud of keywords from the keyword lists in the profiles that you can filter by (Mastodon doesn't even have keyword lists in profiles). You have full-text search for names and keywords. There's even a Facebook-style suggestion mode that proposes connections to you with a ranking based on your keywords and their keywords as well as the number of common connections, and that still has the same filters.
Caveat this time: Hubzilla's directory only supports the one sole protocol built into Hubzilla's core. And that's Zot6. This means that Hubzilla's directory only lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels because Hubzilla and (streams) are the only Fediverse server applications that support Zot6.
(streams) and Forte have inherited their directories again. And they probably have the most powerful decentralised directories in the entire Fediverse. I'd give you a link, but (streams) directories generally aren't public; only local channels can access them.
These directories are similar to the ones on Hubzilla. You see local and federated actors, and you can choose to only see local actors ("This Website Only"). You can choose to only see group actors ("Groups Only"). You can choose to not see channels flagged NSFW ("Safe Mode"). What's new: Inactive actors can be kept out, too ("Recently Updated").
Now it comes: (streams) has ActivityPub built into its core, and it's on by default on new channels. Forte is entirely based on ActivityPub.
This means that their directories can list anything from anywhere that uses ActivityPub. "Groups Only" gives you Guppe groups, Lemmy communities, /kbin and Mbin magazines, PieFed communities, Mobilizon groups, Flipboard magazines, Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups, Forte groups etc., all on one list.
(streams) has a slight edge over Forte here because it also lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off such as the Streams Users Tea Garden where ActivityPub was turned off with the very intention to keep Mastodon out.
If there was a gigantic Forte server, as big as mastodon.social, and its directory was accessible to the public, that directory would be the best directory in the Fediverse for anything really. If it was on (streams), it would list more, but it would confuse some users of e.g. Mastodon who'd try to follow Hubzilla or (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off. Forte simply doesn't list these because it can't find them.
A global directory of everything sounds like a good idea, but it's next to impossible to implement.
Either the directory would go look for actors itself. In order to do that, it would have to know within a split-second not only whenever a new actor is created somewhere so it can index that actor right away, but also whenever a new server is spun up so that the admin actor can be indexed, and that server can be watched. How is it supposed to know all that?
Well, or the directory, a single, monolithic, centralised website, would have to be hard-coded into all Fediverse server software. That way, each server could immediately report newly created actors to the central directory upon their creation.
For starters, this would make the whole Fediverse depend on one single centralised website under the control of, if bad comes to worse, one person.
Besides, this would be a privacy nightmare. Let's suppose I create a new (streams) channel that's supposed to be private. Its existence and all its properties would be sent to the central directory before I can set it to private and restrict its permissions. This wouldn't be so bad on Hubzilla because I'd make the channel private before I turn on PubCrawl and make the channel accessible to the directory in the first place because the directory would only understand ActivityPub.
Of course, the directory would mostly be built against Mastodon. It would not understand the permissions systems implemented on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and it might happily siphon off the profiles of channels where access to the profile is restricted and make them publicly accessible. On the other hand, this is likely to mean that the directory couldn't read most of Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's profile text fields anyway because Mastodon doesn't have them.
But such a centralised directory wouldn't make connecting to other users that much easier and more convenient. You'd still have to copy and paste URLs or IDs into your local search and search for them (unless you're on Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte where you can connect to URLs directly). At the very least, you should be able to go to the centralised directory and follow anyone just by clicking or tapping them. That, however, would require OpenWebAuth support on both your home server and that directory.
Ideally, that directory would be firmly built into all instances of all Fediverse software from snac2 to Mastodon to Hubzilla, even replacing any existing directory to confuse people less. But that would make the Fediverse even more dependent on one central website and its owner, something which should be avoided at all cost.
Lastly, nothing can ever be built into all instances of all Fediverse software. Remember that there's software with living instances that's barely being developed such as Plume. There's even software with living instances that's been officially pronounced dead such as Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. How are Firefish servers supposed to implement such a feature if nobody maintains Firefish anymore, and even the code repository was deleted?
CC: @Risotto Bias
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #Friendica #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #OpenWebAuth #SingleSignOn #NomadicIdentity #Search #FullTextSearch #Directory #Permissions #Privacy #Conversations #ThreadedConversations #FEP_171b #ConversationContainers -
@Ben Pate 🤘🏻 Allow me to take a look at this from a Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte point of view.The Sin of Overwhelming Complexity: Instance Selection Paralysis
The only way to really combat this effectively is by hiding the whole concept of servers/instances at first, railroading everyone to a server and only letting them know about decentralisation and servers/instances after the fact.
In theory, this could be doable with Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and even better than with Mastodon with its themed servers. It wouldn't make sense to offer Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte servers for certain topics or target audiences, seeing as the whole thing would become moot the very moment when you make your first clone on another server. Simply build a kind of "automatic on-boarder" that sends everyone to the geographically closest open-registration server.
In practice, that'd be a bad idea, but for a different reason than on Mastodon. And that's how these servers tend to be very different. Not in topic. Not in target audiences. Not in rules. But in features. Hubzilla is modular, (streams) is modular, Forte is modular, and each admin decides differently on which "apps" to activate. Then you want to join Hubzilla for one cool feature, but the on-boarder railroads you to a server where that very feature isn't even activated.
Sure, the on-boarder could include the option to select certain features that you absolutely must have in your new home and then pick a server that has them. But that'd be extra hassle and extra confusing.
Besides, where'd you put that on-boarder? On the official Hubzilla website? Haha, no can do. The official Hubzilla website is a webpage on a Hubzilla channel itself. It's all just dumb old static HTML with a CSS. If it's even HTML and not Markdown or BBcode, that is. You couldn't add scripts to it if you tried.
Oh, and (streams) and Forte don't even have official websites. And (streams) will never have one, seeing as it's officially and intentionally nameless, brandless and totally not even a project. Their "websites" are readme files in their code repositories on Codeberg.The Sin of Inconsistent Navigation: Timeline Turmoil
The streams on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are quite a bit different from Mastodon timelines.
First of all, what you usually don't have on public servers is the counterpart to Mastodon's local timeline and Mastodon's federated timeline. On all three, this would be only one stream, the "public stream" or "pubstream". It can be switched by the admin to either what'd be local or what'd be federated. However, public servers usually have it off entirely. Unavailable even to local users. That's because the admins don't want to be held liable for what's happening on the pubstream.
Technically speaking, you only have one stream on a public server, and that's your channel stream. It's much more efficient than a Mastodon timeline because it always shows entire conversations by default instead of detached single-message piecemeal, and because it has a counter for unread messages which even lists these unread messages for you to directly go to the corresponding conversation. But that's another story.
However, your channel stream can be viewed on your channel page, conversation by conversation, or it can be viewed on the stream page as an actual stream with all conversations shown in a feed/timeline-like fashion, one upon another, and with its own set of built-in filters such as "only my own messages" or "only conversations started by members of one particular privacy group/access list" or "only conversations from one particular group actor". It's actually much more convenient than any Mastodon timeline, but for those who want a Twitter clone for dumb-dumbs, it can be very overwhelming.
Yes, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are much more complex in handling than, say, snac2. But they're also much more complex in features than snac2. That power is their USP. And that power must be harnessed somehow.The Sin of Remote Interaction Purgatory: Federation Gymnastics
Sure, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte have some of the best built-in search systems in the whole Fediverse. They can pull almost everything onto your channel stream just by searching for it. And if it has replies, chances are they pull these in as well.
But still, they're geared towards desktop users. They still require copy-paste. Phone users don't copy paste. Most of them don't even know the very concept of copy-paste. For most of those who do, copy-paste is much too fumbly if the input device available to them is a 6" touch screen.
You can't blame them, though. This is next to impossible to do any differently. I mean, you won't see a button magically appear with which you can pull in just that one post or comment you want to pull in.
Rather, the issue is that they can only reel in almost everything. Sometimes the search returns nothing, like a void. Sometimes the search runs indefinitely without any kind of result. This may be because someone has blocked your channel, because someone has blocked your entire server, because the server someone is on has blocked you or your entire server, because Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte doesn't understand the URI pasted into the search field or whatever.
So this is made worse by Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte not knowing what they can search for, what they can't and why not.
Connecting with someone whom you encounter on your channel stream is fairly easy. Connections can be initiated with only two clicks. Either you click their long name, and you're taken to a pretty much distraction-less local "intermediate page" with a striking green button that's labelled "+ Connect". Or if you don't want to leave the channel page, you hover your mouse cursor over their profile picture, click on the little white arrow that appears, and you get a small menu that offers you the "Connect" option as well. Granted, even some veterans don't know the latter trick because it isn't immediately advertised on the channel page.
Also, sure, you don't simply follow them right off the bat with nothing else to do like on Mastodon. You're taken to your Connections page, and you have to configure the connection (you don't have to do that on Mastodon because you can't configure connections on Mastodon).
Following accounts/channels from the directory is a bit easier. The green "+ Connect" button is there right away (unless you're already connected). However, Hubzilla's directory only lists channels based on the Nomad protocol, i.e. Hubzilla and (streams) channels, because ActivityPub is only implemented in an optional, off-by-default-for-new-channels add-on whereas it's in the core and on by default on (streams) and the only available protocol on Forte.
Importing contents or following actors when seeing them locally on other servers without copy-pasting and searching can be done. It requires OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, however, and it requires it to be implemented on all servers of all Fediverse server applications from Mastodon to WordPress to Ghost to Flipboard. Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are the only Fediverse server applications with full (client-side and server-side) OpenWebAuth implementations. But that's of little use if the rest of the Fediverse doesn't have server-side implementations, and Mastodon has even silently rejected a mere client-side implementation already developed to a pull request two years ago.The Sin of DM Disasters Waiting to Happen
I think this is less of an issue on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte because they handle DMs differently from Mastodon (which "the Fediverse" actually refers to in the article).
On all three, DMs are integrated into their extensive, fine-grained permissions system in which everything is only public if it's really public. The difference between a post and a DM is not just a switch.
If I want to DM you, I can either tag you@!{[email protected]}rather than@[url=https://mastodon.social/@benpate]Ben Pate 🤘🏻[/url]. Then you're a) the only one to whom the message is sent (it literally doesn't even go out to any other server than mastodon.social plus my clone on hub.hubzilla.de as can be seen in the delivery report) and b) the only one who is granted permission to view the message.
Or I can use the padlock icon and select you from the opening list as the sole recipient. The very moment that I select certain recipients, the post I'm composing quits being public, and the padlock icon switches from open to closed. This isn't a one-click or two-click toggle. You don't do that casually. It's basically configuration. It requires so many mouse clicks that you do it consciously and intentionally. If you want to post in private, you have to really want to post in private.
Better yet: You can default to posting only to a certain limited target audience. In fact, by default on a brand-new channel, you only post to the members of one privacy group/access list (which is a Mastodon list on coke and 'roids). You have to manually reconfigure your new channel if you want to post to the general public by default.
If you preview your post, you can see whether it's a direct message to one or multiple single connections (envelope icon next to your long name), a limited-permissions message to one or multiple privacy groups/access lists/group actors (closed padlock icon) or actually public (no icon).
Even better yet: Posts to group actors generally aren't public. Posts to at least Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups and Forte groups are never public. They do not go out to your followers as well unless they're connected to the same group. And this is independent from whether a group is public or private. You can't accidentially post to a group actor in public, and if you do, you don't post to that group actor at all, at least not in a way that makes the group actor forward your post to its other connections.
Granted, what does not happen is your background switching from your background colour or background image (which can be user-configured) to red #800000 or a yellow-and-back chevron pattern when you change visibility and permissions to something that isn't public.The Sin of Ghost Conversations and Phantom Follower Counts
And again, when @Tim Chambers says, "the Fediverse", he almost exclusively means Mastodon. He writes as if the entire Fediverse handled conversations as terribly as Mastodon, as if the entire Fediverse was as blissfully unaware of enclosed conversations as Mastodon. Which is not the case.
Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, as well as their ancestor Friendica, handle conversations in ways that exceed Mastodon users' imaginations and wildest dreams by magnitudes. Unlike Mastodon, they know threaded conversations, and they see them as enclosed objects where only the start post counts as a post, and everything else counts as a comment.
This means that once you've received a post on your stream, you will also receive all comments on that post, regardless of whether or not you follow the commenters, regardless of whether or not they mention you. That's because all four reel in the comments not from the commentors, but from the original poster who is perceived as the owner of the thread. Only blocks or channel-wide filters can prevent comments from coming in.
Beyond that, (streams) was the first to introduce Conversation Containers. Forte inherited them from (streams), and when they were defined in FEP-171b, Hubzilla implemented them, too.
Here on Hubzilla, I can see all comments in this thread because my channel has fetched them directly from @Johannes Ernst. And I can actually see them right away because that's the default view here on Hubzilla, rather than Mastodon's piecemeal.
Even if you import a post manually using the search feature (and you better import the actual start post), AFAIK existing comments will eventually be backfilled. Comments that come in after importing will definitely end up on your stream as part of the thread.
So this is not a shortcoming of the Fediverse. The Fediverse has been able to do better for 15 years. It's a shortcoming of Mastodon.
The only "issue" here may be that it sometimes takes some time for a comment to show up for some reasons. But unless there are blocks or filters in play, it eventually will.The Sin of Invisible Discovery: The Content Mirage
I'm not going to pick on the audacious implication that "Eugen and team" invented the Fediverse.
But Tim writes like literally everyone wants "the Fediverse" (read, actually Mastodon) to be literally Twitter without Musk.
Also:- Friendica has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2010. Five and a half years longer than Mastodon has even existed.
- Hubzilla has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2011 when it was forked from Free-Friendika. It has inherited full-text search from Friendica.
- (streams) and Forte have had full-blown full-text search since their respective inception in 2021 and 2024, both having inherited it themselves.
Oh, and none of them has an explicit opt-in switch to soothe panicking Twitter converts because panicking Twitter converts have never been the primary target audience of either of them.
Instead, on Hubzilla, whether someone can find your content depends on whether they've got permission to view it in the first place ("Can view my channel stream and posts"). If it's public, they have it. Full stop. Public is public is public. Stop whining. You've made it public, now deal with everything being able to see it.
(streams) and Forte behave the same. In addition, they have an extra permission: "Grant search access to your channel stream and posts". This controls who may search your channel stream using your own local search feature while visiting your channel locally. Something that isn't even possible on Mastodon.
As for not having any content on my channel stream before I connect to anyone: I, for one, do not want some algorithm to force content upon me that I'm not interested in. Full. Frigging. Stop. I want to have full and exclusive control over what I see and what I don't.The Sin of User Discovery Hell
Can it really be that Mastodon's directory is so much worse than Friendica's, Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's directories? I guess it is because it really only lists local accounts on that one particular server. A side-effect of Mastodon being a microblogging service and Twitter clone. And not a full-blown, fully-featured social network and Facebook alternative. No, seriously, it isn't that.
Friendica is. It was designed as such. It was designed to take Facebook's place, and not by aping and cloning Facebook, but by being better than Facebook.
The directory on each node is decentralised. It lists all actors known to that node. What's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view: It takes the keywords in the profiles into account. Better even: It ranks suggestions by the number of matching keywords.
Want something centralised instead? Try the Friendica Directory. Looking for people? Looking for news accounts? Looking for groups? There are specialised tabs for that. Friendica can tell them apart, and so can the Friendica Directory.
Caveat: The Friendica Directory only lists Friendica accounts. Friendica's built-in directory should list everything it knows. I haven't used Friendica in many years, but I guess this even includes diaspora* accounts because why not?
Hubzilla has indirectly inherited its directory from Friendica. This is the directory on Netzgemeinde, the biggest Hubzilla hub.
Again, it lists local as well as federated channels. You can choose whether to see only local channels ("This Website Only") or federated channels as well. You can choose whether channels flagged NSFW shall be listed or not ("Safe Mode"). You can choose to only have group actors listed that let themselves be listed ("Public Forums Only"). You have a cloud of keywords from the keyword lists in the profiles that you can filter by (Mastodon doesn't even have keyword lists in profiles). You have full-text search for names and keywords. There's even a Facebook-style suggestion mode that proposes connections to you with a ranking based on your keywords and their keywords as well as the number of common connections, and that still has the same filters.
Caveat this time: Hubzilla's directory only supports the one sole protocol built into Hubzilla's core. And that's Zot6. This means that Hubzilla's directory only lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels because Hubzilla and (streams) are the only Fediverse server applications that support Zot6.
(streams) and Forte have inherited their directories again. And they probably have the most powerful decentralised directories in the entire Fediverse. I'd give you a link, but (streams) directories generally aren't public; only local channels can access them.
These directories are similar to the ones on Hubzilla. You see local and federated actors, and you can choose to only see local actors ("This Website Only"). You can choose to only see group actors ("Groups Only"). You can choose to not see channels flagged NSFW ("Safe Mode"). What's new: Inactive actors can be kept out, too ("Recently Updated").
Now it comes: (streams) has ActivityPub built into its core, and it's on by default on new channels. Forte is entirely based on ActivityPub.
This means that their directories can list anything from anywhere that uses ActivityPub. "Groups Only" gives you Guppe groups, Lemmy communities, /kbin and Mbin magazines, PieFed communities, Mobilizon groups, Flipboard magazines, Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups, Forte groups etc., all on one list.
(streams) has a slight edge over Forte here because it also lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off such as the Streams Users Tea Garden where ActivityPub was turned off with the very intention to keep Mastodon out.
If there was a gigantic Forte server, as big as mastodon.social, and its directory was accessible to the public, that directory would be the best directory in the Fediverse for anything really. If it was on (streams), it would list more, but it would confuse some users of e.g. Mastodon who'd try to follow Hubzilla or (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off. Forte simply doesn't list these because it can't find them.
A global directory of everything sounds like a good idea, but it's next to impossible to implement.
Either the directory would go look for actors itself. In order to do that, it would have to know within a split-second not only whenever a new actor is created somewhere so it can index that actor right away, but also whenever a new server is spun up so that the admin actor can be indexed, and that server can be watched. How is it supposed to know all that?
Well, or the directory, a single, monolithic, centralised website, would have to be hard-coded into all Fediverse server software. That way, each server could immediately report newly created actors to the central directory upon their creation.
For starters, this would make the whole Fediverse depend on one single centralised website under the control of, if bad comes to worse, one person.
Besides, this would be a privacy nightmare. Let's suppose I create a new (streams) channel that's supposed to be private. Its existence and all its properties would be sent to the central directory before I can set it to private and restrict its permissions. This wouldn't be so bad on Hubzilla because I'd make the channel private before I turn on PubCrawl and make the channel accessible to the directory in the first place because the directory would only understand ActivityPub.
Of course, the directory would mostly be built against Mastodon. It would not understand the permissions systems implemented on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and it might happily siphon off the profiles of channels where access to the profile is restricted and make them publicly accessible. On the other hand, this is likely to mean that the directory couldn't read most of Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's profile text fields anyway because Mastodon doesn't have them.
But such a centralised directory wouldn't make connecting to other users that much easier and more convenient. You'd still have to copy and paste URLs or IDs into your local search and search for them (unless you're on Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte where you can connect to URLs directly). At the very least, you should be able to go to the centralised directory and follow anyone just by clicking or tapping them. That, however, would require OpenWebAuth support on both your home server and that directory.
Ideally, that directory would be firmly built into all instances of all Fediverse software from snac2 to Mastodon to Hubzilla, even replacing any existing directory to confuse people less. But that would make the Fediverse even more dependent on one central website and its owner, something which should be avoided at all cost.
Lastly, nothing can ever be built into all instances of all Fediverse software. Remember that there's software with living instances that's barely being developed such as Plume. There's even software with living instances that's been officially pronounced dead such as Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. How are Firefish servers supposed to implement such a feature if nobody maintains Firefish anymore, and even the code repository was deleted?
CC: @Risotto Bias
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #Friendica #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #OpenWebAuth #SingleSignOn #NomadicIdentity #Search #FullTextSearch #Directory #Permissions #Privacy #Conversations #ThreadedConversations #FEP_171b #ConversationContainers -
@Ben Pate 🤘🏻 Allow me to take a look at this from a Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte point of view.The Sin of Overwhelming Complexity: Instance Selection Paralysis
The only way to really combat this effectively is by hiding the whole concept of servers/instances at first, railroading everyone to a server and only letting them know about decentralisation and servers/instances after the fact.
In theory, this could be doable with Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and even better than with Mastodon with its themed servers. It wouldn't make sense to offer Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte servers for certain topics or target audiences, seeing as the whole thing would become moot the very moment when you make your first clone on another server. Simply build a kind of "automatic on-boarder" that sends everyone to the geographically closest open-registration server.
In practice, that'd be a bad idea, but for a different reason than on Mastodon. And that's how these servers tend to be very different. Not in topic. Not in target audiences. Not in rules. But in features. Hubzilla is modular, (streams) is modular, Forte is modular, and each admin decides differently on which "apps" to activate. Then you want to join Hubzilla for one cool feature, but the on-boarder railroads you to a server where that very feature isn't even activated.
Sure, the on-boarder could include the option to select certain features that you absolutely must have in your new home and then pick a server that has them. But that'd be extra hassle and extra confusing.
Besides, where'd you put that on-boarder? On the official Hubzilla website? Haha, no can do. The official Hubzilla website is a webpage on a Hubzilla channel itself. It's all just dumb old static HTML with a CSS. If it's even HTML and not Markdown or BBcode, that is. You couldn't add scripts to it if you tried.
Oh, and (streams) and Forte don't even have official websites. And (streams) will never have one, seeing as it's officially and intentionally nameless, brandless and totally not even a project. Their "websites" are readme files in their code repositories on Codeberg.The Sin of Inconsistent Navigation: Timeline Turmoil
The streams on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are quite a bit different from Mastodon timelines.
First of all, what you usually don't have on public servers is the counterpart to Mastodon's local timeline and Mastodon's federated timeline. On all three, this would be only one stream, the "public stream" or "pubstream". It can be switched by the admin to either what'd be local or what'd be federated. However, public servers usually have it off entirely. Unavailable even to local users. That's because the admins don't want to be held liable for what's happening on the pubstream.
Technically speaking, you only have one stream on a public server, and that's your channel stream. It's much more efficient than a Mastodon timeline because it always shows entire conversations by default instead of detached single-message piecemeal, and because it has a counter for unread messages which even lists these unread messages for you to directly go to the corresponding conversation. But that's another story.
However, your channel stream can be viewed on your channel page, conversation by conversation, or it can be viewed on the stream page as an actual stream with all conversations shown in a feed/timeline-like fashion, one upon another, and with its own set of built-in filters such as "only my own messages" or "only conversations started by members of one particular privacy group/access list" or "only conversations from one particular group actor". It's actually much more convenient than any Mastodon timeline, but for those who want a Twitter clone for dumb-dumbs, it can be very overwhelming.
Yes, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are much more complex in handling than, say, snac2. But they're also much more complex in features than snac2. That power is their USP. And that power must be harnessed somehow.The Sin of Remote Interaction Purgatory: Federation Gymnastics
Sure, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte have some of the best built-in search systems in the whole Fediverse. They can pull almost everything onto your channel stream just by searching for it. And if it has replies, chances are they pull these in as well.
But still, they're geared towards desktop users. They still require copy-paste. Phone users don't copy paste. Most of them don't even know the very concept of copy-paste. For most of those who do, copy-paste is much too fumbly if the input device available to them is a 6" touch screen.
You can't blame them, though. This is next to impossible to do any differently. I mean, you won't see a button magically appear with which you can pull in just that one post or comment you want to pull in.
Rather, the issue is that they can only reel in almost everything. Sometimes the search returns nothing, like a void. Sometimes the search runs indefinitely without any kind of result. This may be because someone has blocked your channel, because someone has blocked your entire server, because the server someone is on has blocked you or your entire server, because Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte doesn't understand the URI pasted into the search field or whatever.
So this is made worse by Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte not knowing what they can search for, what they can't and why not.
Connecting with someone whom you encounter on your channel stream is fairly easy. Connections can be initiated with only two clicks. Either you click their long name, and you're taken to a pretty much distraction-less local "intermediate page" with a striking green button that's labelled "+ Connect". Or if you don't want to leave the channel page, you hover your mouse cursor over their profile picture, click on the little white arrow that appears, and you get a small menu that offers you the "Connect" option as well. Granted, even some veterans don't know the latter trick because it isn't immediately advertised on the channel page.
Also, sure, you don't simply follow them right off the bat with nothing else to do like on Mastodon. You're taken to your Connections page, and you have to configure the connection (you don't have to do that on Mastodon because you can't configure connections on Mastodon).
Following accounts/channels from the directory is a bit easier. The green "+ Connect" button is there right away (unless you're already connected). However, Hubzilla's directory only lists channels based on the Nomad protocol, i.e. Hubzilla and (streams) channels, because ActivityPub is only implemented in an optional, off-by-default-for-new-channels add-on whereas it's in the core and on by default on (streams) and the only available protocol on Forte.
Importing contents or following actors when seeing them locally on other servers without copy-pasting and searching can be done. It requires OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, however, and it requires it to be implemented on all servers of all Fediverse server applications from Mastodon to WordPress to Ghost to Flipboard. Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are the only Fediverse server applications with full (client-side and server-side) OpenWebAuth implementations. But that's of little use if the rest of the Fediverse doesn't have server-side implementations, and Mastodon has even silently rejected a mere client-side implementation already developed to a pull request two years ago.The Sin of DM Disasters Waiting to Happen
I think this is less of an issue on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte because they handle DMs differently from Mastodon (which "the Fediverse" actually refers to in the article).
On all three, DMs are integrated into their extensive, fine-grained permissions system in which everything is only public if it's really public. The difference between a post and a DM is not just a switch.
If I want to DM you, I can either tag you@!{[email protected]}rather than@[url=https://mastodon.social/@benpate]Ben Pate 🤘🏻[/url]. Then you're a) the only one to whom the message is sent (it literally doesn't even go out to any other server than mastodon.social plus my clone on hub.hubzilla.de as can be seen in the delivery report) and b) the only one who is granted permission to view the message.
Or I can use the padlock icon and select you from the opening list as the sole recipient. The very moment that I select certain recipients, the post I'm composing quits being public, and the padlock icon switches from open to closed. This isn't a one-click or two-click toggle. You don't do that casually. It's basically configuration. It requires so many mouse clicks that you do it consciously and intentionally. If you want to post in private, you have to really want to post in private.
Better yet: You can default to posting only to a certain limited target audience. In fact, by default on a brand-new channel, you only post to the members of one privacy group/access list (which is a Mastodon list on coke and 'roids). You have to manually reconfigure your new channel if you want to post to the general public by default.
If you preview your post, you can see whether it's a direct message to one or multiple single connections (envelope icon next to your long name), a limited-permissions message to one or multiple privacy groups/access lists/group actors (closed padlock icon) or actually public (no icon).
Even better yet: Posts to group actors generally aren't public. Posts to at least Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups and Forte groups are never public. They do not go out to your followers as well unless they're connected to the same group. And this is independent from whether a group is public or private. You can't accidentially post to a group actor in public, and if you do, you don't post to that group actor at all, at least not in a way that makes the group actor forward your post to its other connections.
Granted, what does not happen is your background switching from your background colour or background image (which can be user-configured) to red #800000 or a yellow-and-back chevron pattern when you change visibility and permissions to something that isn't public.The Sin of Ghost Conversations and Phantom Follower Counts
And again, when @Tim Chambers says, "the Fediverse", he almost exclusively means Mastodon. He writes as if the entire Fediverse handled conversations as terribly as Mastodon, as if the entire Fediverse was as blissfully unaware of enclosed conversations as Mastodon. Which is not the case.
Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, as well as their ancestor Friendica, handle conversations in ways that exceed Mastodon users' imaginations and wildest dreams by magnitudes. Unlike Mastodon, they know threaded conversations, and they see them as enclosed objects where only the start post counts as a post, and everything else counts as a comment.
This means that once you've received a post on your stream, you will also receive all comments on that post, regardless of whether or not you follow the commenters, regardless of whether or not they mention you. That's because all four reel in the comments not from the commentors, but from the original poster who is perceived as the owner of the thread. Only blocks or channel-wide filters can prevent comments from coming in.
Beyond that, (streams) was the first to introduce Conversation Containers. Forte inherited them from (streams), and when they were defined in FEP-171b, Hubzilla implemented them, too.
Here on Hubzilla, I can see all comments in this thread because my channel has fetched them directly from @Johannes Ernst. And I can actually see them right away because that's the default view here on Hubzilla, rather than Mastodon's piecemeal.
Even if you import a post manually using the search feature (and you better import the actual start post), AFAIK existing comments will eventually be backfilled. Comments that come in after importing will definitely end up on your stream as part of the thread.
So this is not a shortcoming of the Fediverse. The Fediverse has been able to do better for 15 years. It's a shortcoming of Mastodon.
The only "issue" here may be that it sometimes takes some time for a comment to show up for some reasons. But unless there are blocks or filters in play, it eventually will.The Sin of Invisible Discovery: The Content Mirage
I'm not going to pick on the audacious implication that "Eugen and team" invented the Fediverse.
But Tim writes like literally everyone wants "the Fediverse" (read, actually Mastodon) to be literally Twitter without Musk.
Also:- Friendica has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2010. Five and a half years longer than Mastodon has even existed.
- Hubzilla has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2011 when it was forked from Free-Friendika. It has inherited full-text search from Friendica.
- (streams) and Forte have had full-blown full-text search since their respective inception in 2021 and 2024, both having inherited it themselves.
Oh, and none of them has an explicit opt-in switch to soothe panicking Twitter converts because panicking Twitter converts have never been the primary target audience of either of them.
Instead, on Hubzilla, whether someone can find your content depends on whether they've got permission to view it in the first place ("Can view my channel stream and posts"). If it's public, they have it. Full stop. Public is public is public. Stop whining. You've made it public, now deal with everything being able to see it.
(streams) and Forte behave the same. In addition, they have an extra permission: "Grant search access to your channel stream and posts". This controls who may search your channel stream using your own local search feature while visiting your channel locally. Something that isn't even possible on Mastodon.
As for not having any content on my channel stream before I connect to anyone: I, for one, do not want some algorithm to force content upon me that I'm not interested in. Full. Frigging. Stop. I want to have full and exclusive control over what I see and what I don't.The Sin of User Discovery Hell
Can it really be that Mastodon's directory is so much worse than Friendica's, Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's directories? I guess it is because it really only lists local accounts on that one particular server. A side-effect of Mastodon being a microblogging service and Twitter clone. And not a full-blown, fully-featured social network and Facebook alternative. No, seriously, it isn't that.
Friendica is. It was designed as such. It was designed to take Facebook's place, and not by aping and cloning Facebook, but by being better than Facebook.
The directory on each node is decentralised. It lists all actors known to that node. What's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view: It takes the keywords in the profiles into account. Better even: It ranks suggestions by the number of matching keywords.
Want something centralised instead? Try the Friendica Directory. Looking for people? Looking for news accounts? Looking for groups? There are specialised tabs for that. Friendica can tell them apart, and so can the Friendica Directory.
Caveat: The Friendica Directory only lists Friendica accounts. Friendica's built-in directory should list everything it knows. I haven't used Friendica in many years, but I guess this even includes diaspora* accounts because why not?
Hubzilla has indirectly inherited its directory from Friendica. This is the directory on Netzgemeinde, the biggest Hubzilla hub.
Again, it lists local as well as federated channels. You can choose whether to see only local channels ("This Website Only") or federated channels as well. You can choose whether channels flagged NSFW shall be listed or not ("Safe Mode"). You can choose to only have group actors listed that let themselves be listed ("Public Forums Only"). You have a cloud of keywords from the keyword lists in the profiles that you can filter by (Mastodon doesn't even have keyword lists in profiles). You have full-text search for names and keywords. There's even a Facebook-style suggestion mode that proposes connections to you with a ranking based on your keywords and their keywords as well as the number of common connections, and that still has the same filters.
Caveat this time: Hubzilla's directory only supports the one sole protocol built into Hubzilla's core. And that's Zot6. This means that Hubzilla's directory only lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels because Hubzilla and (streams) are the only Fediverse server applications that support Zot6.
(streams) and Forte have inherited their directories again. And they probably have the most powerful decentralised directories in the entire Fediverse. I'd give you a link, but (streams) directories generally aren't public; only local channels can access them.
These directories are similar to the ones on Hubzilla. You see local and federated actors, and you can choose to only see local actors ("This Website Only"). You can choose to only see group actors ("Groups Only"). You can choose to not see channels flagged NSFW ("Safe Mode"). What's new: Inactive actors can be kept out, too ("Recently Updated").
Now it comes: (streams) has ActivityPub built into its core, and it's on by default on new channels. Forte is entirely based on ActivityPub.
This means that their directories can list anything from anywhere that uses ActivityPub. "Groups Only" gives you Guppe groups, Lemmy communities, /kbin and Mbin magazines, PieFed communities, Mobilizon groups, Flipboard magazines, Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups, Forte groups etc., all on one list.
(streams) has a slight edge over Forte here because it also lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off such as the Streams Users Tea Garden where ActivityPub was turned off with the very intention to keep Mastodon out.
If there was a gigantic Forte server, as big as mastodon.social, and its directory was accessible to the public, that directory would be the best directory in the Fediverse for anything really. If it was on (streams), it would list more, but it would confuse some users of e.g. Mastodon who'd try to follow Hubzilla or (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off. Forte simply doesn't list these because it can't find them.
A global directory of everything sounds like a good idea, but it's next to impossible to implement.
Either the directory would go look for actors itself. In order to do that, it would have to know within a split-second not only whenever a new actor is created somewhere so it can index that actor right away, but also whenever a new server is spun up so that the admin actor can be indexed, and that server can be watched. How is it supposed to know all that?
Well, or the directory, a single, monolithic, centralised website, would have to be hard-coded into all Fediverse server software. That way, each server could immediately report newly created actors to the central directory upon their creation.
For starters, this would make the whole Fediverse depend on one single centralised website under the control of, if bad comes to worse, one person.
Besides, this would be a privacy nightmare. Let's suppose I create a new (streams) channel that's supposed to be private. Its existence and all its properties would be sent to the central directory before I can set it to private and restrict its permissions. This wouldn't be so bad on Hubzilla because I'd make the channel private before I turn on PubCrawl and make the channel accessible to the directory in the first place because the directory would only understand ActivityPub.
Of course, the directory would mostly be built against Mastodon. It would not understand the permissions systems implemented on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and it might happily siphon off the profiles of channels where access to the profile is restricted and make them publicly accessible. On the other hand, this is likely to mean that the directory couldn't read most of Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's profile text fields anyway because Mastodon doesn't have them.
But such a centralised directory wouldn't make connecting to other users that much easier and more convenient. You'd still have to copy and paste URLs or IDs into your local search and search for them (unless you're on Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte where you can connect to URLs directly). At the very least, you should be able to go to the centralised directory and follow anyone just by clicking or tapping them. That, however, would require OpenWebAuth support on both your home server and that directory.
Ideally, that directory would be firmly built into all instances of all Fediverse software from snac2 to Mastodon to Hubzilla, even replacing any existing directory to confuse people less. But that would make the Fediverse even more dependent on one central website and its owner, something which should be avoided at all cost.
Lastly, nothing can ever be built into all instances of all Fediverse software. Remember that there's software with living instances that's barely being developed such as Plume. There's even software with living instances that's been officially pronounced dead such as Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. How are Firefish servers supposed to implement such a feature if nobody maintains Firefish anymore, and even the code repository was deleted?
CC: @Risotto Bias
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #Friendica #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #OpenWebAuth #SingleSignOn #NomadicIdentity #Search #FullTextSearch #Directory #Permissions #Privacy #Conversations #ThreadedConversations #FEP_171b #ConversationContainers -
@Ben Pate 🤘🏻 Allow me to take a look at this from a Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte point of view.The Sin of Overwhelming Complexity: Instance Selection Paralysis
The only way to really combat this effectively is by hiding the whole concept of servers/instances at first, railroading everyone to a server and only letting them know about decentralisation and servers/instances after the fact.
In theory, this could be doable with Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and even better than with Mastodon with its themed servers. It wouldn't make sense to offer Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte servers for certain topics or target audiences, seeing as the whole thing would become moot the very moment when you make your first clone on another server. Simply build a kind of "automatic on-boarder" that sends everyone to the geographically closest open-registration server.
In practice, that'd be a bad idea, but for a different reason than on Mastodon. And that's how these servers tend to be very different. Not in topic. Not in target audiences. Not in rules. But in features. Hubzilla is modular, (streams) is modular, Forte is modular, and each admin decides differently on which "apps" to activate. Then you want to join Hubzilla for one cool feature, but the on-boarder railroads you to a server where that very feature isn't even activated.
Sure, the on-boarder could include the option to select certain features that you absolutely must have in your new home and then pick a server that has them. But that'd be extra hassle and extra confusing.
Besides, where'd you put that on-boarder? On the official Hubzilla website? Haha, no can do. The official Hubzilla website is a webpage on a Hubzilla channel itself. It's all just dumb old static HTML with a CSS. If it's even HTML and not Markdown or BBcode, that is. You couldn't add scripts to it if you tried.
Oh, and (streams) and Forte don't even have official websites. And (streams) will never have one, seeing as it's officially and intentionally nameless, brandless and totally not even a project. Their "websites" are readme files in their code repositories on Codeberg.The Sin of Inconsistent Navigation: Timeline Turmoil
The streams on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are quite a bit different from Mastodon timelines.
First of all, what you usually don't have on public servers is the counterpart to Mastodon's local timeline and Mastodon's federated timeline. On all three, this would be only one stream, the "public stream" or "pubstream". It can be switched by the admin to either what'd be local or what'd be federated. However, public servers usually have it off entirely. Unavailable even to local users. That's because the admins don't want to be held liable for what's happening on the pubstream.
Technically speaking, you only have one stream on a public server, and that's your channel stream. It's much more efficient than a Mastodon timeline because it always shows entire conversations by default instead of detached single-message piecemeal, and because it has a counter for unread messages which even lists these unread messages for you to directly go to the corresponding conversation. But that's another story.
However, your channel stream can be viewed on your channel page, conversation by conversation, or it can be viewed on the stream page as an actual stream with all conversations shown in a feed/timeline-like fashion, one upon another, and with its own set of built-in filters such as "only my own messages" or "only conversations started by members of one particular privacy group/access list" or "only conversations from one particular group actor". It's actually much more convenient than any Mastodon timeline, but for those who want a Twitter clone for dumb-dumbs, it can be very overwhelming.
Yes, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are much more complex in handling than, say, snac2. But they're also much more complex in features than snac2. That power is their USP. And that power must be harnessed somehow.The Sin of Remote Interaction Purgatory: Federation Gymnastics
Sure, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte have some of the best built-in search systems in the whole Fediverse. They can pull almost everything onto your channel stream just by searching for it. And if it has replies, chances are they pull these in as well.
But still, they're geared towards desktop users. They still require copy-paste. Phone users don't copy paste. Most of them don't even know the very concept of copy-paste. For most of those who do, copy-paste is much too fumbly if the input device available to them is a 6" touch screen.
You can't blame them, though. This is next to impossible to do any differently. I mean, you won't see a button magically appear with which you can pull in just that one post or comment you want to pull in.
Rather, the issue is that they can only reel in almost everything. Sometimes the search returns nothing, like a void. Sometimes the search runs indefinitely without any kind of result. This may be because someone has blocked your channel, because someone has blocked your entire server, because the server someone is on has blocked you or your entire server, because Hubzilla/(streams)/Forte doesn't understand the URI pasted into the search field or whatever.
So this is made worse by Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte not knowing what they can search for, what they can't and why not.
Connecting with someone whom you encounter on your channel stream is fairly easy. Connections can be initiated with only two clicks. Either you click their long name, and you're taken to a pretty much distraction-less local "intermediate page" with a striking green button that's labelled "+ Connect". Or if you don't want to leave the channel page, you hover your mouse cursor over their profile picture, click on the little white arrow that appears, and you get a small menu that offers you the "Connect" option as well. Granted, even some veterans don't know the latter trick because it isn't immediately advertised on the channel page.
Also, sure, you don't simply follow them right off the bat with nothing else to do like on Mastodon. You're taken to your Connections page, and you have to configure the connection (you don't have to do that on Mastodon because you can't configure connections on Mastodon).
Following accounts/channels from the directory is a bit easier. The green "+ Connect" button is there right away (unless you're already connected). However, Hubzilla's directory only lists channels based on the Nomad protocol, i.e. Hubzilla and (streams) channels, because ActivityPub is only implemented in an optional, off-by-default-for-new-channels add-on whereas it's in the core and on by default on (streams) and the only available protocol on Forte.
Importing contents or following actors when seeing them locally on other servers without copy-pasting and searching can be done. It requires OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, however, and it requires it to be implemented on all servers of all Fediverse server applications from Mastodon to WordPress to Ghost to Flipboard. Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte are the only Fediverse server applications with full (client-side and server-side) OpenWebAuth implementations. But that's of little use if the rest of the Fediverse doesn't have server-side implementations, and Mastodon has even silently rejected a mere client-side implementation already developed to a pull request two years ago.The Sin of DM Disasters Waiting to Happen
I think this is less of an issue on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte because they handle DMs differently from Mastodon (which "the Fediverse" actually refers to in the article).
On all three, DMs are integrated into their extensive, fine-grained permissions system in which everything is only public if it's really public. The difference between a post and a DM is not just a switch.
If I want to DM you, I can either tag you@!{[email protected]}rather than@[url=https://mastodon.social/@benpate]Ben Pate 🤘🏻[/url]. Then you're a) the only one to whom the message is sent (it literally doesn't even go out to any other server than mastodon.social plus my clone on hub.hubzilla.de as can be seen in the delivery report) and b) the only one who is granted permission to view the message.
Or I can use the padlock icon and select you from the opening list as the sole recipient. The very moment that I select certain recipients, the post I'm composing quits being public, and the padlock icon switches from open to closed. This isn't a one-click or two-click toggle. You don't do that casually. It's basically configuration. It requires so many mouse clicks that you do it consciously and intentionally. If you want to post in private, you have to really want to post in private.
Better yet: You can default to posting only to a certain limited target audience. In fact, by default on a brand-new channel, you only post to the members of one privacy group/access list (which is a Mastodon list on coke and 'roids). You have to manually reconfigure your new channel if you want to post to the general public by default.
If you preview your post, you can see whether it's a direct message to one or multiple single connections (envelope icon next to your long name), a limited-permissions message to one or multiple privacy groups/access lists/group actors (closed padlock icon) or actually public (no icon).
Even better yet: Posts to group actors generally aren't public. Posts to at least Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups and Forte groups are never public. They do not go out to your followers as well unless they're connected to the same group. And this is independent from whether a group is public or private. You can't accidentially post to a group actor in public, and if you do, you don't post to that group actor at all, at least not in a way that makes the group actor forward your post to its other connections.
Granted, what does not happen is your background switching from your background colour or background image (which can be user-configured) to red #800000 or a yellow-and-back chevron pattern when you change visibility and permissions to something that isn't public.The Sin of Ghost Conversations and Phantom Follower Counts
And again, when @Tim Chambers says, "the Fediverse", he almost exclusively means Mastodon. He writes as if the entire Fediverse handled conversations as terribly as Mastodon, as if the entire Fediverse was as blissfully unaware of enclosed conversations as Mastodon. Which is not the case.
Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, as well as their ancestor Friendica, handle conversations in ways that exceed Mastodon users' imaginations and wildest dreams by magnitudes. Unlike Mastodon, they know threaded conversations, and they see them as enclosed objects where only the start post counts as a post, and everything else counts as a comment.
This means that once you've received a post on your stream, you will also receive all comments on that post, regardless of whether or not you follow the commenters, regardless of whether or not they mention you. That's because all four reel in the comments not from the commentors, but from the original poster who is perceived as the owner of the thread. Only blocks or channel-wide filters can prevent comments from coming in.
Beyond that, (streams) was the first to introduce Conversation Containers. Forte inherited them from (streams), and when they were defined in FEP-171b, Hubzilla implemented them, too.
Here on Hubzilla, I can see all comments in this thread because my channel has fetched them directly from @Johannes Ernst. And I can actually see them right away because that's the default view here on Hubzilla, rather than Mastodon's piecemeal.
Even if you import a post manually using the search feature (and you better import the actual start post), AFAIK existing comments will eventually be backfilled. Comments that come in after importing will definitely end up on your stream as part of the thread.
So this is not a shortcoming of the Fediverse. The Fediverse has been able to do better for 15 years. It's a shortcoming of Mastodon.
The only "issue" here may be that it sometimes takes some time for a comment to show up for some reasons. But unless there are blocks or filters in play, it eventually will.The Sin of Invisible Discovery: The Content Mirage
I'm not going to pick on the audacious implication that "Eugen and team" invented the Fediverse.
But Tim writes like literally everyone wants "the Fediverse" (read, actually Mastodon) to be literally Twitter without Musk.
Also:- Friendica has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2010. Five and a half years longer than Mastodon has even existed.
- Hubzilla has had full-blown full-text search since its inception as early as 2011 when it was forked from Free-Friendika. It has inherited full-text search from Friendica.
- (streams) and Forte have had full-blown full-text search since their respective inception in 2021 and 2024, both having inherited it themselves.
Oh, and none of them has an explicit opt-in switch to soothe panicking Twitter converts because panicking Twitter converts have never been the primary target audience of either of them.
Instead, on Hubzilla, whether someone can find your content depends on whether they've got permission to view it in the first place ("Can view my channel stream and posts"). If it's public, they have it. Full stop. Public is public is public. Stop whining. You've made it public, now deal with everything being able to see it.
(streams) and Forte behave the same. In addition, they have an extra permission: "Grant search access to your channel stream and posts". This controls who may search your channel stream using your own local search feature while visiting your channel locally. Something that isn't even possible on Mastodon.
As for not having any content on my channel stream before I connect to anyone: I, for one, do not want some algorithm to force content upon me that I'm not interested in. Full. Frigging. Stop. I want to have full and exclusive control over what I see and what I don't.The Sin of User Discovery Hell
Can it really be that Mastodon's directory is so much worse than Friendica's, Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's directories? I guess it is because it really only lists local accounts on that one particular server. A side-effect of Mastodon being a microblogging service and Twitter clone. And not a full-blown, fully-featured social network and Facebook alternative. No, seriously, it isn't that.
Friendica is. It was designed as such. It was designed to take Facebook's place, and not by aping and cloning Facebook, but by being better than Facebook.
The directory on each node is decentralised. It lists all actors known to that node. What's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view: It takes the keywords in the profiles into account. Better even: It ranks suggestions by the number of matching keywords.
Want something centralised instead? Try the Friendica Directory. Looking for people? Looking for news accounts? Looking for groups? There are specialised tabs for that. Friendica can tell them apart, and so can the Friendica Directory.
Caveat: The Friendica Directory only lists Friendica accounts. Friendica's built-in directory should list everything it knows. I haven't used Friendica in many years, but I guess this even includes diaspora* accounts because why not?
Hubzilla has indirectly inherited its directory from Friendica. This is the directory on Netzgemeinde, the biggest Hubzilla hub.
Again, it lists local as well as federated channels. You can choose whether to see only local channels ("This Website Only") or federated channels as well. You can choose whether channels flagged NSFW shall be listed or not ("Safe Mode"). You can choose to only have group actors listed that let themselves be listed ("Public Forums Only"). You have a cloud of keywords from the keyword lists in the profiles that you can filter by (Mastodon doesn't even have keyword lists in profiles). You have full-text search for names and keywords. There's even a Facebook-style suggestion mode that proposes connections to you with a ranking based on your keywords and their keywords as well as the number of common connections, and that still has the same filters.
Caveat this time: Hubzilla's directory only supports the one sole protocol built into Hubzilla's core. And that's Zot6. This means that Hubzilla's directory only lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels because Hubzilla and (streams) are the only Fediverse server applications that support Zot6.
(streams) and Forte have inherited their directories again. And they probably have the most powerful decentralised directories in the entire Fediverse. I'd give you a link, but (streams) directories generally aren't public; only local channels can access them.
These directories are similar to the ones on Hubzilla. You see local and federated actors, and you can choose to only see local actors ("This Website Only"). You can choose to only see group actors ("Groups Only"). You can choose to not see channels flagged NSFW ("Safe Mode"). What's new: Inactive actors can be kept out, too ("Recently Updated").
Now it comes: (streams) has ActivityPub built into its core, and it's on by default on new channels. Forte is entirely based on ActivityPub.
This means that their directories can list anything from anywhere that uses ActivityPub. "Groups Only" gives you Guppe groups, Lemmy communities, /kbin and Mbin magazines, PieFed communities, Mobilizon groups, Flipboard magazines, Friendica groups, Hubzilla forums, (streams) groups, Forte groups etc., all on one list.
(streams) has a slight edge over Forte here because it also lists Hubzilla and (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off such as the Streams Users Tea Garden where ActivityPub was turned off with the very intention to keep Mastodon out.
If there was a gigantic Forte server, as big as mastodon.social, and its directory was accessible to the public, that directory would be the best directory in the Fediverse for anything really. If it was on (streams), it would list more, but it would confuse some users of e.g. Mastodon who'd try to follow Hubzilla or (streams) channels that have ActivityPub off. Forte simply doesn't list these because it can't find them.
A global directory of everything sounds like a good idea, but it's next to impossible to implement.
Either the directory would go look for actors itself. In order to do that, it would have to know within a split-second not only whenever a new actor is created somewhere so it can index that actor right away, but also whenever a new server is spun up so that the admin actor can be indexed, and that server can be watched. How is it supposed to know all that?
Well, or the directory, a single, monolithic, centralised website, would have to be hard-coded into all Fediverse server software. That way, each server could immediately report newly created actors to the central directory upon their creation.
For starters, this would make the whole Fediverse depend on one single centralised website under the control of, if bad comes to worse, one person.
Besides, this would be a privacy nightmare. Let's suppose I create a new (streams) channel that's supposed to be private. Its existence and all its properties would be sent to the central directory before I can set it to private and restrict its permissions. This wouldn't be so bad on Hubzilla because I'd make the channel private before I turn on PubCrawl and make the channel accessible to the directory in the first place because the directory would only understand ActivityPub.
Of course, the directory would mostly be built against Mastodon. It would not understand the permissions systems implemented on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, and it might happily siphon off the profiles of channels where access to the profile is restricted and make them publicly accessible. On the other hand, this is likely to mean that the directory couldn't read most of Hubzilla's, (streams)' and Forte's profile text fields anyway because Mastodon doesn't have them.
But such a centralised directory wouldn't make connecting to other users that much easier and more convenient. You'd still have to copy and paste URLs or IDs into your local search and search for them (unless you're on Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) or Forte where you can connect to URLs directly). At the very least, you should be able to go to the centralised directory and follow anyone just by clicking or tapping them. That, however, would require OpenWebAuth support on both your home server and that directory.
Ideally, that directory would be firmly built into all instances of all Fediverse software from snac2 to Mastodon to Hubzilla, even replacing any existing directory to confuse people less. But that would make the Fediverse even more dependent on one central website and its owner, something which should be avoided at all cost.
Lastly, nothing can ever be built into all instances of all Fediverse software. Remember that there's software with living instances that's barely being developed such as Plume. There's even software with living instances that's been officially pronounced dead such as Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. How are Firefish servers supposed to implement such a feature if nobody maintains Firefish anymore, and even the code repository was deleted?
CC: @Risotto Bias
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #Friendica #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #OpenWebAuth #SingleSignOn #NomadicIdentity #Search #FullTextSearch #Directory #Permissions #Privacy #Conversations #ThreadedConversations #FEP_171b #ConversationContainers -
Finally Friday Reads: Free Speech Attacks, Incompetency, Cruelty, and Grifting Galore Characterize the Trump Regime
“A modern-day interpretation of a 1871 Thomas Nast work seems fitting to commemorate Trump’s secret crypto dinner.” John Buss, repeat@1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
As the old Buddhist and Hobbit saying goes: “We live in Dark Times.” “Kali Yuga” is the Hindu expression. Darkness has always been an expression of decline in European History, hence the label “Dark Ages” for the period from the 5th to about the 8th century. Usually, these periods experience a decline in economic, intellectual, and cultural life. One of the most prevalent things about these times is that there is a paucity of written records. So, it’s difficult to capture the decline until a renaissance occurs. The breakdown of institutions occurred in these past times as well as the present. At the moment, we still have the ability to document the decline in the US. Many relate to it as a rebirth of fascist movements of the 20th century. It is a global feature at the moment, but no matter if it’s the Decline of the Roman Empire or the American Empire, there are signs.
The invention of the printing press is seen as one of the most powerful examples of an invention that can change the course of history. Access to information directly, for personal consideration, tends to create a citizenry with low tolerance of being shut off from thinking for themselves. Perhaps it’s why today’s dark leaders tend to go for education and the press, and why they attract “low information” and angry denizens. They also attract a cadre of greedy followers willing to help attack and grab the wealth of those who are powerless.
These are indeed Dark Times.
The fight for the light in the newly filed Harvard case against the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students is a prime cause of denying the citizenry access to anything that might cause them to question the goings-on here. But it also breaks into the tradition of the United States being the shining light of discovery, science, and reason. It’s why those of us who have had academic careers cherish and enjoy academic freedom. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is essential.
We have traditionally had a small number of women in my field of economics. It was between 4 to 10 percent in the late 70s and early 80s. It once rose to above 30%, but recently has settled on 27%. The STEM fields still reflect the struggle for inclusion. It’s even lower for Black Americans. However, my career has led me to have colleagues from a variety of countries, which is wonderful. In my early career, most of my women colleagues came from the Middle East or China. I was lucky enough to have a professor from Finland. She was brilliant. Believe me. During my academic studies and life, the joy of having colleagues from all over the world who could share things was a blessing in my life. A colleague from the Punjab who now teaches in Canada helped me improve my math chops to get me through some of the most complex models that you could imagine. He stayed with me after Katrina until the campus got its FEMA trailers. I also had a student from Taiwan staying with me. My last biggest joy, however, was writing 2 letters of recommendation for two Black New Orleans students to Rice. The US cannot afford to fall behind in a vast world of research. And, yet, here we are with a professional moron taking down the biggest academic center of research in the World. America’s first University, Harvard. If we do not train the world’s best minds, we will fall deeply behind in everything.
Today, we got the news of the Case Harvard filed against Trump. “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin From Revoking Harvard’s Ability To Enroll International Students.” This is from The Harvard Crimson. Harvard turned out one of my favorite journalists, Joy Reid, and you can read this article knowing there are more good journalists headed to jobs.
A federal judge granted Harvard a temporary restraining order in its suit to block the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke its authorization to enroll international students.
The order was issued less than two hours after the University requested a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to end its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification. Harvard had described the move as “unprecedented and retaliatory.”
United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that if the DHS’ move goes forward, Harvard “will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”
The TRO will go into effect immediately and will likely last until a hearing in the case. Burroughs has scheduled a May 27 status hearing and a May 29 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction. Harvard would need to file for a preliminary injunction to prevent the DHS’ directive from going into effect after the TRO expires.
Under the terms of the order, the DHS is barred from enforcing the Thursday move to strip Harvard of its SEVP status — and Harvard is no longer legally obligated to turn over the requested documents by Sunday.
Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, has adjudicated several cases relating to Harvard in the past. She oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT in 2021 against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s effort to force all international students who were enrolled online in the U.S. to leave the country. ICE ultimately rolled back the policy without a ruling from Burroughs.
Burroughs is also overseeing Harvard’s first lawsuit, filed in April, against the Trump administration over its nearly $3 billion funding cut.
You can see all of the destruction of the Age of Reason and the Scientific Age, and the Information Age, clearly in these actions and even more clearly in Trump’s appointments and the destruction of the Agencies most responsible for progress using science and reason. BB shared this Substack today, and I thought I’d post it here. It’s from Steven Beschloss, a journalist with a historian brother. “How Much More Stupidity Will Americans Endure? Reflecting on the escalating hostility to American values, principles, and decency in a 24-hour period.” I personally cannot take much more of this.
I admit: The daily drumbeat of stupidity is exhausting. I wish it were enough for me to simply document the dangerous ignorance of Trump and his sycophants, confident that we’ll soon be free of this regime and its power to spread their poison and cancerous hostility across the land and around the world. But the midterm elections will not arrive for another 17 months. It’s hard to overstate how much damage Trump, his cabinet and his kowtowing Republican Congress can cause between now and then.
That’s why most days I ask myself: Could today be the day Americans decide they’ve had enough and demand change? I have thought that there might be a single event that triggers millions of Americans taking to the streets or committing to a national strike in a public, unavoidable show of solidarity. But I have come to see that the daily drumbeat is numbing too many people, causing them to adapt to the cruelty, the racism, the hostility to democracy, the arrogant rejection of the Constitution and the rule of law. The metaphor of the frog in a slowly boiling pot of water is apt; by the time the frog’s figured out he needs to get out, it’s too late.
We’re not there yet. You can see that dedicated lawyers are filing suit against the corruption and criminality, judges are pushing back, outraged Americans are engaging in protests, some elected Democrats and other awake leaders are ringing alarm bells, a growing number of colleges and universities have refused to buckle under, some independent media are addressing the reality of authoritarianism in no uncertain terms. Americans have not surrendered their sanity or capacity to know what’s right and wrong, what’s true and false. The pot may be beginning to boil, but we can still see and feel what’s happening. We are still able to take action.
But I want to spotlight a series of events in a single 24-hour period that individually outrage me and, taken together, express a level of stupidity and sickness that should motivate more than a shrug of the head or an angry social media post. You may have already focused on—been outraged by—one or even all of these. But it’s important to not look at them as discrete events, but part and parcel of a single plot to convince us that we should accept a fascist regime bent on elevating white nationalism, oppressing people of color, silencing dissent and making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer and sicker. This effort is led by a malignant racist and sociopath who’s convinced the people around him to do what he says, no matter how ugly, cruel, blatantly false—or just plain stupid.
Two of the four events were in the Oval Office Wednesday—our Oval Office, the place where real presidents have made some of the most momentous decisions that improved the lives of Americans, created a safety net to overcome the ravages of the Great Depression and soften cap italism’s turbulence, helped defeat the Nazis and fascism, built global alliances that made the world safer, more stable and prosperous, and demonstrated a commitment to bend the arc of history toward justice.
Into this historical place of honor came South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, a calm and skilled diplomat who decades earlier had served alongside Nelson Mandela as his chief negotiator to end apartheid in South Africa. But just like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, he arrived for an ambush by a spiteful, narrow-minded man who spreads lies like Ukraine not Russia started the still-raging war. On this day he insisted with false information from fringe groups that South Africa, whose leaders are mostly Black, are committing genocide against white farmers, a false narrative that his top donor and South African-born Elon Musk has propagated.
At Trump’s urging, Ramaphosa answered a reporter’s question about what it would take to convince Trump there is no such white genocide. “It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here,” he calmly said, referencing South African golfer Ernie Els who was in the room. “When we have talks between us around a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them.”
But South Africa’s president was being set up. Trump interrupted him to play a video pushing the lies, then he showed photos meant to “prove” how much death there was, even leading Trump to mutter, “Death, death, death, horrible death, death.”
Except the video clip showing a long line of white wooden crosses were not actual burial sites for white farmers, as Trump insisted, but were from a 2020 protest against farm murders over the years. Except the photo Trump showed of people lifting body bags, insisting they “are all white farmers that are being buried,” was actually of humanitarian workers burying bodies in Congo. Except for all the claims of genocide among white farmers, meant to justify bringing white Afrikaners as preferred refugees to America now, there were a total of 44 murders in farming communities last year, Reuters reports, with over 26,000 in the country overall.
President Ramaphosa came to discuss trade and economic partnership. Yet Trump brought him into the Oval Office to ambush and abuse him, push his white nationalist agenda, spread more widely his egregious lies and showcase that—while illegally deporting people of color—only whites deserve America’s protection from presumed persecution. “We were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them,” Ramaphosa noted, but Trump was not listening.
There is a daily drumbeat of stupidity, airing of white grievances, and cruelty. While discriminating harshly against everyone who is not white and Christian, this administration harbors supporters who carry torches and shout “Jews will not replace us,” and has bubble-headed Congress Critters who scream about “Jewish Space Lasers”. Anti-semitism has become transactional. It has become a useful tool in the attack on Academia and the Democratic Party. It assumes that you can’t understand the history of the Jewish people without turning a blind eye to the punishing attacks on Palestinian women, children, and innocents in the Gaza Strip. I do not think there is a bigger way of showing disrespect for a group of people than using their historical struggles as a tool to encourage the murder of innocents. But then, our #FARTUS is planning a Trump Tower, hotel, and golf course in GAZA. The Trump Boyz–in between murdering endangered animals for sport–have been travelling the globe using the Tariff stick as a way to expand their Crime Syndicate. All, at the expense of the United States and its economy. This is from QUARTZ: “8 countries where Trump has been making new business deals, from Pakistan to Vietnam, Residential towers, golf courses, crypto — the deals didn’t stop on Inauguration Day.” This is the art of the steal in full display. All we need to see is Eric and Don Jr. flying in the palace in the sky and sitting at Trump’s Crypto Fundraiser now.
Businesses spearheaded by President Donald Trump have struck numerous deals since Trump returned to the White House in January.
Leading the way is the Trump Organization, a conglomerate privately owned by the president. With more than 250 subsidiaries, it serves as a holding company for Trump’s various hotels, residential real estate, towers, resorts, and golf courses across the world.
World Liberty Financial, a decentralized protocol that merges financial services and cryptocurrency, has also brokered deals. A Trump business entity owns 60% of World Liberty and is entitled to 75% of all revenue from coin sales. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. manage the company.
Here are the countries where the Trump empire has been dealmaking. The slide show that follows lists Vietnam. It’s in Hanoi, which reminds me of the Hanoi Hilton and the late Senator John McCain.
The project consists of a golf course, hotels, and luxury residences, and is slated for completion by 2029. In addition, Eric Trump is scheduled to meet with officials in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday to discuss a possible Trump Tower in the city, Reuters reports.
In April, the president imposed a “reciprocal” tariff rate of 46% on Vietnamese goods. While that policy is currently on a 90-day pause, it would deal a major blow to the Southeast Asian country if resumed. Goods exported to the U.S. account for 30% of Vietnam’s economy, according to IMF estimates, the largest of all U.S. trading partners. As the specter of these crippling levies looms, Hanoi has pledged to buy more American goods, including Boeing (BA) aircraft and agricultural products.
Other countries include Serbia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, and Singapore. Most of these discussions haven’t been covered by the Media other than Qatar, which came with the gift that “Palace in the sky” that will cause millions of dollars to refit before it’s handed over to Trump and his “library.” If there’s a bigger oxymoron than Trump Library, I’m waiting to hear it. Let’s just call it the warehouse facility for all the bribes and emoluments. We have to discuss that big ol’ party Trump threw for his richest customers. This is from the New York Times. “Hundreds Join Trump at ‘Exclusive’ Dinner, With Dreams of Crypto Fortunes in Mind. The guests were the biggest investors in President Trump’s memecoin, and they were greeted with chants of “shame” as they arrived at Trump National Golf Course.”
President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia golf club with the highest-paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
The gala dinner held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, many having flown to the United States from overseas.
At the club’s entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump. Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with The New York Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
“The past administration made your lives miserable,” Mr. Trump told the dinner guests, referring to the Biden administration’s enforcement actions against crypto companies.
The gala attendees made whooping noises while Mr. Trump spoke, and applauded as the president declared: “They were going after everybody. It was a disgrace frankly,” according to a video provided to The Times by a dinner guest.
Mr. Trump promised to change that approach. “There is a lot of sense in crypto. A lot of common sense in crypto,” he said. “And we’re honored to be working on helping everybody here.”
That sure is different than the 2021 #FARTUS who told Fox News. He just couldn’t wait to get into that scam, I guess. This is from the BBC. “Donald Trump calls Bitcoin ‘a scam against the dollar’. This is reported by BBC News Business Reporter Mary-Ann Russon.
Former US President Donald Trump has told Fox Business that he sees Bitcoin as a “scam” affecting the value of the US dollar.
“Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam,” Mr Trump said. “I don’t like it because it’s another currency competing against the dollar.”
He added that he wanted the dollar to be “the currency of the world”.
As per usual, the biggest losers from any more normalization of cryptocurrency will be his own voters. This is from the BBC. “The Bitcoin hum that is unsettling Trump’s MAGA heartlands.” This was written by Mike Wendling.
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation’s grid.
The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.
But it’s the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines – produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
“We can hear a constant buzzing,” says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. “It’s a constant, loud humming noise that you just can’t ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay.”
Such is Ms Campbell’s annoyance with Trump’s Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. “Right now I’m not real happy about that party,” she says.
So, build the nastiest factory in the backyard of the people least able to deal with it. That’s the sound of these Robber Barons that should be familiar to anyone who knows US history from its early 20th-century business escapades. The most interesting thing that’s popped up today is that Apple has got Trump in a lather, and the Equity Markets hate it. This is from Yahoo Finance: “Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq trim losses as Trump threatens Apple, EU with new tariffs.”
US stocks fell on Friday, on pace for weekly losses as investors assessed President Trump’s latest tariff threats and what his giant tax bill means for the deficit and the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) sank 0.4%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) also fell roughly 0.4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) backed off about 0.6%.
All three indexes trimmed steeper losses after Trump said on Friday that Apple (AAPL) must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones sold but not made in the US. The tech giant has begun shifting some manufacturing to India, with China, home to its key suppliers, locked in a trade war with the US. Apple shares fell 3% after Trump’s post on Truth Social.
At the same time, Trump threatened to hike the tariff on EU imports to “a straight 50%” beginning June 1 as trade talks between the two have stalled.
The president’s warnings shattered a more muted mood on Wall Street as investors wound down to the Memorial Day trading break on Monday.
It adds another supply chain complication for companies already worried about the potential hit to the economy from Trump’s tariff blitz. Earnings season has seen several companies hold off from providing full annual guidance thanks to uncertainty around tariffs.
All three major gauges are on track for a losing week. Stocks have suffered as deficit worries pushed up Treasury yields, intensified as Trump’s giant tax bill forged ahead. Wall Street is still weighing the economic impact of Trump’s revised bill, which cleared a key hurdle in the House vote for approval.
Well, I have always called him Orange Caligula. It seems we have a mad emperor on our hands. It didn’t help crypto either. “Bitcoin tumbles under $108K after Trump calls for 50% EU tariff. Trump’s tariff announcement sparks Bitcoin volatility, highlighting digital assets’ sensitivity to geopolitical events.” This is from Crypto Briefing and Vivian Nguyen.
The price of Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $108,000 early Friday after President Donald Trump called for steep tariffs on EU imports and threatened Apple with similar measures. The digital asset briefly touched $107,300 on Binance, pulling back from session highs above $111,000 as traders responded to fresh geopolitical tensions.
The US president on Friday proposed a 50% tariff on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, in a post on Truth Social. He cited trade imbalances and regulatory frictions as rationale for the move, declaring current EU-US trade dynamics “totally unacceptable.”
Apple is being threatened with 25% tariffs. Wow, how free market is this? Sounds a lot more like the old Soviet Command and Control model. Is he channeling Putin and Orban or just pissed about something Apple did at his party? This is from CNBC. “Trump says Apple must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones not made in the U.S.” Does he not realize how long it would take to even set up a factory, let alone train everyone? Doesn’t he know what this huge project would take to even break even?
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Friday that Apple will have to pay a tariff of 25% or more for iPhones made outside the United States.
“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Shares of Apple fell about 2% on Friday after the post.
Apple’s flagship phone is produced primarily in China, but the company has been shifting manufacturing to India in part because that country has a friendlier trade relationship with the U.S.
Some Wall Street analysts have estimated that moving iPhone production to the U.S. would raise the price of the Apple smartphone by at least 25%. Wedbush’s Dan Ives put the estimated cost of a U.S. iPhone at $3,500. The iPhone 16 Pro currently retails for about $1,000.
This is the latest jab at Apple from Trump, who over the past couple of weeks has ramped up pressure on the company and Cook to increase domestic manufacturing. Trump and Cook met at the White House on Tuesday, according to Politico.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he was not part of the meeting at the White House but that the Apple situation could be part of the Trump administration’s push to bring “precision manufacturing” back to the U.S.
“A large part of Apple’s components are in semiconductors. So we would like to have Apple help us make the semiconductor supply chain more secure,” Bessent said.
Cook gave $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and attended the inauguration in January. Apple has announced a $500 billion spend on U.S. development, including AI server production in Houston.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
So, I’m over 4200 words and probably have put you to sleep. You know how I am about Rabbit Holes. How much longer before the economy collapses? I’m actually beginning to wonder that. I know every time I see or hear him act so insane, I just collapse on the couch.
You have a very nice Memorial Day weekend. Please spend your time appreciating the many folks who gave their life for this country and its democracy. Don’t let the ones trying to destroy it get to you. There’s always the June 14th Flag Day “No Kings” protests and actions to look forward to and participate in. Just don’t watch that damn parade. The least we old folks can do is tank the ratings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
How about a little Warren Zevon and Prince?
#JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #academicFreedom #CryptoCurrencyPonziSchemeFromTrumpAndMusk #FARTUS #HarvardVTrump #NeoRobberBarons #NoKingsProtestOverFARTUSParade #TheHinduLoveGods #TrumpSoursApple #WeLiveInDarkTimes
-
Finally Friday Reads: Free Speech Attacks, Incompetency, Cruelty, and Grifting Galore Characterize the Trump Regime
“A modern-day interpretation of a 1871 Thomas Nast work seems fitting to commemorate Trump’s secret crypto dinner.” John Buss, repeat@1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
As the old Buddhist and Hobbit saying goes: “We live in Dark Times.” “Kali Yuga” is the Hindu expression. Darkness has always been an expression of decline in European History, hence the label “Dark Ages” for the period from the 5th to about the 8th century. Usually, these periods experience a decline in economic, intellectual, and cultural life. One of the most prevalent things about these times is that there is a paucity of written records. So, it’s difficult to capture the decline until a renaissance occurs. The breakdown of institutions occurred in these past times as well as the present. At the moment, we still have the ability to document the decline in the US. Many relate to it as a rebirth of fascist movements of the 20th century. It is a global feature at the moment, but no matter if it’s the Decline of the Roman Empire or the American Empire, there are signs.
The invention of the printing press is seen as one of the most powerful examples of an invention that can change the course of history. Access to information directly, for personal consideration, tends to create a citizenry with low tolerance of being shut off from thinking for themselves. Perhaps it’s why today’s dark leaders tend to go for education and the press, and why they attract “low information” and angry denizens. They also attract a cadre of greedy followers willing to help attack and grab the wealth of those who are powerless.
These are indeed Dark Times.
The fight for the light in the newly filed Harvard case against the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students is a prime cause of denying the citizenry access to anything that might cause them to question the goings-on here. But it also breaks into the tradition of the United States being the shining light of discovery, science, and reason. It’s why those of us who have had academic careers cherish and enjoy academic freedom. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is essential.
We have traditionally had a small number of women in my field of economics. It was between 4 to 10 percent in the late 70s and early 80s. It once rose to above 30%, but recently has settled on 27%. The STEM fields still reflect the struggle for inclusion. It’s even lower for Black Americans. However, my career has led me to have colleagues from a variety of countries, which is wonderful. In my early career, most of my women colleagues came from the Middle East or China. I was lucky enough to have a professor from Finland. She was brilliant. Believe me. During my academic studies and life, the joy of having colleagues from all over the world who could share things was a blessing in my life. A colleague from the Punjab who now teaches in Canada helped me improve my math chops to get me through some of the most complex models that you could imagine. He stayed with me after Katrina until the campus got its FEMA trailers. I also had a student from Taiwan staying with me. My last biggest joy, however, was writing 2 letters of recommendation for two Black New Orleans students to Rice. The US cannot afford to fall behind in a vast world of research. And, yet, here we are with a professional moron taking down the biggest academic center of research in the World. America’s first University, Harvard. If we do not train the world’s best minds, we will fall deeply behind in everything.
Today, we got the news of the Case Harvard filed against Trump. “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin From Revoking Harvard’s Ability To Enroll International Students.” This is from The Harvard Crimson. Harvard turned out one of my favorite journalists, Joy Reid, and you can read this article knowing there are more good journalists headed to jobs.
A federal judge granted Harvard a temporary restraining order in its suit to block the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke its authorization to enroll international students.
The order was issued less than two hours after the University requested a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to end its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification. Harvard had described the move as “unprecedented and retaliatory.”
United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that if the DHS’ move goes forward, Harvard “will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”
The TRO will go into effect immediately and will likely last until a hearing in the case. Burroughs has scheduled a May 27 status hearing and a May 29 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction. Harvard would need to file for a preliminary injunction to prevent the DHS’ directive from going into effect after the TRO expires.
Under the terms of the order, the DHS is barred from enforcing the Thursday move to strip Harvard of its SEVP status — and Harvard is no longer legally obligated to turn over the requested documents by Sunday.
Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, has adjudicated several cases relating to Harvard in the past. She oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT in 2021 against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s effort to force all international students who were enrolled online in the U.S. to leave the country. ICE ultimately rolled back the policy without a ruling from Burroughs.
Burroughs is also overseeing Harvard’s first lawsuit, filed in April, against the Trump administration over its nearly $3 billion funding cut.
You can see all of the destruction of the Age of Reason and the Scientific Age, and the Information Age, clearly in these actions and even more clearly in Trump’s appointments and the destruction of the Agencies most responsible for progress using science and reason. BB shared this Substack today, and I thought I’d post it here. It’s from Steven Beschloss, a journalist with a historian brother. “How Much More Stupidity Will Americans Endure? Reflecting on the escalating hostility to American values, principles, and decency in a 24-hour period.” I personally cannot take much more of this.
I admit: The daily drumbeat of stupidity is exhausting. I wish it were enough for me to simply document the dangerous ignorance of Trump and his sycophants, confident that we’ll soon be free of this regime and its power to spread their poison and cancerous hostility across the land and around the world. But the midterm elections will not arrive for another 17 months. It’s hard to overstate how much damage Trump, his cabinet and his kowtowing Republican Congress can cause between now and then.
That’s why most days I ask myself: Could today be the day Americans decide they’ve had enough and demand change? I have thought that there might be a single event that triggers millions of Americans taking to the streets or committing to a national strike in a public, unavoidable show of solidarity. But I have come to see that the daily drumbeat is numbing too many people, causing them to adapt to the cruelty, the racism, the hostility to democracy, the arrogant rejection of the Constitution and the rule of law. The metaphor of the frog in a slowly boiling pot of water is apt; by the time the frog’s figured out he needs to get out, it’s too late.
We’re not there yet. You can see that dedicated lawyers are filing suit against the corruption and criminality, judges are pushing back, outraged Americans are engaging in protests, some elected Democrats and other awake leaders are ringing alarm bells, a growing number of colleges and universities have refused to buckle under, some independent media are addressing the reality of authoritarianism in no uncertain terms. Americans have not surrendered their sanity or capacity to know what’s right and wrong, what’s true and false. The pot may be beginning to boil, but we can still see and feel what’s happening. We are still able to take action.
But I want to spotlight a series of events in a single 24-hour period that individually outrage me and, taken together, express a level of stupidity and sickness that should motivate more than a shrug of the head or an angry social media post. You may have already focused on—been outraged by—one or even all of these. But it’s important to not look at them as discrete events, but part and parcel of a single plot to convince us that we should accept a fascist regime bent on elevating white nationalism, oppressing people of color, silencing dissent and making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer and sicker. This effort is led by a malignant racist and sociopath who’s convinced the people around him to do what he says, no matter how ugly, cruel, blatantly false—or just plain stupid.
Two of the four events were in the Oval Office Wednesday—our Oval Office, the place where real presidents have made some of the most momentous decisions that improved the lives of Americans, created a safety net to overcome the ravages of the Great Depression and soften cap italism’s turbulence, helped defeat the Nazis and fascism, built global alliances that made the world safer, more stable and prosperous, and demonstrated a commitment to bend the arc of history toward justice.
Into this historical place of honor came South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, a calm and skilled diplomat who decades earlier had served alongside Nelson Mandela as his chief negotiator to end apartheid in South Africa. But just like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, he arrived for an ambush by a spiteful, narrow-minded man who spreads lies like Ukraine not Russia started the still-raging war. On this day he insisted with false information from fringe groups that South Africa, whose leaders are mostly Black, are committing genocide against white farmers, a false narrative that his top donor and South African-born Elon Musk has propagated.
At Trump’s urging, Ramaphosa answered a reporter’s question about what it would take to convince Trump there is no such white genocide. “It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here,” he calmly said, referencing South African golfer Ernie Els who was in the room. “When we have talks between us around a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them.”
But South Africa’s president was being set up. Trump interrupted him to play a video pushing the lies, then he showed photos meant to “prove” how much death there was, even leading Trump to mutter, “Death, death, death, horrible death, death.”
Except the video clip showing a long line of white wooden crosses were not actual burial sites for white farmers, as Trump insisted, but were from a 2020 protest against farm murders over the years. Except the photo Trump showed of people lifting body bags, insisting they “are all white farmers that are being buried,” was actually of humanitarian workers burying bodies in Congo. Except for all the claims of genocide among white farmers, meant to justify bringing white Afrikaners as preferred refugees to America now, there were a total of 44 murders in farming communities last year, Reuters reports, with over 26,000 in the country overall.
President Ramaphosa came to discuss trade and economic partnership. Yet Trump brought him into the Oval Office to ambush and abuse him, push his white nationalist agenda, spread more widely his egregious lies and showcase that—while illegally deporting people of color—only whites deserve America’s protection from presumed persecution. “We were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them,” Ramaphosa noted, but Trump was not listening.
There is a daily drumbeat of stupidity, airing of white grievances, and cruelty. While discriminating harshly against everyone who is not white and Christian, this administration harbors supporters who carry torches and shout “Jews will not replace us,” and has bubble-headed Congress Critters who scream about “Jewish Space Lasers”. Anti-semitism has become transactional. It has become a useful tool in the attack on Academia and the Democratic Party. It assumes that you can’t understand the history of the Jewish people without turning a blind eye to the punishing attacks on Palestinian women, children, and innocents in the Gaza Strip. I do not think there is a bigger way of showing disrespect for a group of people than using their historical struggles as a tool to encourage the murder of innocents. But then, our #FARTUS is planning a Trump Tower, hotel, and golf course in GAZA. The Trump Boyz–in between murdering endangered animals for sport–have been travelling the globe using the Tariff stick as a way to expand their Crime Syndicate. All, at the expense of the United States and its economy. This is from QUARTZ: “8 countries where Trump has been making new business deals, from Pakistan to Vietnam, Residential towers, golf courses, crypto — the deals didn’t stop on Inauguration Day.” This is the art of the steal in full display. All we need to see is Eric and Don Jr. flying in the palace in the sky and sitting at Trump’s Crypto Fundraiser now.
Businesses spearheaded by President Donald Trump have struck numerous deals since Trump returned to the White House in January.
Leading the way is the Trump Organization, a conglomerate privately owned by the president. With more than 250 subsidiaries, it serves as a holding company for Trump’s various hotels, residential real estate, towers, resorts, and golf courses across the world.
World Liberty Financial, a decentralized protocol that merges financial services and cryptocurrency, has also brokered deals. A Trump business entity owns 60% of World Liberty and is entitled to 75% of all revenue from coin sales. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. manage the company.
Here are the countries where the Trump empire has been dealmaking. The slide show that follows lists Vietnam. It’s in Hanoi, which reminds me of the Hanoi Hilton and the late Senator John McCain.
The project consists of a golf course, hotels, and luxury residences, and is slated for completion by 2029. In addition, Eric Trump is scheduled to meet with officials in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday to discuss a possible Trump Tower in the city, Reuters reports.
In April, the president imposed a “reciprocal” tariff rate of 46% on Vietnamese goods. While that policy is currently on a 90-day pause, it would deal a major blow to the Southeast Asian country if resumed. Goods exported to the U.S. account for 30% of Vietnam’s economy, according to IMF estimates, the largest of all U.S. trading partners. As the specter of these crippling levies looms, Hanoi has pledged to buy more American goods, including Boeing (BA) aircraft and agricultural products.
Other countries include Serbia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, and Singapore. Most of these discussions haven’t been covered by the Media other than Qatar, which came with the gift that “Palace in the sky” that will cause millions of dollars to refit before it’s handed over to Trump and his “library.” If there’s a bigger oxymoron than Trump Library, I’m waiting to hear it. Let’s just call it the warehouse facility for all the bribes and emoluments. We have to discuss that big ol’ party Trump threw for his richest customers. This is from the New York Times. “Hundreds Join Trump at ‘Exclusive’ Dinner, With Dreams of Crypto Fortunes in Mind. The guests were the biggest investors in President Trump’s memecoin, and they were greeted with chants of “shame” as they arrived at Trump National Golf Course.”
President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia golf club with the highest-paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
The gala dinner held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, many having flown to the United States from overseas.
At the club’s entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump. Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with The New York Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
“The past administration made your lives miserable,” Mr. Trump told the dinner guests, referring to the Biden administration’s enforcement actions against crypto companies.
The gala attendees made whooping noises while Mr. Trump spoke, and applauded as the president declared: “They were going after everybody. It was a disgrace frankly,” according to a video provided to The Times by a dinner guest.
Mr. Trump promised to change that approach. “There is a lot of sense in crypto. A lot of common sense in crypto,” he said. “And we’re honored to be working on helping everybody here.”
That sure is different than the 2021 #FARTUS who told Fox News. He just couldn’t wait to get into that scam, I guess. This is from the BBC. “Donald Trump calls Bitcoin ‘a scam against the dollar’. This is reported by BBC News Business Reporter Mary-Ann Russon.
Former US President Donald Trump has told Fox Business that he sees Bitcoin as a “scam” affecting the value of the US dollar.
“Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam,” Mr Trump said. “I don’t like it because it’s another currency competing against the dollar.”
He added that he wanted the dollar to be “the currency of the world”.
As per usual, the biggest losers from any more normalization of cryptocurrency will be his own voters. This is from the BBC. “The Bitcoin hum that is unsettling Trump’s MAGA heartlands.” This was written by Mike Wendling.
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation’s grid.
The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.
But it’s the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines – produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
“We can hear a constant buzzing,” says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. “It’s a constant, loud humming noise that you just can’t ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay.”
Such is Ms Campbell’s annoyance with Trump’s Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. “Right now I’m not real happy about that party,” she says.
So, build the nastiest factory in the backyard of the people least able to deal with it. That’s the sound of these Robber Barons that should be familiar to anyone who knows US history from its early 20th-century business escapades. The most interesting thing that’s popped up today is that Apple has got Trump in a lather, and the Equity Markets hate it. This is from Yahoo Finance: “Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq trim losses as Trump threatens Apple, EU with new tariffs.”
US stocks fell on Friday, on pace for weekly losses as investors assessed President Trump’s latest tariff threats and what his giant tax bill means for the deficit and the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) sank 0.4%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) also fell roughly 0.4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) backed off about 0.6%.
All three indexes trimmed steeper losses after Trump said on Friday that Apple (AAPL) must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones sold but not made in the US. The tech giant has begun shifting some manufacturing to India, with China, home to its key suppliers, locked in a trade war with the US. Apple shares fell 3% after Trump’s post on Truth Social.
At the same time, Trump threatened to hike the tariff on EU imports to “a straight 50%” beginning June 1 as trade talks between the two have stalled.
The president’s warnings shattered a more muted mood on Wall Street as investors wound down to the Memorial Day trading break on Monday.
It adds another supply chain complication for companies already worried about the potential hit to the economy from Trump’s tariff blitz. Earnings season has seen several companies hold off from providing full annual guidance thanks to uncertainty around tariffs.
All three major gauges are on track for a losing week. Stocks have suffered as deficit worries pushed up Treasury yields, intensified as Trump’s giant tax bill forged ahead. Wall Street is still weighing the economic impact of Trump’s revised bill, which cleared a key hurdle in the House vote for approval.
Well, I have always called him Orange Caligula. It seems we have a mad emperor on our hands. It didn’t help crypto either. “Bitcoin tumbles under $108K after Trump calls for 50% EU tariff. Trump’s tariff announcement sparks Bitcoin volatility, highlighting digital assets’ sensitivity to geopolitical events.” This is from Crypto Briefing and Vivian Nguyen.
The price of Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $108,000 early Friday after President Donald Trump called for steep tariffs on EU imports and threatened Apple with similar measures. The digital asset briefly touched $107,300 on Binance, pulling back from session highs above $111,000 as traders responded to fresh geopolitical tensions.
The US president on Friday proposed a 50% tariff on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, in a post on Truth Social. He cited trade imbalances and regulatory frictions as rationale for the move, declaring current EU-US trade dynamics “totally unacceptable.”
Apple is being threatened with 25% tariffs. Wow, how free market is this? Sounds a lot more like the old Soviet Command and Control model. Is he channeling Putin and Orban or just pissed about something Apple did at his party? This is from CNBC. “Trump says Apple must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones not made in the U.S.” Does he not realize how long it would take to even set up a factory, let alone train everyone? Doesn’t he know what this huge project would take to even break even?
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Friday that Apple will have to pay a tariff of 25% or more for iPhones made outside the United States.
“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Shares of Apple fell about 2% on Friday after the post.
Apple’s flagship phone is produced primarily in China, but the company has been shifting manufacturing to India in part because that country has a friendlier trade relationship with the U.S.
Some Wall Street analysts have estimated that moving iPhone production to the U.S. would raise the price of the Apple smartphone by at least 25%. Wedbush’s Dan Ives put the estimated cost of a U.S. iPhone at $3,500. The iPhone 16 Pro currently retails for about $1,000.
This is the latest jab at Apple from Trump, who over the past couple of weeks has ramped up pressure on the company and Cook to increase domestic manufacturing. Trump and Cook met at the White House on Tuesday, according to Politico.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he was not part of the meeting at the White House but that the Apple situation could be part of the Trump administration’s push to bring “precision manufacturing” back to the U.S.
“A large part of Apple’s components are in semiconductors. So we would like to have Apple help us make the semiconductor supply chain more secure,” Bessent said.
Cook gave $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and attended the inauguration in January. Apple has announced a $500 billion spend on U.S. development, including AI server production in Houston.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
So, I’m over 4200 words and probably have put you to sleep. You know how I am about Rabbit Holes. How much longer before the economy collapses? I’m actually beginning to wonder that. I know every time I see or hear him act so insane, I just collapse on the couch.
You have a very nice Memorial Day weekend. Please spend your time appreciating the many folks who gave their life for this country and its democracy. Don’t let the ones trying to destroy it get to you. There’s always the June 14th Flag Day “No Kings” protests and actions to look forward to and participate in. Just don’t watch that damn parade. The least we old folks can do is tank the ratings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
How about a little Warren Zevon and Prince?
#JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #academicFreedom #CryptoCurrencyPonziSchemeFromTrumpAndMusk #FARTUS #HarvardVTrump #NeoRobberBarons #NoKingsProtestOverFARTUSParade #TheHinduLoveGods #TrumpSoursApple #WeLiveInDarkTimes
-
Finally Friday Reads: Free Speech Attacks, Incompetency, Cruelty, and Grifting Galore Characterize the Trump Regime
“A modern-day interpretation of a 1871 Thomas Nast work seems fitting to commemorate Trump’s secret crypto dinner.” John Buss, repeat@1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
As the old Buddhist and Hobbit saying goes: “We live in Dark Times.” “Kali Yuga” is the Hindu expression. Darkness has always been an expression of decline in European History, hence the label “Dark Ages” for the period from the 5th to about the 8th century. Usually, these periods experience a decline in economic, intellectual, and cultural life. One of the most prevalent things about these times is that there is a paucity of written records. So, it’s difficult to capture the decline until a renaissance occurs. The breakdown of institutions occurred in these past times as well as the present. At the moment, we still have the ability to document the decline in the US. Many relate to it as a rebirth of fascist movements of the 20th century. It is a global feature at the moment, but no matter if it’s the Decline of the Roman Empire or the American Empire, there are signs.
The invention of the printing press is seen as one of the most powerful examples of an invention that can change the course of history. Access to information directly, for personal consideration, tends to create a citizenry with low tolerance of being shut off from thinking for themselves. Perhaps it’s why today’s dark leaders tend to go for education and the press, and why they attract “low information” and angry denizens. They also attract a cadre of greedy followers willing to help attack and grab the wealth of those who are powerless.
These are indeed Dark Times.
The fight for the light in the newly filed Harvard case against the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students is a prime cause of denying the citizenry access to anything that might cause them to question the goings-on here. But it also breaks into the tradition of the United States being the shining light of discovery, science, and reason. It’s why those of us who have had academic careers cherish and enjoy academic freedom. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is essential.
We have traditionally had a small number of women in my field of economics. It was between 4 to 10 percent in the late 70s and early 80s. It once rose to above 30%, but recently has settled on 27%. The STEM fields still reflect the struggle for inclusion. It’s even lower for Black Americans. However, my career has led me to have colleagues from a variety of countries, which is wonderful. In my early career, most of my women colleagues came from the Middle East or China. I was lucky enough to have a professor from Finland. She was brilliant. Believe me. During my academic studies and life, the joy of having colleagues from all over the world who could share things was a blessing in my life. A colleague from the Punjab who now teaches in Canada helped me improve my math chops to get me through some of the most complex models that you could imagine. He stayed with me after Katrina until the campus got its FEMA trailers. I also had a student from Taiwan staying with me. My last biggest joy, however, was writing 2 letters of recommendation for two Black New Orleans students to Rice. The US cannot afford to fall behind in a vast world of research. And, yet, here we are with a professional moron taking down the biggest academic center of research in the World. America’s first University, Harvard. If we do not train the world’s best minds, we will fall deeply behind in everything.
Today, we got the news of the Case Harvard filed against Trump. “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin From Revoking Harvard’s Ability To Enroll International Students.” This is from The Harvard Crimson. Harvard turned out one of my favorite journalists, Joy Reid, and you can read this article knowing there are more good journalists headed to jobs.
A federal judge granted Harvard a temporary restraining order in its suit to block the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke its authorization to enroll international students.
The order was issued less than two hours after the University requested a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to end its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification. Harvard had described the move as “unprecedented and retaliatory.”
United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that if the DHS’ move goes forward, Harvard “will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”
The TRO will go into effect immediately and will likely last until a hearing in the case. Burroughs has scheduled a May 27 status hearing and a May 29 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction. Harvard would need to file for a preliminary injunction to prevent the DHS’ directive from going into effect after the TRO expires.
Under the terms of the order, the DHS is barred from enforcing the Thursday move to strip Harvard of its SEVP status — and Harvard is no longer legally obligated to turn over the requested documents by Sunday.
Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, has adjudicated several cases relating to Harvard in the past. She oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT in 2021 against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s effort to force all international students who were enrolled online in the U.S. to leave the country. ICE ultimately rolled back the policy without a ruling from Burroughs.
Burroughs is also overseeing Harvard’s first lawsuit, filed in April, against the Trump administration over its nearly $3 billion funding cut.
You can see all of the destruction of the Age of Reason and the Scientific Age, and the Information Age, clearly in these actions and even more clearly in Trump’s appointments and the destruction of the Agencies most responsible for progress using science and reason. BB shared this Substack today, and I thought I’d post it here. It’s from Steven Beschloss, a journalist with a historian brother. “How Much More Stupidity Will Americans Endure? Reflecting on the escalating hostility to American values, principles, and decency in a 24-hour period.” I personally cannot take much more of this.
I admit: The daily drumbeat of stupidity is exhausting. I wish it were enough for me to simply document the dangerous ignorance of Trump and his sycophants, confident that we’ll soon be free of this regime and its power to spread their poison and cancerous hostility across the land and around the world. But the midterm elections will not arrive for another 17 months. It’s hard to overstate how much damage Trump, his cabinet and his kowtowing Republican Congress can cause between now and then.
That’s why most days I ask myself: Could today be the day Americans decide they’ve had enough and demand change? I have thought that there might be a single event that triggers millions of Americans taking to the streets or committing to a national strike in a public, unavoidable show of solidarity. But I have come to see that the daily drumbeat is numbing too many people, causing them to adapt to the cruelty, the racism, the hostility to democracy, the arrogant rejection of the Constitution and the rule of law. The metaphor of the frog in a slowly boiling pot of water is apt; by the time the frog’s figured out he needs to get out, it’s too late.
We’re not there yet. You can see that dedicated lawyers are filing suit against the corruption and criminality, judges are pushing back, outraged Americans are engaging in protests, some elected Democrats and other awake leaders are ringing alarm bells, a growing number of colleges and universities have refused to buckle under, some independent media are addressing the reality of authoritarianism in no uncertain terms. Americans have not surrendered their sanity or capacity to know what’s right and wrong, what’s true and false. The pot may be beginning to boil, but we can still see and feel what’s happening. We are still able to take action.
But I want to spotlight a series of events in a single 24-hour period that individually outrage me and, taken together, express a level of stupidity and sickness that should motivate more than a shrug of the head or an angry social media post. You may have already focused on—been outraged by—one or even all of these. But it’s important to not look at them as discrete events, but part and parcel of a single plot to convince us that we should accept a fascist regime bent on elevating white nationalism, oppressing people of color, silencing dissent and making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer and sicker. This effort is led by a malignant racist and sociopath who’s convinced the people around him to do what he says, no matter how ugly, cruel, blatantly false—or just plain stupid.
Two of the four events were in the Oval Office Wednesday—our Oval Office, the place where real presidents have made some of the most momentous decisions that improved the lives of Americans, created a safety net to overcome the ravages of the Great Depression and soften cap italism’s turbulence, helped defeat the Nazis and fascism, built global alliances that made the world safer, more stable and prosperous, and demonstrated a commitment to bend the arc of history toward justice.
Into this historical place of honor came South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, a calm and skilled diplomat who decades earlier had served alongside Nelson Mandela as his chief negotiator to end apartheid in South Africa. But just like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, he arrived for an ambush by a spiteful, narrow-minded man who spreads lies like Ukraine not Russia started the still-raging war. On this day he insisted with false information from fringe groups that South Africa, whose leaders are mostly Black, are committing genocide against white farmers, a false narrative that his top donor and South African-born Elon Musk has propagated.
At Trump’s urging, Ramaphosa answered a reporter’s question about what it would take to convince Trump there is no such white genocide. “It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here,” he calmly said, referencing South African golfer Ernie Els who was in the room. “When we have talks between us around a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them.”
But South Africa’s president was being set up. Trump interrupted him to play a video pushing the lies, then he showed photos meant to “prove” how much death there was, even leading Trump to mutter, “Death, death, death, horrible death, death.”
Except the video clip showing a long line of white wooden crosses were not actual burial sites for white farmers, as Trump insisted, but were from a 2020 protest against farm murders over the years. Except the photo Trump showed of people lifting body bags, insisting they “are all white farmers that are being buried,” was actually of humanitarian workers burying bodies in Congo. Except for all the claims of genocide among white farmers, meant to justify bringing white Afrikaners as preferred refugees to America now, there were a total of 44 murders in farming communities last year, Reuters reports, with over 26,000 in the country overall.
President Ramaphosa came to discuss trade and economic partnership. Yet Trump brought him into the Oval Office to ambush and abuse him, push his white nationalist agenda, spread more widely his egregious lies and showcase that—while illegally deporting people of color—only whites deserve America’s protection from presumed persecution. “We were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them,” Ramaphosa noted, but Trump was not listening.
There is a daily drumbeat of stupidity, airing of white grievances, and cruelty. While discriminating harshly against everyone who is not white and Christian, this administration harbors supporters who carry torches and shout “Jews will not replace us,” and has bubble-headed Congress Critters who scream about “Jewish Space Lasers”. Anti-semitism has become transactional. It has become a useful tool in the attack on Academia and the Democratic Party. It assumes that you can’t understand the history of the Jewish people without turning a blind eye to the punishing attacks on Palestinian women, children, and innocents in the Gaza Strip. I do not think there is a bigger way of showing disrespect for a group of people than using their historical struggles as a tool to encourage the murder of innocents. But then, our #FARTUS is planning a Trump Tower, hotel, and golf course in GAZA. The Trump Boyz–in between murdering endangered animals for sport–have been travelling the globe using the Tariff stick as a way to expand their Crime Syndicate. All, at the expense of the United States and its economy. This is from QUARTZ: “8 countries where Trump has been making new business deals, from Pakistan to Vietnam, Residential towers, golf courses, crypto — the deals didn’t stop on Inauguration Day.” This is the art of the steal in full display. All we need to see is Eric and Don Jr. flying in the palace in the sky and sitting at Trump’s Crypto Fundraiser now.
Businesses spearheaded by President Donald Trump have struck numerous deals since Trump returned to the White House in January.
Leading the way is the Trump Organization, a conglomerate privately owned by the president. With more than 250 subsidiaries, it serves as a holding company for Trump’s various hotels, residential real estate, towers, resorts, and golf courses across the world.
World Liberty Financial, a decentralized protocol that merges financial services and cryptocurrency, has also brokered deals. A Trump business entity owns 60% of World Liberty and is entitled to 75% of all revenue from coin sales. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. manage the company.
Here are the countries where the Trump empire has been dealmaking. The slide show that follows lists Vietnam. It’s in Hanoi, which reminds me of the Hanoi Hilton and the late Senator John McCain.
The project consists of a golf course, hotels, and luxury residences, and is slated for completion by 2029. In addition, Eric Trump is scheduled to meet with officials in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday to discuss a possible Trump Tower in the city, Reuters reports.
In April, the president imposed a “reciprocal” tariff rate of 46% on Vietnamese goods. While that policy is currently on a 90-day pause, it would deal a major blow to the Southeast Asian country if resumed. Goods exported to the U.S. account for 30% of Vietnam’s economy, according to IMF estimates, the largest of all U.S. trading partners. As the specter of these crippling levies looms, Hanoi has pledged to buy more American goods, including Boeing (BA) aircraft and agricultural products.
Other countries include Serbia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, and Singapore. Most of these discussions haven’t been covered by the Media other than Qatar, which came with the gift that “Palace in the sky” that will cause millions of dollars to refit before it’s handed over to Trump and his “library.” If there’s a bigger oxymoron than Trump Library, I’m waiting to hear it. Let’s just call it the warehouse facility for all the bribes and emoluments. We have to discuss that big ol’ party Trump threw for his richest customers. This is from the New York Times. “Hundreds Join Trump at ‘Exclusive’ Dinner, With Dreams of Crypto Fortunes in Mind. The guests were the biggest investors in President Trump’s memecoin, and they were greeted with chants of “shame” as they arrived at Trump National Golf Course.”
President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia golf club with the highest-paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
The gala dinner held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, many having flown to the United States from overseas.
At the club’s entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump. Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with The New York Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
“The past administration made your lives miserable,” Mr. Trump told the dinner guests, referring to the Biden administration’s enforcement actions against crypto companies.
The gala attendees made whooping noises while Mr. Trump spoke, and applauded as the president declared: “They were going after everybody. It was a disgrace frankly,” according to a video provided to The Times by a dinner guest.
Mr. Trump promised to change that approach. “There is a lot of sense in crypto. A lot of common sense in crypto,” he said. “And we’re honored to be working on helping everybody here.”
That sure is different than the 2021 #FARTUS who told Fox News. He just couldn’t wait to get into that scam, I guess. This is from the BBC. “Donald Trump calls Bitcoin ‘a scam against the dollar’. This is reported by BBC News Business Reporter Mary-Ann Russon.
Former US President Donald Trump has told Fox Business that he sees Bitcoin as a “scam” affecting the value of the US dollar.
“Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam,” Mr Trump said. “I don’t like it because it’s another currency competing against the dollar.”
He added that he wanted the dollar to be “the currency of the world”.
As per usual, the biggest losers from any more normalization of cryptocurrency will be his own voters. This is from the BBC. “The Bitcoin hum that is unsettling Trump’s MAGA heartlands.” This was written by Mike Wendling.
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation’s grid.
The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.
But it’s the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines – produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
“We can hear a constant buzzing,” says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. “It’s a constant, loud humming noise that you just can’t ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay.”
Such is Ms Campbell’s annoyance with Trump’s Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. “Right now I’m not real happy about that party,” she says.
So, build the nastiest factory in the backyard of the people least able to deal with it. That’s the sound of these Robber Barons that should be familiar to anyone who knows US history from its early 20th-century business escapades. The most interesting thing that’s popped up today is that Apple has got Trump in a lather, and the Equity Markets hate it. This is from Yahoo Finance: “Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq trim losses as Trump threatens Apple, EU with new tariffs.”
US stocks fell on Friday, on pace for weekly losses as investors assessed President Trump’s latest tariff threats and what his giant tax bill means for the deficit and the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) sank 0.4%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) also fell roughly 0.4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) backed off about 0.6%.
All three indexes trimmed steeper losses after Trump said on Friday that Apple (AAPL) must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones sold but not made in the US. The tech giant has begun shifting some manufacturing to India, with China, home to its key suppliers, locked in a trade war with the US. Apple shares fell 3% after Trump’s post on Truth Social.
At the same time, Trump threatened to hike the tariff on EU imports to “a straight 50%” beginning June 1 as trade talks between the two have stalled.
The president’s warnings shattered a more muted mood on Wall Street as investors wound down to the Memorial Day trading break on Monday.
It adds another supply chain complication for companies already worried about the potential hit to the economy from Trump’s tariff blitz. Earnings season has seen several companies hold off from providing full annual guidance thanks to uncertainty around tariffs.
All three major gauges are on track for a losing week. Stocks have suffered as deficit worries pushed up Treasury yields, intensified as Trump’s giant tax bill forged ahead. Wall Street is still weighing the economic impact of Trump’s revised bill, which cleared a key hurdle in the House vote for approval.
Well, I have always called him Orange Caligula. It seems we have a mad emperor on our hands. It didn’t help crypto either. “Bitcoin tumbles under $108K after Trump calls for 50% EU tariff. Trump’s tariff announcement sparks Bitcoin volatility, highlighting digital assets’ sensitivity to geopolitical events.” This is from Crypto Briefing and Vivian Nguyen.
The price of Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $108,000 early Friday after President Donald Trump called for steep tariffs on EU imports and threatened Apple with similar measures. The digital asset briefly touched $107,300 on Binance, pulling back from session highs above $111,000 as traders responded to fresh geopolitical tensions.
The US president on Friday proposed a 50% tariff on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, in a post on Truth Social. He cited trade imbalances and regulatory frictions as rationale for the move, declaring current EU-US trade dynamics “totally unacceptable.”
Apple is being threatened with 25% tariffs. Wow, how free market is this? Sounds a lot more like the old Soviet Command and Control model. Is he channeling Putin and Orban or just pissed about something Apple did at his party? This is from CNBC. “Trump says Apple must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones not made in the U.S.” Does he not realize how long it would take to even set up a factory, let alone train everyone? Doesn’t he know what this huge project would take to even break even?
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Friday that Apple will have to pay a tariff of 25% or more for iPhones made outside the United States.
“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Shares of Apple fell about 2% on Friday after the post.
Apple’s flagship phone is produced primarily in China, but the company has been shifting manufacturing to India in part because that country has a friendlier trade relationship with the U.S.
Some Wall Street analysts have estimated that moving iPhone production to the U.S. would raise the price of the Apple smartphone by at least 25%. Wedbush’s Dan Ives put the estimated cost of a U.S. iPhone at $3,500. The iPhone 16 Pro currently retails for about $1,000.
This is the latest jab at Apple from Trump, who over the past couple of weeks has ramped up pressure on the company and Cook to increase domestic manufacturing. Trump and Cook met at the White House on Tuesday, according to Politico.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he was not part of the meeting at the White House but that the Apple situation could be part of the Trump administration’s push to bring “precision manufacturing” back to the U.S.
“A large part of Apple’s components are in semiconductors. So we would like to have Apple help us make the semiconductor supply chain more secure,” Bessent said.
Cook gave $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and attended the inauguration in January. Apple has announced a $500 billion spend on U.S. development, including AI server production in Houston.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
So, I’m over 4200 words and probably have put you to sleep. You know how I am about Rabbit Holes. How much longer before the economy collapses? I’m actually beginning to wonder that. I know every time I see or hear him act so insane, I just collapse on the couch.
You have a very nice Memorial Day weekend. Please spend your time appreciating the many folks who gave their life for this country and its democracy. Don’t let the ones trying to destroy it get to you. There’s always the June 14th Flag Day “No Kings” protests and actions to look forward to and participate in. Just don’t watch that damn parade. The least we old folks can do is tank the ratings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
How about a little Warren Zevon and Prince?
#JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #academicFreedom #CryptoCurrencyPonziSchemeFromTrumpAndMusk #FARTUS #HarvardVTrump #NeoRobberBarons #NoKingsProtestOverFARTUSParade #TheHinduLoveGods #TrumpSoursApple #WeLiveInDarkTimes
-
Finally Friday Reads: Free Speech Attacks, Incompetency, Cruelty, and Grifting Galore Characterize the Trump Regime
“A modern-day interpretation of a 1871 Thomas Nast work seems fitting to commemorate Trump’s secret crypto dinner.” John Buss, repeat@1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
As the old Buddhist and Hobbit saying goes: “We live in Dark Times.” “Kali Yuga” is the Hindu expression. Darkness has always been an expression of decline in European History, hence the label “Dark Ages” for the period from the 5th to about the 8th century. Usually, these periods experience a decline in economic, intellectual, and cultural life. One of the most prevalent things about these times is that there is a paucity of written records. So, it’s difficult to capture the decline until a renaissance occurs. The breakdown of institutions occurred in these past times as well as the present. At the moment, we still have the ability to document the decline in the US. Many relate to it as a rebirth of fascist movements of the 20th century. It is a global feature at the moment, but no matter if it’s the Decline of the Roman Empire or the American Empire, there are signs.
The invention of the printing press is seen as one of the most powerful examples of an invention that can change the course of history. Access to information directly, for personal consideration, tends to create a citizenry with low tolerance of being shut off from thinking for themselves. Perhaps it’s why today’s dark leaders tend to go for education and the press, and why they attract “low information” and angry denizens. They also attract a cadre of greedy followers willing to help attack and grab the wealth of those who are powerless.
These are indeed Dark Times.
The fight for the light in the newly filed Harvard case against the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students is a prime cause of denying the citizenry access to anything that might cause them to question the goings-on here. But it also breaks into the tradition of the United States being the shining light of discovery, science, and reason. It’s why those of us who have had academic careers cherish and enjoy academic freedom. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is essential.
We have traditionally had a small number of women in my field of economics. It was between 4 to 10 percent in the late 70s and early 80s. It once rose to above 30%, but recently has settled on 27%. The STEM fields still reflect the struggle for inclusion. It’s even lower for Black Americans. However, my career has led me to have colleagues from a variety of countries, which is wonderful. In my early career, most of my women colleagues came from the Middle East or China. I was lucky enough to have a professor from Finland. She was brilliant. Believe me. During my academic studies and life, the joy of having colleagues from all over the world who could share things was a blessing in my life. A colleague from the Punjab who now teaches in Canada helped me improve my math chops to get me through some of the most complex models that you could imagine. He stayed with me after Katrina until the campus got its FEMA trailers. I also had a student from Taiwan staying with me. My last biggest joy, however, was writing 2 letters of recommendation for two Black New Orleans students to Rice. The US cannot afford to fall behind in a vast world of research. And, yet, here we are with a professional moron taking down the biggest academic center of research in the World. America’s first University, Harvard. If we do not train the world’s best minds, we will fall deeply behind in everything.
Today, we got the news of the Case Harvard filed against Trump. “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin From Revoking Harvard’s Ability To Enroll International Students.” This is from The Harvard Crimson. Harvard turned out one of my favorite journalists, Joy Reid, and you can read this article knowing there are more good journalists headed to jobs.
A federal judge granted Harvard a temporary restraining order in its suit to block the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke its authorization to enroll international students.
The order was issued less than two hours after the University requested a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to end its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification. Harvard had described the move as “unprecedented and retaliatory.”
United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that if the DHS’ move goes forward, Harvard “will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”
The TRO will go into effect immediately and will likely last until a hearing in the case. Burroughs has scheduled a May 27 status hearing and a May 29 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction. Harvard would need to file for a preliminary injunction to prevent the DHS’ directive from going into effect after the TRO expires.
Under the terms of the order, the DHS is barred from enforcing the Thursday move to strip Harvard of its SEVP status — and Harvard is no longer legally obligated to turn over the requested documents by Sunday.
Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, has adjudicated several cases relating to Harvard in the past. She oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT in 2021 against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s effort to force all international students who were enrolled online in the U.S. to leave the country. ICE ultimately rolled back the policy without a ruling from Burroughs.
Burroughs is also overseeing Harvard’s first lawsuit, filed in April, against the Trump administration over its nearly $3 billion funding cut.
You can see all of the destruction of the Age of Reason and the Scientific Age, and the Information Age, clearly in these actions and even more clearly in Trump’s appointments and the destruction of the Agencies most responsible for progress using science and reason. BB shared this Substack today, and I thought I’d post it here. It’s from Steven Beschloss, a journalist with a historian brother. “How Much More Stupidity Will Americans Endure? Reflecting on the escalating hostility to American values, principles, and decency in a 24-hour period.” I personally cannot take much more of this.
I admit: The daily drumbeat of stupidity is exhausting. I wish it were enough for me to simply document the dangerous ignorance of Trump and his sycophants, confident that we’ll soon be free of this regime and its power to spread their poison and cancerous hostility across the land and around the world. But the midterm elections will not arrive for another 17 months. It’s hard to overstate how much damage Trump, his cabinet and his kowtowing Republican Congress can cause between now and then.
That’s why most days I ask myself: Could today be the day Americans decide they’ve had enough and demand change? I have thought that there might be a single event that triggers millions of Americans taking to the streets or committing to a national strike in a public, unavoidable show of solidarity. But I have come to see that the daily drumbeat is numbing too many people, causing them to adapt to the cruelty, the racism, the hostility to democracy, the arrogant rejection of the Constitution and the rule of law. The metaphor of the frog in a slowly boiling pot of water is apt; by the time the frog’s figured out he needs to get out, it’s too late.
We’re not there yet. You can see that dedicated lawyers are filing suit against the corruption and criminality, judges are pushing back, outraged Americans are engaging in protests, some elected Democrats and other awake leaders are ringing alarm bells, a growing number of colleges and universities have refused to buckle under, some independent media are addressing the reality of authoritarianism in no uncertain terms. Americans have not surrendered their sanity or capacity to know what’s right and wrong, what’s true and false. The pot may be beginning to boil, but we can still see and feel what’s happening. We are still able to take action.
But I want to spotlight a series of events in a single 24-hour period that individually outrage me and, taken together, express a level of stupidity and sickness that should motivate more than a shrug of the head or an angry social media post. You may have already focused on—been outraged by—one or even all of these. But it’s important to not look at them as discrete events, but part and parcel of a single plot to convince us that we should accept a fascist regime bent on elevating white nationalism, oppressing people of color, silencing dissent and making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer and sicker. This effort is led by a malignant racist and sociopath who’s convinced the people around him to do what he says, no matter how ugly, cruel, blatantly false—or just plain stupid.
Two of the four events were in the Oval Office Wednesday—our Oval Office, the place where real presidents have made some of the most momentous decisions that improved the lives of Americans, created a safety net to overcome the ravages of the Great Depression and soften cap italism’s turbulence, helped defeat the Nazis and fascism, built global alliances that made the world safer, more stable and prosperous, and demonstrated a commitment to bend the arc of history toward justice.
Into this historical place of honor came South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, a calm and skilled diplomat who decades earlier had served alongside Nelson Mandela as his chief negotiator to end apartheid in South Africa. But just like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, he arrived for an ambush by a spiteful, narrow-minded man who spreads lies like Ukraine not Russia started the still-raging war. On this day he insisted with false information from fringe groups that South Africa, whose leaders are mostly Black, are committing genocide against white farmers, a false narrative that his top donor and South African-born Elon Musk has propagated.
At Trump’s urging, Ramaphosa answered a reporter’s question about what it would take to convince Trump there is no such white genocide. “It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here,” he calmly said, referencing South African golfer Ernie Els who was in the room. “When we have talks between us around a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them.”
But South Africa’s president was being set up. Trump interrupted him to play a video pushing the lies, then he showed photos meant to “prove” how much death there was, even leading Trump to mutter, “Death, death, death, horrible death, death.”
Except the video clip showing a long line of white wooden crosses were not actual burial sites for white farmers, as Trump insisted, but were from a 2020 protest against farm murders over the years. Except the photo Trump showed of people lifting body bags, insisting they “are all white farmers that are being buried,” was actually of humanitarian workers burying bodies in Congo. Except for all the claims of genocide among white farmers, meant to justify bringing white Afrikaners as preferred refugees to America now, there were a total of 44 murders in farming communities last year, Reuters reports, with over 26,000 in the country overall.
President Ramaphosa came to discuss trade and economic partnership. Yet Trump brought him into the Oval Office to ambush and abuse him, push his white nationalist agenda, spread more widely his egregious lies and showcase that—while illegally deporting people of color—only whites deserve America’s protection from presumed persecution. “We were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them,” Ramaphosa noted, but Trump was not listening.
There is a daily drumbeat of stupidity, airing of white grievances, and cruelty. While discriminating harshly against everyone who is not white and Christian, this administration harbors supporters who carry torches and shout “Jews will not replace us,” and has bubble-headed Congress Critters who scream about “Jewish Space Lasers”. Anti-semitism has become transactional. It has become a useful tool in the attack on Academia and the Democratic Party. It assumes that you can’t understand the history of the Jewish people without turning a blind eye to the punishing attacks on Palestinian women, children, and innocents in the Gaza Strip. I do not think there is a bigger way of showing disrespect for a group of people than using their historical struggles as a tool to encourage the murder of innocents. But then, our #FARTUS is planning a Trump Tower, hotel, and golf course in GAZA. The Trump Boyz–in between murdering endangered animals for sport–have been travelling the globe using the Tariff stick as a way to expand their Crime Syndicate. All, at the expense of the United States and its economy. This is from QUARTZ: “8 countries where Trump has been making new business deals, from Pakistan to Vietnam, Residential towers, golf courses, crypto — the deals didn’t stop on Inauguration Day.” This is the art of the steal in full display. All we need to see is Eric and Don Jr. flying in the palace in the sky and sitting at Trump’s Crypto Fundraiser now.
Businesses spearheaded by President Donald Trump have struck numerous deals since Trump returned to the White House in January.
Leading the way is the Trump Organization, a conglomerate privately owned by the president. With more than 250 subsidiaries, it serves as a holding company for Trump’s various hotels, residential real estate, towers, resorts, and golf courses across the world.
World Liberty Financial, a decentralized protocol that merges financial services and cryptocurrency, has also brokered deals. A Trump business entity owns 60% of World Liberty and is entitled to 75% of all revenue from coin sales. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. manage the company.
Here are the countries where the Trump empire has been dealmaking. The slide show that follows lists Vietnam. It’s in Hanoi, which reminds me of the Hanoi Hilton and the late Senator John McCain.
The project consists of a golf course, hotels, and luxury residences, and is slated for completion by 2029. In addition, Eric Trump is scheduled to meet with officials in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday to discuss a possible Trump Tower in the city, Reuters reports.
In April, the president imposed a “reciprocal” tariff rate of 46% on Vietnamese goods. While that policy is currently on a 90-day pause, it would deal a major blow to the Southeast Asian country if resumed. Goods exported to the U.S. account for 30% of Vietnam’s economy, according to IMF estimates, the largest of all U.S. trading partners. As the specter of these crippling levies looms, Hanoi has pledged to buy more American goods, including Boeing (BA) aircraft and agricultural products.
Other countries include Serbia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, and Singapore. Most of these discussions haven’t been covered by the Media other than Qatar, which came with the gift that “Palace in the sky” that will cause millions of dollars to refit before it’s handed over to Trump and his “library.” If there’s a bigger oxymoron than Trump Library, I’m waiting to hear it. Let’s just call it the warehouse facility for all the bribes and emoluments. We have to discuss that big ol’ party Trump threw for his richest customers. This is from the New York Times. “Hundreds Join Trump at ‘Exclusive’ Dinner, With Dreams of Crypto Fortunes in Mind. The guests were the biggest investors in President Trump’s memecoin, and they were greeted with chants of “shame” as they arrived at Trump National Golf Course.”
President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia golf club with the highest-paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
The gala dinner held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, many having flown to the United States from overseas.
At the club’s entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump. Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with The New York Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
“The past administration made your lives miserable,” Mr. Trump told the dinner guests, referring to the Biden administration’s enforcement actions against crypto companies.
The gala attendees made whooping noises while Mr. Trump spoke, and applauded as the president declared: “They were going after everybody. It was a disgrace frankly,” according to a video provided to The Times by a dinner guest.
Mr. Trump promised to change that approach. “There is a lot of sense in crypto. A lot of common sense in crypto,” he said. “And we’re honored to be working on helping everybody here.”
That sure is different than the 2021 #FARTUS who told Fox News. He just couldn’t wait to get into that scam, I guess. This is from the BBC. “Donald Trump calls Bitcoin ‘a scam against the dollar’. This is reported by BBC News Business Reporter Mary-Ann Russon.
Former US President Donald Trump has told Fox Business that he sees Bitcoin as a “scam” affecting the value of the US dollar.
“Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam,” Mr Trump said. “I don’t like it because it’s another currency competing against the dollar.”
He added that he wanted the dollar to be “the currency of the world”.
As per usual, the biggest losers from any more normalization of cryptocurrency will be his own voters. This is from the BBC. “The Bitcoin hum that is unsettling Trump’s MAGA heartlands.” This was written by Mike Wendling.
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation’s grid.
The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.
But it’s the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines – produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
“We can hear a constant buzzing,” says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. “It’s a constant, loud humming noise that you just can’t ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay.”
Such is Ms Campbell’s annoyance with Trump’s Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. “Right now I’m not real happy about that party,” she says.
So, build the nastiest factory in the backyard of the people least able to deal with it. That’s the sound of these Robber Barons that should be familiar to anyone who knows US history from its early 20th-century business escapades. The most interesting thing that’s popped up today is that Apple has got Trump in a lather, and the Equity Markets hate it. This is from Yahoo Finance: “Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq trim losses as Trump threatens Apple, EU with new tariffs.”
US stocks fell on Friday, on pace for weekly losses as investors assessed President Trump’s latest tariff threats and what his giant tax bill means for the deficit and the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) sank 0.4%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) also fell roughly 0.4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) backed off about 0.6%.
All three indexes trimmed steeper losses after Trump said on Friday that Apple (AAPL) must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones sold but not made in the US. The tech giant has begun shifting some manufacturing to India, with China, home to its key suppliers, locked in a trade war with the US. Apple shares fell 3% after Trump’s post on Truth Social.
At the same time, Trump threatened to hike the tariff on EU imports to “a straight 50%” beginning June 1 as trade talks between the two have stalled.
The president’s warnings shattered a more muted mood on Wall Street as investors wound down to the Memorial Day trading break on Monday.
It adds another supply chain complication for companies already worried about the potential hit to the economy from Trump’s tariff blitz. Earnings season has seen several companies hold off from providing full annual guidance thanks to uncertainty around tariffs.
All three major gauges are on track for a losing week. Stocks have suffered as deficit worries pushed up Treasury yields, intensified as Trump’s giant tax bill forged ahead. Wall Street is still weighing the economic impact of Trump’s revised bill, which cleared a key hurdle in the House vote for approval.
Well, I have always called him Orange Caligula. It seems we have a mad emperor on our hands. It didn’t help crypto either. “Bitcoin tumbles under $108K after Trump calls for 50% EU tariff. Trump’s tariff announcement sparks Bitcoin volatility, highlighting digital assets’ sensitivity to geopolitical events.” This is from Crypto Briefing and Vivian Nguyen.
The price of Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $108,000 early Friday after President Donald Trump called for steep tariffs on EU imports and threatened Apple with similar measures. The digital asset briefly touched $107,300 on Binance, pulling back from session highs above $111,000 as traders responded to fresh geopolitical tensions.
The US president on Friday proposed a 50% tariff on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, in a post on Truth Social. He cited trade imbalances and regulatory frictions as rationale for the move, declaring current EU-US trade dynamics “totally unacceptable.”
Apple is being threatened with 25% tariffs. Wow, how free market is this? Sounds a lot more like the old Soviet Command and Control model. Is he channeling Putin and Orban or just pissed about something Apple did at his party? This is from CNBC. “Trump says Apple must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones not made in the U.S.” Does he not realize how long it would take to even set up a factory, let alone train everyone? Doesn’t he know what this huge project would take to even break even?
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Friday that Apple will have to pay a tariff of 25% or more for iPhones made outside the United States.
“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Shares of Apple fell about 2% on Friday after the post.
Apple’s flagship phone is produced primarily in China, but the company has been shifting manufacturing to India in part because that country has a friendlier trade relationship with the U.S.
Some Wall Street analysts have estimated that moving iPhone production to the U.S. would raise the price of the Apple smartphone by at least 25%. Wedbush’s Dan Ives put the estimated cost of a U.S. iPhone at $3,500. The iPhone 16 Pro currently retails for about $1,000.
This is the latest jab at Apple from Trump, who over the past couple of weeks has ramped up pressure on the company and Cook to increase domestic manufacturing. Trump and Cook met at the White House on Tuesday, according to Politico.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he was not part of the meeting at the White House but that the Apple situation could be part of the Trump administration’s push to bring “precision manufacturing” back to the U.S.
“A large part of Apple’s components are in semiconductors. So we would like to have Apple help us make the semiconductor supply chain more secure,” Bessent said.
Cook gave $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and attended the inauguration in January. Apple has announced a $500 billion spend on U.S. development, including AI server production in Houston.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
So, I’m over 4200 words and probably have put you to sleep. You know how I am about Rabbit Holes. How much longer before the economy collapses? I’m actually beginning to wonder that. I know every time I see or hear him act so insane, I just collapse on the couch.
You have a very nice Memorial Day weekend. Please spend your time appreciating the many folks who gave their life for this country and its democracy. Don’t let the ones trying to destroy it get to you. There’s always the June 14th Flag Day “No Kings” protests and actions to look forward to and participate in. Just don’t watch that damn parade. The least we old folks can do is tank the ratings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
How about a little Warren Zevon and Prince?
#JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #academicFreedom #CryptoCurrencyPonziSchemeFromTrumpAndMusk #FARTUS #HarvardVTrump #NeoRobberBarons #NoKingsProtestOverFARTUSParade #TheHinduLoveGods #TrumpSoursApple #WeLiveInDarkTimes
-
Finally Friday Reads: Free Speech Attacks, Incompetency, Cruelty, and Grifting Galore Characterize the Trump Regime
“A modern-day interpretation of a 1871 Thomas Nast work seems fitting to commemorate Trump’s secret crypto dinner.” John Buss, repeat@1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
As the old Buddhist and Hobbit saying goes: “We live in Dark Times.” “Kali Yuga” is the Hindu expression. Darkness has always been an expression of decline in European History, hence the label “Dark Ages” for the period from the 5th to about the 8th century. Usually, these periods experience a decline in economic, intellectual, and cultural life. One of the most prevalent things about these times is that there is a paucity of written records. So, it’s difficult to capture the decline until a renaissance occurs. The breakdown of institutions occurred in these past times as well as the present. At the moment, we still have the ability to document the decline in the US. Many relate to it as a rebirth of fascist movements of the 20th century. It is a global feature at the moment, but no matter if it’s the Decline of the Roman Empire or the American Empire, there are signs.
The invention of the printing press is seen as one of the most powerful examples of an invention that can change the course of history. Access to information directly, for personal consideration, tends to create a citizenry with low tolerance of being shut off from thinking for themselves. Perhaps it’s why today’s dark leaders tend to go for education and the press, and why they attract “low information” and angry denizens. They also attract a cadre of greedy followers willing to help attack and grab the wealth of those who are powerless.
These are indeed Dark Times.
The fight for the light in the newly filed Harvard case against the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students is a prime cause of denying the citizenry access to anything that might cause them to question the goings-on here. But it also breaks into the tradition of the United States being the shining light of discovery, science, and reason. It’s why those of us who have had academic careers cherish and enjoy academic freedom. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is essential.
We have traditionally had a small number of women in my field of economics. It was between 4 to 10 percent in the late 70s and early 80s. It once rose to above 30%, but recently has settled on 27%. The STEM fields still reflect the struggle for inclusion. It’s even lower for Black Americans. However, my career has led me to have colleagues from a variety of countries, which is wonderful. In my early career, most of my women colleagues came from the Middle East or China. I was lucky enough to have a professor from Finland. She was brilliant. Believe me. During my academic studies and life, the joy of having colleagues from all over the world who could share things was a blessing in my life. A colleague from the Punjab who now teaches in Canada helped me improve my math chops to get me through some of the most complex models that you could imagine. He stayed with me after Katrina until the campus got its FEMA trailers. I also had a student from Taiwan staying with me. My last biggest joy, however, was writing 2 letters of recommendation for two Black New Orleans students to Rice. The US cannot afford to fall behind in a vast world of research. And, yet, here we are with a professional moron taking down the biggest academic center of research in the World. America’s first University, Harvard. If we do not train the world’s best minds, we will fall deeply behind in everything.
Today, we got the news of the Case Harvard filed against Trump. “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin From Revoking Harvard’s Ability To Enroll International Students.” This is from The Harvard Crimson. Harvard turned out one of my favorite journalists, Joy Reid, and you can read this article knowing there are more good journalists headed to jobs.
A federal judge granted Harvard a temporary restraining order in its suit to block the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke its authorization to enroll international students.
The order was issued less than two hours after the University requested a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to end its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification. Harvard had described the move as “unprecedented and retaliatory.”
United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that if the DHS’ move goes forward, Harvard “will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”
The TRO will go into effect immediately and will likely last until a hearing in the case. Burroughs has scheduled a May 27 status hearing and a May 29 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction. Harvard would need to file for a preliminary injunction to prevent the DHS’ directive from going into effect after the TRO expires.
Under the terms of the order, the DHS is barred from enforcing the Thursday move to strip Harvard of its SEVP status — and Harvard is no longer legally obligated to turn over the requested documents by Sunday.
Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, has adjudicated several cases relating to Harvard in the past. She oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT in 2021 against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s effort to force all international students who were enrolled online in the U.S. to leave the country. ICE ultimately rolled back the policy without a ruling from Burroughs.
Burroughs is also overseeing Harvard’s first lawsuit, filed in April, against the Trump administration over its nearly $3 billion funding cut.
You can see all of the destruction of the Age of Reason and the Scientific Age, and the Information Age, clearly in these actions and even more clearly in Trump’s appointments and the destruction of the Agencies most responsible for progress using science and reason. BB shared this Substack today, and I thought I’d post it here. It’s from Steven Beschloss, a journalist with a historian brother. “How Much More Stupidity Will Americans Endure? Reflecting on the escalating hostility to American values, principles, and decency in a 24-hour period.” I personally cannot take much more of this.
I admit: The daily drumbeat of stupidity is exhausting. I wish it were enough for me to simply document the dangerous ignorance of Trump and his sycophants, confident that we’ll soon be free of this regime and its power to spread their poison and cancerous hostility across the land and around the world. But the midterm elections will not arrive for another 17 months. It’s hard to overstate how much damage Trump, his cabinet and his kowtowing Republican Congress can cause between now and then.
That’s why most days I ask myself: Could today be the day Americans decide they’ve had enough and demand change? I have thought that there might be a single event that triggers millions of Americans taking to the streets or committing to a national strike in a public, unavoidable show of solidarity. But I have come to see that the daily drumbeat is numbing too many people, causing them to adapt to the cruelty, the racism, the hostility to democracy, the arrogant rejection of the Constitution and the rule of law. The metaphor of the frog in a slowly boiling pot of water is apt; by the time the frog’s figured out he needs to get out, it’s too late.
We’re not there yet. You can see that dedicated lawyers are filing suit against the corruption and criminality, judges are pushing back, outraged Americans are engaging in protests, some elected Democrats and other awake leaders are ringing alarm bells, a growing number of colleges and universities have refused to buckle under, some independent media are addressing the reality of authoritarianism in no uncertain terms. Americans have not surrendered their sanity or capacity to know what’s right and wrong, what’s true and false. The pot may be beginning to boil, but we can still see and feel what’s happening. We are still able to take action.
But I want to spotlight a series of events in a single 24-hour period that individually outrage me and, taken together, express a level of stupidity and sickness that should motivate more than a shrug of the head or an angry social media post. You may have already focused on—been outraged by—one or even all of these. But it’s important to not look at them as discrete events, but part and parcel of a single plot to convince us that we should accept a fascist regime bent on elevating white nationalism, oppressing people of color, silencing dissent and making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer and sicker. This effort is led by a malignant racist and sociopath who’s convinced the people around him to do what he says, no matter how ugly, cruel, blatantly false—or just plain stupid.
Two of the four events were in the Oval Office Wednesday—our Oval Office, the place where real presidents have made some of the most momentous decisions that improved the lives of Americans, created a safety net to overcome the ravages of the Great Depression and soften cap italism’s turbulence, helped defeat the Nazis and fascism, built global alliances that made the world safer, more stable and prosperous, and demonstrated a commitment to bend the arc of history toward justice.
Into this historical place of honor came South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, a calm and skilled diplomat who decades earlier had served alongside Nelson Mandela as his chief negotiator to end apartheid in South Africa. But just like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, he arrived for an ambush by a spiteful, narrow-minded man who spreads lies like Ukraine not Russia started the still-raging war. On this day he insisted with false information from fringe groups that South Africa, whose leaders are mostly Black, are committing genocide against white farmers, a false narrative that his top donor and South African-born Elon Musk has propagated.
At Trump’s urging, Ramaphosa answered a reporter’s question about what it would take to convince Trump there is no such white genocide. “It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here,” he calmly said, referencing South African golfer Ernie Els who was in the room. “When we have talks between us around a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them.”
But South Africa’s president was being set up. Trump interrupted him to play a video pushing the lies, then he showed photos meant to “prove” how much death there was, even leading Trump to mutter, “Death, death, death, horrible death, death.”
Except the video clip showing a long line of white wooden crosses were not actual burial sites for white farmers, as Trump insisted, but were from a 2020 protest against farm murders over the years. Except the photo Trump showed of people lifting body bags, insisting they “are all white farmers that are being buried,” was actually of humanitarian workers burying bodies in Congo. Except for all the claims of genocide among white farmers, meant to justify bringing white Afrikaners as preferred refugees to America now, there were a total of 44 murders in farming communities last year, Reuters reports, with over 26,000 in the country overall.
President Ramaphosa came to discuss trade and economic partnership. Yet Trump brought him into the Oval Office to ambush and abuse him, push his white nationalist agenda, spread more widely his egregious lies and showcase that—while illegally deporting people of color—only whites deserve America’s protection from presumed persecution. “We were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them,” Ramaphosa noted, but Trump was not listening.
There is a daily drumbeat of stupidity, airing of white grievances, and cruelty. While discriminating harshly against everyone who is not white and Christian, this administration harbors supporters who carry torches and shout “Jews will not replace us,” and has bubble-headed Congress Critters who scream about “Jewish Space Lasers”. Anti-semitism has become transactional. It has become a useful tool in the attack on Academia and the Democratic Party. It assumes that you can’t understand the history of the Jewish people without turning a blind eye to the punishing attacks on Palestinian women, children, and innocents in the Gaza Strip. I do not think there is a bigger way of showing disrespect for a group of people than using their historical struggles as a tool to encourage the murder of innocents. But then, our #FARTUS is planning a Trump Tower, hotel, and golf course in GAZA. The Trump Boyz–in between murdering endangered animals for sport–have been travelling the globe using the Tariff stick as a way to expand their Crime Syndicate. All, at the expense of the United States and its economy. This is from QUARTZ: “8 countries where Trump has been making new business deals, from Pakistan to Vietnam, Residential towers, golf courses, crypto — the deals didn’t stop on Inauguration Day.” This is the art of the steal in full display. All we need to see is Eric and Don Jr. flying in the palace in the sky and sitting at Trump’s Crypto Fundraiser now.
Businesses spearheaded by President Donald Trump have struck numerous deals since Trump returned to the White House in January.
Leading the way is the Trump Organization, a conglomerate privately owned by the president. With more than 250 subsidiaries, it serves as a holding company for Trump’s various hotels, residential real estate, towers, resorts, and golf courses across the world.
World Liberty Financial, a decentralized protocol that merges financial services and cryptocurrency, has also brokered deals. A Trump business entity owns 60% of World Liberty and is entitled to 75% of all revenue from coin sales. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. manage the company.
Here are the countries where the Trump empire has been dealmaking. The slide show that follows lists Vietnam. It’s in Hanoi, which reminds me of the Hanoi Hilton and the late Senator John McCain.
The project consists of a golf course, hotels, and luxury residences, and is slated for completion by 2029. In addition, Eric Trump is scheduled to meet with officials in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday to discuss a possible Trump Tower in the city, Reuters reports.
In April, the president imposed a “reciprocal” tariff rate of 46% on Vietnamese goods. While that policy is currently on a 90-day pause, it would deal a major blow to the Southeast Asian country if resumed. Goods exported to the U.S. account for 30% of Vietnam’s economy, according to IMF estimates, the largest of all U.S. trading partners. As the specter of these crippling levies looms, Hanoi has pledged to buy more American goods, including Boeing (BA) aircraft and agricultural products.
Other countries include Serbia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, and Singapore. Most of these discussions haven’t been covered by the Media other than Qatar, which came with the gift that “Palace in the sky” that will cause millions of dollars to refit before it’s handed over to Trump and his “library.” If there’s a bigger oxymoron than Trump Library, I’m waiting to hear it. Let’s just call it the warehouse facility for all the bribes and emoluments. We have to discuss that big ol’ party Trump threw for his richest customers. This is from the New York Times. “Hundreds Join Trump at ‘Exclusive’ Dinner, With Dreams of Crypto Fortunes in Mind. The guests were the biggest investors in President Trump’s memecoin, and they were greeted with chants of “shame” as they arrived at Trump National Golf Course.”
President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia golf club with the highest-paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
The gala dinner held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, many having flown to the United States from overseas.
At the club’s entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump. Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with The New York Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
“The past administration made your lives miserable,” Mr. Trump told the dinner guests, referring to the Biden administration’s enforcement actions against crypto companies.
The gala attendees made whooping noises while Mr. Trump spoke, and applauded as the president declared: “They were going after everybody. It was a disgrace frankly,” according to a video provided to The Times by a dinner guest.
Mr. Trump promised to change that approach. “There is a lot of sense in crypto. A lot of common sense in crypto,” he said. “And we’re honored to be working on helping everybody here.”
That sure is different than the 2021 #FARTUS who told Fox News. He just couldn’t wait to get into that scam, I guess. This is from the BBC. “Donald Trump calls Bitcoin ‘a scam against the dollar’. This is reported by BBC News Business Reporter Mary-Ann Russon.
Former US President Donald Trump has told Fox Business that he sees Bitcoin as a “scam” affecting the value of the US dollar.
“Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam,” Mr Trump said. “I don’t like it because it’s another currency competing against the dollar.”
He added that he wanted the dollar to be “the currency of the world”.
As per usual, the biggest losers from any more normalization of cryptocurrency will be his own voters. This is from the BBC. “The Bitcoin hum that is unsettling Trump’s MAGA heartlands.” This was written by Mike Wendling.
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation’s grid.
The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.
But it’s the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines – produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
“We can hear a constant buzzing,” says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. “It’s a constant, loud humming noise that you just can’t ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay.”
Such is Ms Campbell’s annoyance with Trump’s Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. “Right now I’m not real happy about that party,” she says.
So, build the nastiest factory in the backyard of the people least able to deal with it. That’s the sound of these Robber Barons that should be familiar to anyone who knows US history from its early 20th-century business escapades. The most interesting thing that’s popped up today is that Apple has got Trump in a lather, and the Equity Markets hate it. This is from Yahoo Finance: “Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq trim losses as Trump threatens Apple, EU with new tariffs.”
US stocks fell on Friday, on pace for weekly losses as investors assessed President Trump’s latest tariff threats and what his giant tax bill means for the deficit and the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) sank 0.4%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) also fell roughly 0.4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) backed off about 0.6%.
All three indexes trimmed steeper losses after Trump said on Friday that Apple (AAPL) must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones sold but not made in the US. The tech giant has begun shifting some manufacturing to India, with China, home to its key suppliers, locked in a trade war with the US. Apple shares fell 3% after Trump’s post on Truth Social.
At the same time, Trump threatened to hike the tariff on EU imports to “a straight 50%” beginning June 1 as trade talks between the two have stalled.
The president’s warnings shattered a more muted mood on Wall Street as investors wound down to the Memorial Day trading break on Monday.
It adds another supply chain complication for companies already worried about the potential hit to the economy from Trump’s tariff blitz. Earnings season has seen several companies hold off from providing full annual guidance thanks to uncertainty around tariffs.
All three major gauges are on track for a losing week. Stocks have suffered as deficit worries pushed up Treasury yields, intensified as Trump’s giant tax bill forged ahead. Wall Street is still weighing the economic impact of Trump’s revised bill, which cleared a key hurdle in the House vote for approval.
Well, I have always called him Orange Caligula. It seems we have a mad emperor on our hands. It didn’t help crypto either. “Bitcoin tumbles under $108K after Trump calls for 50% EU tariff. Trump’s tariff announcement sparks Bitcoin volatility, highlighting digital assets’ sensitivity to geopolitical events.” This is from Crypto Briefing and Vivian Nguyen.
The price of Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $108,000 early Friday after President Donald Trump called for steep tariffs on EU imports and threatened Apple with similar measures. The digital asset briefly touched $107,300 on Binance, pulling back from session highs above $111,000 as traders responded to fresh geopolitical tensions.
The US president on Friday proposed a 50% tariff on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, in a post on Truth Social. He cited trade imbalances and regulatory frictions as rationale for the move, declaring current EU-US trade dynamics “totally unacceptable.”
Apple is being threatened with 25% tariffs. Wow, how free market is this? Sounds a lot more like the old Soviet Command and Control model. Is he channeling Putin and Orban or just pissed about something Apple did at his party? This is from CNBC. “Trump says Apple must pay a 25% tariff on iPhones not made in the U.S.” Does he not realize how long it would take to even set up a factory, let alone train everyone? Doesn’t he know what this huge project would take to even break even?
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Friday that Apple will have to pay a tariff of 25% or more for iPhones made outside the United States.
“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Shares of Apple fell about 2% on Friday after the post.
Apple’s flagship phone is produced primarily in China, but the company has been shifting manufacturing to India in part because that country has a friendlier trade relationship with the U.S.
Some Wall Street analysts have estimated that moving iPhone production to the U.S. would raise the price of the Apple smartphone by at least 25%. Wedbush’s Dan Ives put the estimated cost of a U.S. iPhone at $3,500. The iPhone 16 Pro currently retails for about $1,000.
This is the latest jab at Apple from Trump, who over the past couple of weeks has ramped up pressure on the company and Cook to increase domestic manufacturing. Trump and Cook met at the White House on Tuesday, according to Politico.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he was not part of the meeting at the White House but that the Apple situation could be part of the Trump administration’s push to bring “precision manufacturing” back to the U.S.
“A large part of Apple’s components are in semiconductors. So we would like to have Apple help us make the semiconductor supply chain more secure,” Bessent said.
Cook gave $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and attended the inauguration in January. Apple has announced a $500 billion spend on U.S. development, including AI server production in Houston.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
So, I’m over 4200 words and probably have put you to sleep. You know how I am about Rabbit Holes. How much longer before the economy collapses? I’m actually beginning to wonder that. I know every time I see or hear him act so insane, I just collapse on the couch.
You have a very nice Memorial Day weekend. Please spend your time appreciating the many folks who gave their life for this country and its democracy. Don’t let the ones trying to destroy it get to you. There’s always the June 14th Flag Day “No Kings” protests and actions to look forward to and participate in. Just don’t watch that damn parade. The least we old folks can do is tank the ratings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
How about a little Warren Zevon and Prince?
#JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #academicFreedom #CryptoCurrencyPonziSchemeFromTrumpAndMusk #FARTUS #HarvardVTrump #NeoRobberBarons #NoKingsProtestOverFARTUSParade #TheHinduLoveGods #TrumpSoursApple #WeLiveInDarkTimes
-
KI und Facharbeiten – ein Leitfaden für den Unterricht
von Manuel Flick, Philipp Sölken & Niels Winkelmann
Generative KI-Tools wie ChatGPT verändern gegenwärtig das wissenschaftliche Arbeiten und Schreiben grundlegend. In schulischen Facharbeiten führt dies zu neuen Fragen und Herausforderungen hinsichtlich der Eigenleistung, der Bewertungskriterien und der Transparenz beim Einsatz von KI. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird ein Leitfaden vorgestellt, der für die Praxis in Schule und Unterricht konzipiert ist und den gesamten Erstellungsprozess einer Facharbeit berücksichtigt. Mithilfe exemplarischer Empfehlungen, die von der Themenfindung über Literaturrecherche und Textproduktion bis hin zur schriftlichen Reflexion reichen, soll der verantwortungsvolle und reflektierte Einsatz von KI im Rahmen von Facharbeiten ermöglicht werden. Der zentrale Ansatz besteht darin, statt einer akribischen Dokumentation des KI-Einsatzes eine ausführliche Reflexion in den Mittelpunkt zu stellen, um kritisches Denken zu fördern und wissenschaftliches Arbeiten mit KI zu stärken.
Einleitung
Facharbeiten gelten in vielen Schulformen als zentrales Instrument, um Schüler:innen an wissenschaftliches Arbeiten heranzuführen. Doch seit der Veröffentlichung von ChatGPT im November 2022 befindet sich dieses Format in einer erheblichen Umbruchphase.
Generative KI-Tools sind in der Lage, Forschungsfragen zu entwickeln, Gliederungen zu erstellen als auch vollständige Texte zu verfassen, was eine eindeutige Zuordnung zur Eigenleistung von Schüler:innen erschwert. Zeitgleich eröffnen sich durch den KI-Einsatz neue Möglichkeiten und Potenziale für Facharbeiten, insbesondere wenn KI gezielt und reflektiert eingesetzt wird.
Im schulischen Kontext stehen Lehrkräfte und Bildungseinrichtungen damit vor grundlegenden Fragen zur Rolle der KI hinsichtlich der wissenschaftlichen Recherche, des wissenschaftlichen Schreibens und letztlich hinsichtlich der Bewertung von Facharbeiten, bei denen KI zum Einsatz kommt.
Daher haben wir uns als Arbeitsgruppe ausgehend vom ThinkTank „Lehren und Lernen im Kontext von künstlicher Intelligenz“ der VK:KIWA mit der Erstellung dieses Leitfadens befasst. Mit dem Leitfaden wollen wir Lehrkräften eine Orientierung bieten, um KI bei Facharbeiten sinnvoll, zielgerichtet und reflektiert mit den Schüler:innen einzusetzen – von der Themensuche über Recherche und Textproduktion bis zur Überarbeitung und Reflexion.
Im Folgenden werden zunächst der Hintergrund und die Ziele dieses Leitfadens erläutert, gefolgt von einer kurzen Beschreibung des Inhalts, den entsprechenden Veröffentlichungshinweisen sowie der Möglichkeit, den Leitfaden herunterzuladen.
Unser KI-Leitfaden für Facharbeiten im Fokus
Hintergrund und Ausrichtung
Seit der Einführung von ChatGPT Ende 2022 sind verschiedene Handreichungen zum KIbasierten Schreiben veröffentlicht worden, die Herausforderungen und Potenziale des KIEinsatzes aufzeigen und Empfehlungen zur Dokumentation und Zitation KI-generierter Inhalte geben.
Unser KI-Leitfaden für Facharbeiten knüpft an diese Ansätze an, nimmt jedoch noch stärker den konkreten, schulpraktischen KI-Einsatz in den Fokus. Dabei wird der gesamte Prozess der Facharbeitserstellung betrachtet.
Analog zu den Forderungen für Universitäten, die Prof. Doris Wessels (2025) jüngst in der ZEIT aufstellte, plädieren wir ebenfalls für eine reflektierte Nutzung von KI, bei der die Schüler:innen offenlegen, mit welchen Tools sie in welcher Weise gearbeitet haben. Gleichzeitig bleiben Schüler:innen dabei in der Pflicht, KI-generierte Inhalte zu prüfen und Verantwortung für ihre Texte übernehmen.
Fokus auf Reflexion statt detaillierter Dokumentation
Unser Leitfaden unterscheidet sich gegenüber bestehenden Ansätzen insbesondere hinsichtlich der Dokumentationspflicht des KI-Einsatzes. Während andere Handreichungen meist auf eine möglichst detaillierte Dokumentation aller KI-Interaktionen setzen, zeigt sich dies in der schulischen Praxis aus mehreren Gründen als schwierig:
- Unterschiedliche Ergebnisse trotz identischer Prompts: Bei erneuter Eingabe der in Facharbeiten dokumentierten Prompts liefern KI-Tools in der Regel abweichende Ergebnisse. Somit lässt sich der KI-Einsatz nicht eindeutig nachvollziehen oder nachweisen. Eine akribische Dokumentation liefert daher keinen verlässlichen Einblick in den realen Entstehungsprozess.
- Zunehmende Komplexität des KI-Einsatzes: Der Schreibprozess umfasst häufig zahlreiche Iterationen, bei denen verschiedene KI-Tools gleichzeitig eingesetzt werden. Die KI-Ergebnisse sind zudem nicht einem einzigen Prompt zuzuordnen. Es wäre folglich eine aufwendige Dokumentation gesamter Gesprächsverläufe notwendig, was den Schreibfluss erheblich behindern würde. Einige KI-Tools werden zudem nicht rein promptbasiert gesteuert, was die Komplexität einer entsprechenden Dokumentation weiter erhöht.
- Praktische Umsetzbarkeit: Eine akribische Dokumentation lenkt den Fokus schnell vom inhaltlichen Arbeiten ab. Statt die wissenschaftliche Auseinandersetzung mit dem Thema zu fördern, entsteht eine umfangreiche, aber nur bedingt aussagekräftige Sammlung von KI-Interaktionen.
Aus diesen Gründen empfehlen wir in unserem Leitfaden, den KI-Einsatz kritisch zu reflektieren und den Erkenntnisgewinn, der sich aus dem Zusammenspiel von menschlicher Eigenleistung und KI-Unterstützung ergibt, in den Vordergrund zu stellen. Dies beinhaltet:
- Exemplarische Dokumentation des KI-Einsatzes: Anstelle einer akribischen Protokollierung aller KI-Schritte wird eine exemplarische Darstellung des KI-Einsatzes in einem Reflexionskapitel empfohlen, die den gezielten und reflektierten Einsatz verdeutlicht, ohne dabei den fachlichen Arbeitsprozess unnötig zu belasten.
- Reflexion in einem gesonderten Abschnitt: Ein eigenes Kapitel oder Unterkapitel innerhalb der Facharbeit, in dem Einsatzbereiche, Grenzen und Erkenntnisse zum KIEinsatz erläutert werden (ergänzt durch eine Liste aller verwendeten KI-Tools im Anhang).
Diese Vorgehensweise soll dazu beitragen, dass Schüler:innen KI-Tools sinnvoll und reflektiert einsetzen, zugleich ein Bewusstsein für mögliche Fehlerquellen („Halluzinationen“) entwickeln und weiterhin ihre eigene wissenschaftliche Kompetenz stärken. Die schriftliche Reflexion des KI-Einsatzes muss sich folglich auch in der Bewertung von Facharbeiten wiederfinden.
Aufbau und Struktur der Leitfadens
Der Leitfaden gliedert sich davon ausgehend in die nachfolgenden Kapitel, entlang des gesamten Facharbeitsprozess:
- Themenfindung und Gliederung: Wie KI-Tools beim Brainstorming und der Entwicklung einer Leitfrage unterstützen können.
- Literaturrecherche und -organisation: Tools und Hinweise, um wissenschaftliche Texte KI-gestützt zu recherchieren und zu verwalten.
- Textproduktion: Hinweise zur Nutzung von KI für Ideenfindung, Formulierung und Strukturierung von Texten.
- Textkorrektur: Optimierung der sprachlichen Richtigkeit und sprachlichen Ausdrucks mithilfe von KI.
- Reflexion und Dokumentation: Schriftliche Reflexion des KI-Einsatzes als Alternative zu akribischer Dokumentation der KI-Nutzung.
- Vorschlag zur Umstrukturierung der Facharbeit: Einführung prozessbegleitender Elemente wie Konsultationen und Verteidigungen, um die Eigenleistung sichtbar zu machen und die wissenschaftliche Denkweise zu stärken.
Die Ausführungen lassen sich zudem auf weitere schriftliche Arbeiten wie Seminar-, Haus- oder Projektarbeiten übertragen, auch wenn nachfolgend vornehmlich von Facharbeiten gesprochen wird.
Mit dem Leitfaden arbeiten
Der Leitfaden steht nachfolgend unter Creative-Commons-Lizenz (CC-BY) zum Download bereit:
Veröffentlichungshinweise
Der Leitfaden wird unter Creative-Commons-Lizenz (CC-BY) veröffentlicht und darf entsprechend verwendet, bearbeitet und weitergegeben werden, wir bitten in diesem Fall jedoch um Namensnennung.
Der Leitfaden samt zugehöriger Einordnung ist zeitgleich auf dem Blog von Manuel Flick und Niels Winkelmann erschienen.
Feedback zum KI-Leitfaden
Noch ein Hinweis in eigener Sache: Wir erheben bei diesem Leitfaden keinen Anspruch auf
Vollständigkeit und sehen diese Erstveröffentlichung als Teil eines iterativen Prozesses. Der Leitfaden soll perspektivisch vertieft und weiterentwickelt werden. Aus diesem Grund freuen wir uns besonders auf euer / Ihr Feedback, Anmerkungen, Hinweise und Kommentare. Die Rückmeldung kann über unser Online-Feedback-Formular anonymisiert erfolgen.
Autoren:
Der KI-Leitfaden für Facharbeiten wurde gemeinsam von Manuel Flick, Philipp Sölken und Niels Winkelmann entwickelt.
Manuel Flick ist Lehrkraft im berufsbildenden Bereich aus Berlin. Als Fortbildner, Referent und Blogger widmet er sich schwerpunktmäßig dem Einsatz und der Integration von Künstlicher Intelligenz im Schul- und Unterrichtskontext. Weitere Infos und Kontakt: manuelflick.de
Philipp Sölken ist Lehrkraft an der Ernst-Reuter-Schule Pattensen. Als stellvertretender Leiter des Digital-Pädagogischen Teams an der ERS Pattensen sowie als Fortbildner und Referent befasst er sich mit der Frage, wie Künstliche Intelligenz wirksam in Lernsettings unterschiedlicher Jahrgangsstufen eingesetzt werden kann. Kontakt: [email protected]
Niels Winkelmann ist Lehrer am Gymnasium in Wilhelmhaven. Als Fortbildner, Referent und Blogger hat er neben dem Lernen unter den Bedingungen der Digitalität die Persönlichkeitsbildung und das Zusammenspiel von Lernenden und KI im Fokus. Mehr unter DigiLog.Blog
Zitiervorschlag:
Flick, M., Sölken, P., & Winkelmann, N. (2025). KI und Facharbeiten: Ein Leitfaden. VK:KIWA Blog. URL:
Literaturverzeichnis
Wessels, D. (2025, 16. Januar). Die Position: Schluss mit absurden KI-Regeln! DIE ZEIT (13), S. 31.
Impressum
Der vorliegende Beitrag wurde unter der Creative-Commons-Lizenz „Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)“ veröffentlicht.
Den Vertragstext finden Sie unter: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by–sa/4.0/deed.de
Bitte beachten Sie, dass einzelne, entsprechend gekennzeichnete Teile des Werks von der genannten Lizenz ausgenommen sein bzw. anderen urheberrechtlichen Bedingungen unterliegen können.
Herausgeber: Virtuelles Kompetenzzentrum – Schreiben lehren und lernen mit Künstlicher Intelligenz (VK:KIWA)
Redaktion: Manuel Flick, Philipp Sölken & Niels Winkelmann
Dieser Beitrag erscheint parallel
- im Blog der VK:KIWAhttps://www.vkkiwa.de/blog/ki-und-facharbeiten/ und
- im Blog von Manuel Flick.
-
"Roles in the world of programming: The path to the industry through non-technical professions and their analogies with the film industry"
Introduction:
In the modern world, programming has become one of the most popular and dynamically developing professions. However, success in this field is not limited solely to technical skills. In the world of software development, as in the film industry, there are important roles that are not directly related to coding, but are key to the successful delivery of a project. Just as in cinema there are not only directors and camera operators, but also producers, marketing managers, PR specialists and other professionals, in the IT field there is also a number of non-technical professions that support and develop the project, ensuring its successful implementation.
This work is aimed at helping novice developers and anyone interested in understanding the structure of projects that exist in the world of programming and understanding what roles there may be in such projects in addition to developers. We'll look at how the software development process works, what key people work on the project, and how a newcomer without a technical background can find a role in the industry.
As an example, we will take a hypothetical project improvement Ygdrassil. This project has already attracted the attention of many developers and users, and there is every reason to believe that it can be supplemented with new functionality, especially in the field of user interface (UI). We will look at how the introduction of new roles and improved communication between the various development participants can affect the success of such a project, as well as its further development.
Rationale:
The world of programming is vast and multifaceted, and to successfully become a part of this world, it is important to understand not only the technical aspects, but also the organizational, management and communication roles. Roles in software development, as in film production, are not always limited to technical people, but include professionals who manage the project, interact with stakeholders, handle marketing issues and develop the community. These roles are equally valuable and are necessary for the project to be successful and attract the attention of the audience.
For many aspiring developers, the process of choosing a path in the industry can be daunting, and they are often confused about what opportunities exist outside of technical work. This work aims to provide a clear understanding of how the world of programming works, what key roles exist in a project, and how a beginner can choose his or her path beyond just technical skills.
Key words:
Programming
Roles in the project
Software development
An open-source project
Career path
New to programming
Development process
Startups and large companies
Skill development
Non-technical roles
Labor market in IT
The authors' goal:
The purpose of this work is to provide novice programmers and anyone interested with a complete and clear idea of how the world of programming works. We strive to:
Describe the main roles that may exist in a project and their relationships.
Explain how a newbie can enter this world and what skills and knowledge are required for each role.
Provide insight into the development process, how different specialists interact, and how to choose your path in this area.
Talk about career development and opportunities for growth in programming, including in the context of open-source projects and startups.
Conclusion:
We are confident that understanding the structure of projects, roles in the team and development paths will help beginning professionals make an informed choice and quickly adapt to the world of programming. This work serves as a guide for those who want to enter the industry, as well as for those who are already in it and want to expand their horizons.
Now this is a complete description with title, introduction, rationale, keywords and purpose of the work.
Yes, improving Yggdrasil code can be beneficial in several ways, depending on your goals and needs. Here are some reasons to improve your code:
Performance: Code optimization can improve code performance by reducing the use of resources such as memory and CPU time.
Safety: If the code has not been updated or vulnerabilities have been identified, improving it and updating it to meet modern security standards is an important task.
Readability and Maintainability: Improving the structure and quality of the code can make it easier to maintain and develop, especially if the project is maintained by multiple developers.
Compatibility and Extensibility: Perhaps the project can be improved by making it more compatible with modern technologies and extensible for new use cases.
Integration with other projects: If new features or integrations with other systems are added to the project, improving the code will better support such extensions.
Testability: Improving the code may include creating more convenient testing methods, which is important for the reliability and stability of the system.
If there are specific areas for improvement or bottlenecks in a project, this can be particularly important in improving the overall efficiency and quality of the system.
Successful development and maintenance of a project such as Yggdrasil requires several key participants with different skills and experience. Here is a list of required roles:
Project Manager:
Responsible for planning, coordinating, managing deadlines and priorities.
Monitors task completion, sets goals, and evaluates progress.
Interacts with other project participants and customers.
System Architect:
Develops the system architecture, defines the main components and their interactions.
Conducts requirements analysis and makes recommendations on technology selection.
Developers (Backend/Full-stack):
They write the main code of the system, including the server side, working with databases and API.
They are engaged in performance optimization, bug fixes, and functionality improvements.
Security Engineer:
Ensures system security, including work with cryptography, authentication, and protection against attacks.
Checks code for vulnerabilities, implements and maintains security systems.
Network Engineer:
Specializes in setting up and optimizing network connections.
Works with protocols and distributed systems such as p2p and VPN.
Testers (QA):
Conduct software testing, identify bugs and errors.
Working on test automation and creating tests for new features.
Technical Writer:
Creates technical documentation describing the architecture, code, instructions for developers and users.
Keeps documentation current and accessible.
UI/UX designer (if required):
Responsible for the user interface (if the project includes a client side with UI).
Works on ease of use, improves user interaction with the system.
System Administrator (DevOps):
Provides infrastructure deployment, monitoring and support.
Works on automating CI/CD processes, managing servers and containers.
Analyst/Researcher:
Conducts requirements and market analysis, assesses user needs and technology trends.
May also research new approaches and algorithms to improve the system.
Each of these roles plays an important role in supporting and developing the project. Team structure may vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, and some roles may be combined into one person, especially on smaller projects.
Yes, a similar role in project development can be identified "Product Manager", who performs functions similar to a producer in the film business.
Product manager:
General Product Management: Just as a producer manages the creation of a film, a product manager is responsible for the entire life cycle of a product, from idea to release and support.
Coordination between teams: A product manager often coordinates the interaction of various teams (developers, designers, marketers, testers) and ensures that tasks are completed on time.
Making key decisions: Just as a producer makes strategic decisions, a product manager determines development directions, functional priorities, and also negotiates with stakeholders (for example, customers or investors).
Resources and budget: A product manager also manages resources, controls the project budget, assigns tasks so that the product is delivered on time and within budget.
Differences from the producer:
Unlike a producer, who may be involved in financing and promotion in the film industry, a product manager focuses more on the actual development of the product and its features, as well as interaction with users.
If the project is large and complex, there may be several product managers, each of whom is responsible for separate parts of the project, such as the frontend, backend or infrastructure.
The initiator of a project similar to Yggdrasil could be founder or initiator of the idea (for example, in the context of a startup or open-source project). This is a person or group of people who:
Form the basic concept: The project initiator often defines the project's vision, goals and mission. They can be theoreticians, practitioners or enthusiasts who see a need to solve a problem and propose their own approach.
Attract resources and partners: It is important that the initiator can assemble a team, attract investors, volunteers or even influential partners to implement the idea.
Starting development: The proponent may organize the initial phase of the project, including basic concept development, prototypes, or research, to prove the viability of the idea and gain support from other stakeholders.
Define strategy and goals: The initiator sets the tone for the project and determines what problems or needs it solves. In the case of open-source projects, the initiator may be the person who has set himself the task of solving technical or social problems, which in turn attracts other developers.
In a more formal structure, such as a startup, the initiator may be founder or general director, while in the open-source community it might be project leader or even several people coordinating the initial development.
Thus, an initiator is someone who launches an idea and inspires others to pursue it, whether through technical or financial efforts.
In a more formalized project team context, there are several key roles associated with the initiative and launch of the project. Here's how it could be:
1. Project Initiator
This is the person or group of people who initiates the project. They may be:
Founders (especially in startups or within new organizations).
Ideologists or thought leaders — people who propose a solution to a specific problem or create a project concept, setting a general strategy and goals.
Sponsors - financial or resource initiators who provide start-up capital or support the project at its initial stage.
2. Project Manager
A formalized manager who can be appointed to coordinate all aspects of the project. This person:
Manages all phases of development including planning, execution and control.
Ensures project completion is on time, within budget and in compliance with requirements.
Coordinates teams and stakeholders, monitors risks and resolves issues that arise during the process.
3. Product Owner
In the context of Agile development or Scrum methodology, this person is responsible for the product development strategy:
Serves as a link between customers (or users) and the development team.
Makes key decisions regarding product functionality and its priorities.
Responsible for maintaining the product backlog and can initiate changes at various stages of development.
4. Development team
This is a group of technical specialists working on the implementation of the project:
Developers (Backend, Frontend, Full-stack).
Security Engineers.
Testers (QA).
System administrators or DevOps specialists.
5. Head of department or program (Program Manager)
If the project is part of a larger enterprise (for example, in large organizations), this role may be allocated:
Oversees several projects aimed at achieving a common business goal.
Responsible for ensuring synergy between various projects and their interdependence.
6. Investor/Project Sponsor
A project sponsor or investor is a person or organization that provides financing for a project:
Supports the project financially and strategically.
Can actively participate in key senior-level decisions.
Provides resources and mentorship to the project.
Thus, in a formalized structure, the project has a clear hierarchy, where project initiator is the key figure who forms the strategy and initial ideas, and project Manager or product manager ensure the implementation of these ideas through team coordination and project management.
Interesting question! Role general producer in the film business has several unique aspects that do not always translate easily to technology projects such as software development or startups. However, there are several factors that may explain why the equivalent of such a role is not as prominent in software development projects.
Reasons for the absence of an obvious analogue of the “general producer”:
Distributed responsibilities: In film, a producer (including a general producer) often performs many tasks, including financial management, crew selection, production management, marketing and distribution. In technology projects, these tasks are distributed among different roles:
Project Manager or product manager can take charge of time management, task management and team coordination.
System Architects And technical leaders are responsible for the technological direction.
Finance executives or investors manage financing and budget planning.
Differences in approaches to risk and financing: In the film business, a producer manages a project as a complex business with high risks and investors, often with many uncertain factors such as the success of the film, audience reactions and marketing strategies. In software development projects, risks are more predictable and can be reduced to managing the team, time and budget. Investors or sponsors are often involved in the project, but do not take on such comprehensive responsibility for the development process itself.
Focus on technology: In technology and software development, the role focuses on creating the product. Here, the success of a product primarily depends on the team of developers, engineers and managers who are responsible for the technical side, unlike in film, where the producer can make a wider range of decisions, including the choice of actors and scripts.
Flexibility and Agile approaches: Modern IT projects often use flexible methodology (Agile, Scrum, etc.), where the focus is on an iterative process and constant adaptation of the product. This means that project roles often focus on specific tasks and goals at each stage, and product management is more collaborative than centralized. The role of "general producer" might be perceived as redundant, since coordination is already delegated to various roles.
Division into narrower roles: In an IT environment, there is a clearer division of labor between technical, business and operational roles. This reduces the need for a single person to cover all aspects, as a film producer does. For example, one person may be responsible for marketing, another for product development, and a third for finance.
Potential analogue of a general producer
If we consider the analogy with general producer, then we can distinguish several roles that can combine the functions inherent in a producer in the film business:
Lead Product Manager or Product Director: He can take on project management at a higher level, coordinating not only the technical aspects, but also the overall product strategy, its market prospects, as well as interaction with various stakeholders (investors, partners, etc.).
Chief Operating Officer (COO): In large companies, the COO role may cover functions similar to a general producer. He oversees all operational aspects of the business, including finances, resources, team and strategies.
Executive Director (CEO) or founder: In startups and small projects, the founder or CEO often performs functions similar to the producer. They may be responsible for everything from concept to marketing to financing, overseeing the project at every level.
Thus, although the role general producer in its full sense is not always present in technology projects, elements of this function can be distributed among several key roles in the team.
In context open-source projects role similar general producer, may also not be as clearly defined, but several analogies can be drawn with more traditional business roles. Open-source projects have a unique structure where responsibilities are often distributed among many participants, but certain individuals can still perform functions similar to those of a film producer. This is what it looks like:
1. Project Lead or Lead Developer
Role in an open-source project project leader will often perform functions similar to the general producer:
Development coordination: The project leader manages the overall direction of development, makes key architectural decisions, and coordinates the work of other participants.
Responsibility for vision and strategy: Like the CEO, the leader shapes the project's development strategy, deciding which features to implement and which to reject, depending on the needs of the community and users.
Attracting participants: A leader often works with other developers, just as a film producer works with actors and creators. This may include managing community contributions, attracting new contributors, and maintaining engagement.
2. Technical Lead
In open-source projects, especially if the project is large, the role of a technical manager can be similar to some of the functions of a producer:
Technical management: The technical leader resolves key issues related to the implementation of functionality, technologies and tools that will be used.
Code quality control: Just as a producer ensures the quality of the final product in a movie, a technical leader ensures that the code meets quality standards and safety requirements.
3. Community Manager
Although the role community manager in an open-source project is not a direct analogue of a producer, he plays an important role in organizing interactions with the outside world, which is also typical for producers:
Engaging and motivating participants: The community manager works with external participants, organizing communication between them and the main developers.
Marketing and promotion of the project: The manager is actively working to disseminate information about the project, attracting new users and developers.
Organization of events and meetings: He can organize meetups, webinars or other events aimed at developing the project.
4. Project Sponsor or Funding Organizations
In the open-source world there may be financial sponsors, such as large companies, organizations or individual donors who support the project with funds. Although the role sponsor in open-source is different from a producer in cinema, they also play an important role in the support and development of the project:
Financing: Sponsors often provide the project with the financial resources needed for its growth, infrastructure, and developers.
Resources and advertising: Sponsors can help a project gain more attention, as well as help build infrastructure and attract new participants.
5. Founder of the project (Founder)
The founder of an open-source project can perform functions similar to the role of a producer:
Initiator of idea and strategy: The founder forms the concept of the project, creates its mission and vision.
Attracting a team and partners: Just like a film producer assembles a team and manages the entire process, the founder of an open-source project can attract other developers, organize teams and decide how to develop the project in the future.
6. Consultants or mentors
In large open-source projects there may be consultants or mentors, who serve as external experts, helping to guide the project in the right direction. While this role is not exactly the same as a producer, it can involve helping make important decisions, especially at a more senior level.
Summary
In open-source projects, the role general producer somewhat breaks down into several separate functions:
Project leader Responsible for strategy, management and vision.
Technical Leader manages technical aspects.
Community Manager deals with external relations, engagement and popularization.
Sponsors or funding organizations provide resources.
Although in the open-source world there is no clear-cut role analogous to the general producer in film, all of these participants collectively perform tasks that ensure the successful development of the project and the achievement of its goals.
Finally, to output the project Ygdrassil to the next level, it is necessary to focus on improving the user interface (UI), providing more flexible customization for users and adding new opportunities for interacting with the project. This may include improving navigation, adding new visual elements and tools for effective project management. In addition, it is worth considering introducing functionality that will more effectively integrate teamwork and the exchange of ideas, which is especially important for open-source projects. Improving these aspects will not only increase the project's appeal to a wider audience, but will also create opportunities for greater community engagement and increased user numbers. The question "Where are you going?" in the context of Ygdrassil, one can answer this way: towards creating an intuitive, powerful and convenient tool for everyone who is looking for opportunities to organize and manage projects in the world of programming.
Here is a list of possible project touchpoints Ygdrassil with other projects that can significantly improve the user experience, expand the functionality and PC/software combination, and also make these technologies more accessible and useful for specialists and beginners, especially in the face of current challenges:
1. Integration with tools for remote work (for example, Slack, Microsoft Teams)
Provide easy integration with popular communication and teamwork platforms, improving collaboration and communication across projects.
2. Support for cloud technologies (for example, AWS, Google Cloud, Azure)
Implementation of integration with cloud services for data storage, application deployment and scalability to expand the functionality of the project.
3. API for interaction with external services
The ability to integrate with other services via API, which will open up new opportunities for expanding the functionality of Igdrassil, including synchronization with other projects and task automation.
4. Data visualization and analytics (for example, integration with Power BI, Tableau)
Adding functions for data visualization, which will allow users to easily analyze project statistics, draw conclusions and make informed decisions.
5. Integration with project management systems (for example, Jira, Trello, Asana)
Built-in support for popular project management systems will improve planning, control and reporting of tasks, which will provide greater flexibility in the work of teams.
6. Using blockchain technologies to verify and track changes
Integration with blockchain platforms to ensure transparency and security of transactions, as well as to track the history of changes in the project.
7. Integration with Git and other version control systems
The ability to more easily interact with Git repositories for convenient storage and synchronization of source code.
8. Using machine learning to analyze project data
Implementation of machine learning algorithms that will analyze user behavior and predict needs, improving interaction with the interface and optimizing functionality.
9. Interfaces for users with special needs (accessibility)
Development of adaptive interfaces that will be convenient for people with disabilities, for example, support for screen readers, high-contrast themes and voice control.
10. Supports Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) to showcase projects
Introducing AR/VR to demonstrate and interact with projects in a more interactive format, which can be useful for presentations and training.
11. Implementation of neural network solutions for task automation
Using neural networks to automate routine tasks such as reporting, code analysis, or documentation generation.
12. Integration with online learning platforms (e.g. Coursera, Udemy)
Implementation of educational modules or courses available directly through the Igdrassil interface to train new users or improve their skills.
13. Supports multitasking and real-time collaboration
Creation of tools for effective work on a project in real time with the possibility of parallel editing and instant exchange of information.
14. Flexibility in customizing UI/UX for different types of users
The ability to customize the interface for different types of users: from beginners to experts, providing simplicity for some and deep customization for others.
15. Integration with monitoring and logging systems (for example, Prometheus, Grafana)
Ability to monitor project activity, performance and errors using popular monitoring and visualization tools.
16. Integration with automated testing platforms (for example, Selenium, Jenkins)
Incorporating capabilities for automated software testing within a project, improving the quality of the released product.
17. Support for DevOps practices to automate deployment and CI/CD
Introducing capabilities for automated deployment and integration with CI/CD pipelines, improving development speed and stability.
18. Integration with services for managing finances and resources (for example, QuickBooks, Xero)
The ability to manage project finances, track budgets, expenses and income using integration with popular financial platforms.
19. API support for working with the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ability to interact with IoT devices to create more complex and integrated software development solutions.
20. Integration with video conferencing systems (for example, Zoom, Google Meet)
Seamlessly integrate with video communication platforms for meetings and discussions, ensuring effective collaboration among teams located in different locations.
21. Implementation of cybersecurity and data protection solutions
Integration with data security, leak and malware protection tools, and access rights management.
22. Support for integration with social networks to promote projects
Implementation of functions for automatic dissemination of information about the project through social networks, which will help in popularizing it and attracting users.
23. Use of cryptocurrencies for financing and transactions within the project
The introduction of support for cryptocurrency payments and financing facilities, which will give the project additional flexibility in financing and attracting investments.
24. Flexible notification and reminder system
Implementation of a notification system that will be flexibly customized to the needs of users and remind them of key events, deadlines and changes in the project.
25. Support for language packs and interface localization
The ability to choose the interface language and support users from different countries and regions, which will make the project more accessible and expand the audience.
26. Mechanisms for managing the life cycle of software and its versions
Implementation of version and release management tools that will simplify the process of deploying and updating the application.
These improvements can significantly increase the functionality of Igdrassil, improve the user experience and make the project more convenient and accessible to a wide audience, including both experts and beginners. Importantly, most of these changes are relevant to current trends and challenges related to remote work, security, efficiency and accessibility of technology.
Self-hosting is indeed becoming increasingly attractive in the context of privacy and anonymity, especially with increasing attention to data protection and the value of personal information. In connection with the objectives of the project Ygdrassil Several directions can be considered that could improve the project and support the idea of autonomy, privacy and security for users. Here are some of them that may be useful and practical to implement:
1. Self-hosting as an alternative to cloud solutions
Description: Offer users the ability to deploy Ygdrassil on their own servers or local machines. This will ensure complete control over the data and the project, minimizing the risks of leaks or unauthorized access.
How to implement: Develop detailed documentation for installing and configuring Igdrassil on various platforms (Linux, Windows, macOS) with simple instructions and scripts for automatic configuration.
Advantages: Increased security, data protection and the ability to work in completely closed or local networks.
2. Support for anonymous networks (for example, Tor, I2P)
Description: Integration with anonymous networks such as Tor or I2P will allow users to use the project in an environment with the maximum degree of privacy and anonymity.
How to implement: Enable the ability for users to connect to the project via Tor, ensuring their IP address is hidden and improved protection from surveillance. You can offer separate configurations and settings for using such networks.
Advantages: Privacy and protection from monitoring or tracking, which is especially important for users who value anonymity.
3. Data encryption on the client side (End-to-Encryption)
Description: Implement client-side data encryption before sending it to the server, so that only users can decrypt their data and even project administrators cannot access the content.
How to implement: Use standard and proven cryptographic methods such as AES for encryption and integrate them into the project so that only authorized users can decrypt their data.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, protecting data from potential leaks, attacks or unauthorized access attempts.
4. Decentralized data stores
Description: Possibility of using decentralized data storage systems such as IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) or Sia. This will allow users to store data on distributed networks, making them less vulnerable to attacks and giving them more control over their data.
How to implement: Integrate support for IPFS or other similar services so that users can store and share data through decentralized storage.
Advantages: Censorship protection, increased data availability, decentralized storage and improved privacy.
5. Local and secure databases
Description: Offer the ability to use local databases to store information rather than relying on cloud solutions. You can also offer the option of using protected and encrypted databases.
How to implement: Integrate SQLite, local or distribution databases with the ability to encrypt data on the user side, without requiring centralized storage.
Advantages: Users have full control over their data, which improves security and protects it from external control.
6. Confidential authentication methods
Description: Design and implement authentication mechanisms that maintain confidentiality, such as using cryptographic methods or two-factor authentication (2FA) over secure channels.
How to implement: Supports authentication through secure and anonymous channels, such as one-time passwords, biometrics, or tokens that do not require linking to personal information.
Advantages: Increased security, protection against phishing attacks and minimizing the need to collect personal information.
7. Autonomous update and patch systems
Description: Offer a solution that allows users to receive updates and security patches through offline channels, not tied to external servers, to avoid the risk of surveillance or data leaks.
How to implement: Use an automatic update system that will check for patches and updates across a distributed network, without the need to connect to centralized servers.
Advantages: Security from external monitoring, the ability to update autonomously and minimize privacy risks.
8. Local or private networks for data synchronization
Description: Implementation of functionality for data synchronization and interaction between users on local networks or private VPNs, excluding external servers and minimizing the risk of leaks.
How to implement: Develop functionality for exchanging data through secure channels, such as local networks or VPNs, without the need to use cloud servers.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, eliminating dependence on cloud providers.
9. Data recovery mechanisms using cryptographic keys
Description: Implementation of a system for restoring access to data using cryptographic keys, which will allow the user to restore data in the event of loss of access, without resorting to external sources.
How to implement: Implement functionality to create backup keys or tokens that can be used to restore data.
Advantages: Protection against data loss, ease of access restoration without the participation of third parties.
10. Supports multi-factor authentication via key storage devices (such as YubiKey)
Description: To improve security, you can offer support for authentication through devices that generate one-time keys, such as YubiKey or other hardware devices.
How to implement: Integrate support for such devices into the project's authentication system.
Advantages: Enhanced security, protection against phishing and other authentication attacks.
These solutions can make a project Ygdrassil more attractive to users who value privacy, security and autonomy. Implementing such capabilities will ensure reliable data protection and help build trust among users, especially in the face of growing threats to personal information online.
Implement all these possibilities within the project Ygdrassilmaking them work “out of the box” for an untrained user is certainly difficult, but possible if you approach the implementation step by step. However, there are a few important points to consider:
1. Keep it simple for untrained users
Implementing most of these functions in a finished product requires creating an intuitive interface that hides all the complexity behind convenient settings and smart assistants. For untrained users, it is important that most operations are performed automatically, without the need for intervention.
How to implement it:
For self-hosting You can develop simple scripts or installation wizards that automate the deployment, configuration, and upgrade processes. This can be achieved through the use of containers (such as Docker), which can be configured with minimal effort.
Integration with Tor and I2P should not only be possible, but also offered as an easy setup in the interface. A couple of clicks to connect through these networks, with pre-configured settings, will improve the experience for beginners.
Encryption data must be transparent. For example, automatically encrypting data on the client side without the user needing to know how it works can be implemented as on/off settings.
2. Technical complexity and documentation
One important aspect will be the quality of documentation and training materials. For an untrained user, it will be useful if all the information is presented in a step-by-step format with clear explanations.
How to implement it:
Add built-in hints And interactive tutorials, which will help the user go through all the setup steps.
Provide flexible interface settings using templates for different types of users (newbies, experienced users, administrators).
Turn on automatic updates, which will eliminate the need to manually search for patches and updates, as well as integration with services for restoring from backups.
3. Performance issues and hardware requirements
Some of the proposed solutions may require quite powerful resources, such as encryption and decentralized data storage (IPFS). For the casual user, it is important that such features work effectively even on less powerful devices.
How to implement it:
Enable feature step-by-step setup, where the user can choose which features and services to activate based on the power of their device.
For remote hosting and use of cloud services You can offer options with minimal requirements, for example, using cloud providers for data storage, which will reduce the load on the local computer.
4. Transparency in use and user interface
Integration process with technologies such as Tor, IPFS, or machine learning, may be difficult to understand for beginners. It is important that such systems operate in the background, with clear and understandable status alerts, and provide the user with the ability to enable or disable these features at their discretion.
How to implement it:
Simple and intuitive interface with visual indicators what's happening in the background (for example, when data is encrypted or when a Tor connection is active).
Enable ready-made presets with safe settings for beginners, and more complex, customizable settings for experienced users.
5. Problems with network infrastructure and dependencies on third-party solutions
The use of decentralized technologies and anonymous networks such as Tor, can cause performance and connection stability issues, which can be frustrating for the untrained user.
How to implement it:
Simplify the process of switching between main network And anonymous network, so that the user can easily return to normal operation if problems with anonymity arise.
The out-of-the-box approach means that most of these dependencies and technologies will work automatically, hiding technical details and providing stable work.
What can be realistically implemented for untrained users:
Basic functions (e.g. self-hosting, basic encryption, Tor connection) can be made accessible to beginners with simple tools and instructions.
Cloud and decentralized solutions can be implemented through standard interfaces with basic settings for beginners, but with the possibility of deeper customization for experienced users.
Updates and patches: You can implement automatic update and patch mechanisms to protect against vulnerabilities without user intervention.
Easy security setup: Users can enable or disable security features (such as encryption and anonymous networks) through the interface with minimal settings.
What is the way out:
In order to do this “really out of the box”, you need to consider two important aspects:
Simplicity of the interface and automation of all complex technical processes.
Accessibility for different types of users, including those without technical experience.
Creating such software may require a lot of effort at the development stage, but the result can be a very powerful tool for users seeking privacy, security and independence.#Programming #RolesInTheProject #SoftwareDevelopment #OpenSource #CareerPath #NewToProgramming #DevelopmentProcess #Startups #NonTechnicalRoles #IT #TechIndustry #ProjectManagement #UIUX #Marketing #CommunityBuilding #ProductManagement #CareerGrowth #TechLeadership #TechMarketing #Agile #LearnToCode #TechCareers #TechProjects #InnovationInTech #TechPathways
Qoto Mastodon
https://qoto.org/web/@tyden/113815686277448963 -
"Roles in the world of programming: The path to the industry through non-technical professions and their analogies with the film industry"
Introduction:
In the modern world, programming has become one of the most popular and dynamically developing professions. However, success in this field is not limited solely to technical skills. In the world of software development, as in the film industry, there are important roles that are not directly related to coding, but are key to the successful delivery of a project. Just as in cinema there are not only directors and camera operators, but also producers, marketing managers, PR specialists and other professionals, in the IT field there is also a number of non-technical professions that support and develop the project, ensuring its successful implementation.
This work is aimed at helping novice developers and anyone interested in understanding the structure of projects that exist in the world of programming and understanding what roles there may be in such projects in addition to developers. We'll look at how the software development process works, what key people work on the project, and how a newcomer without a technical background can find a role in the industry.
As an example, we will take a hypothetical project improvement Ygdrassil. This project has already attracted the attention of many developers and users, and there is every reason to believe that it can be supplemented with new functionality, especially in the field of user interface (UI). We will look at how the introduction of new roles and improved communication between the various development participants can affect the success of such a project, as well as its further development.
Rationale:
The world of programming is vast and multifaceted, and to successfully become a part of this world, it is important to understand not only the technical aspects, but also the organizational, management and communication roles. Roles in software development, as in film production, are not always limited to technical people, but include professionals who manage the project, interact with stakeholders, handle marketing issues and develop the community. These roles are equally valuable and are necessary for the project to be successful and attract the attention of the audience.
For many aspiring developers, the process of choosing a path in the industry can be daunting, and they are often confused about what opportunities exist outside of technical work. This work aims to provide a clear understanding of how the world of programming works, what key roles exist in a project, and how a beginner can choose his or her path beyond just technical skills.
Key words:
Programming
Roles in the project
Software development
An open-source project
Career path
New to programming
Development process
Startups and large companies
Skill development
Non-technical roles
Labor market in IT
The authors' goal:
The purpose of this work is to provide novice programmers and anyone interested with a complete and clear idea of how the world of programming works. We strive to:
Describe the main roles that may exist in a project and their relationships.
Explain how a newbie can enter this world and what skills and knowledge are required for each role.
Provide insight into the development process, how different specialists interact, and how to choose your path in this area.
Talk about career development and opportunities for growth in programming, including in the context of open-source projects and startups.
Conclusion:
We are confident that understanding the structure of projects, roles in the team and development paths will help beginning professionals make an informed choice and quickly adapt to the world of programming. This work serves as a guide for those who want to enter the industry, as well as for those who are already in it and want to expand their horizons.
Now this is a complete description with title, introduction, rationale, keywords and purpose of the work.
Yes, improving Yggdrasil code can be beneficial in several ways, depending on your goals and needs. Here are some reasons to improve your code:
Performance: Code optimization can improve code performance by reducing the use of resources such as memory and CPU time.
Safety: If the code has not been updated or vulnerabilities have been identified, improving it and updating it to meet modern security standards is an important task.
Readability and Maintainability: Improving the structure and quality of the code can make it easier to maintain and develop, especially if the project is maintained by multiple developers.
Compatibility and Extensibility: Perhaps the project can be improved by making it more compatible with modern technologies and extensible for new use cases.
Integration with other projects: If new features or integrations with other systems are added to the project, improving the code will better support such extensions.
Testability: Improving the code may include creating more convenient testing methods, which is important for the reliability and stability of the system.
If there are specific areas for improvement or bottlenecks in a project, this can be particularly important in improving the overall efficiency and quality of the system.
Successful development and maintenance of a project such as Yggdrasil requires several key participants with different skills and experience. Here is a list of required roles:
Project Manager:
Responsible for planning, coordinating, managing deadlines and priorities.
Monitors task completion, sets goals, and evaluates progress.
Interacts with other project participants and customers.
System Architect:
Develops the system architecture, defines the main components and their interactions.
Conducts requirements analysis and makes recommendations on technology selection.
Developers (Backend/Full-stack):
They write the main code of the system, including the server side, working with databases and API.
They are engaged in performance optimization, bug fixes, and functionality improvements.
Security Engineer:
Ensures system security, including work with cryptography, authentication, and protection against attacks.
Checks code for vulnerabilities, implements and maintains security systems.
Network Engineer:
Specializes in setting up and optimizing network connections.
Works with protocols and distributed systems such as p2p and VPN.
Testers (QA):
Conduct software testing, identify bugs and errors.
Working on test automation and creating tests for new features.
Technical Writer:
Creates technical documentation describing the architecture, code, instructions for developers and users.
Keeps documentation current and accessible.
UI/UX designer (if required):
Responsible for the user interface (if the project includes a client side with UI).
Works on ease of use, improves user interaction with the system.
System Administrator (DevOps):
Provides infrastructure deployment, monitoring and support.
Works on automating CI/CD processes, managing servers and containers.
Analyst/Researcher:
Conducts requirements and market analysis, assesses user needs and technology trends.
May also research new approaches and algorithms to improve the system.
Each of these roles plays an important role in supporting and developing the project. Team structure may vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, and some roles may be combined into one person, especially on smaller projects.
Yes, a similar role in project development can be identified "Product Manager", who performs functions similar to a producer in the film business.
Product manager:
General Product Management: Just as a producer manages the creation of a film, a product manager is responsible for the entire life cycle of a product, from idea to release and support.
Coordination between teams: A product manager often coordinates the interaction of various teams (developers, designers, marketers, testers) and ensures that tasks are completed on time.
Making key decisions: Just as a producer makes strategic decisions, a product manager determines development directions, functional priorities, and also negotiates with stakeholders (for example, customers or investors).
Resources and budget: A product manager also manages resources, controls the project budget, assigns tasks so that the product is delivered on time and within budget.
Differences from the producer:
Unlike a producer, who may be involved in financing and promotion in the film industry, a product manager focuses more on the actual development of the product and its features, as well as interaction with users.
If the project is large and complex, there may be several product managers, each of whom is responsible for separate parts of the project, such as the frontend, backend or infrastructure.
The initiator of a project similar to Yggdrasil could be founder or initiator of the idea (for example, in the context of a startup or open-source project). This is a person or group of people who:
Form the basic concept: The project initiator often defines the project's vision, goals and mission. They can be theoreticians, practitioners or enthusiasts who see a need to solve a problem and propose their own approach.
Attract resources and partners: It is important that the initiator can assemble a team, attract investors, volunteers or even influential partners to implement the idea.
Starting development: The proponent may organize the initial phase of the project, including basic concept development, prototypes, or research, to prove the viability of the idea and gain support from other stakeholders.
Define strategy and goals: The initiator sets the tone for the project and determines what problems or needs it solves. In the case of open-source projects, the initiator may be the person who has set himself the task of solving technical or social problems, which in turn attracts other developers.
In a more formal structure, such as a startup, the initiator may be founder or general director, while in the open-source community it might be project leader or even several people coordinating the initial development.
Thus, an initiator is someone who launches an idea and inspires others to pursue it, whether through technical or financial efforts.
In a more formalized project team context, there are several key roles associated with the initiative and launch of the project. Here's how it could be:
1. Project Initiator
This is the person or group of people who initiates the project. They may be:
Founders (especially in startups or within new organizations).
Ideologists or thought leaders — people who propose a solution to a specific problem or create a project concept, setting a general strategy and goals.
Sponsors - financial or resource initiators who provide start-up capital or support the project at its initial stage.
2. Project Manager
A formalized manager who can be appointed to coordinate all aspects of the project. This person:
Manages all phases of development including planning, execution and control.
Ensures project completion is on time, within budget and in compliance with requirements.
Coordinates teams and stakeholders, monitors risks and resolves issues that arise during the process.
3. Product Owner
In the context of Agile development or Scrum methodology, this person is responsible for the product development strategy:
Serves as a link between customers (or users) and the development team.
Makes key decisions regarding product functionality and its priorities.
Responsible for maintaining the product backlog and can initiate changes at various stages of development.
4. Development team
This is a group of technical specialists working on the implementation of the project:
Developers (Backend, Frontend, Full-stack).
Security Engineers.
Testers (QA).
System administrators or DevOps specialists.
5. Head of department or program (Program Manager)
If the project is part of a larger enterprise (for example, in large organizations), this role may be allocated:
Oversees several projects aimed at achieving a common business goal.
Responsible for ensuring synergy between various projects and their interdependence.
6. Investor/Project Sponsor
A project sponsor or investor is a person or organization that provides financing for a project:
Supports the project financially and strategically.
Can actively participate in key senior-level decisions.
Provides resources and mentorship to the project.
Thus, in a formalized structure, the project has a clear hierarchy, where project initiator is the key figure who forms the strategy and initial ideas, and project Manager or product manager ensure the implementation of these ideas through team coordination and project management.
Interesting question! Role general producer in the film business has several unique aspects that do not always translate easily to technology projects such as software development or startups. However, there are several factors that may explain why the equivalent of such a role is not as prominent in software development projects.
Reasons for the absence of an obvious analogue of the “general producer”:
Distributed responsibilities: In film, a producer (including a general producer) often performs many tasks, including financial management, crew selection, production management, marketing and distribution. In technology projects, these tasks are distributed among different roles:
Project Manager or product manager can take charge of time management, task management and team coordination.
System Architects And technical leaders are responsible for the technological direction.
Finance executives or investors manage financing and budget planning.
Differences in approaches to risk and financing: In the film business, a producer manages a project as a complex business with high risks and investors, often with many uncertain factors such as the success of the film, audience reactions and marketing strategies. In software development projects, risks are more predictable and can be reduced to managing the team, time and budget. Investors or sponsors are often involved in the project, but do not take on such comprehensive responsibility for the development process itself.
Focus on technology: In technology and software development, the role focuses on creating the product. Here, the success of a product primarily depends on the team of developers, engineers and managers who are responsible for the technical side, unlike in film, where the producer can make a wider range of decisions, including the choice of actors and scripts.
Flexibility and Agile approaches: Modern IT projects often use flexible methodology (Agile, Scrum, etc.), where the focus is on an iterative process and constant adaptation of the product. This means that project roles often focus on specific tasks and goals at each stage, and product management is more collaborative than centralized. The role of "general producer" might be perceived as redundant, since coordination is already delegated to various roles.
Division into narrower roles: In an IT environment, there is a clearer division of labor between technical, business and operational roles. This reduces the need for a single person to cover all aspects, as a film producer does. For example, one person may be responsible for marketing, another for product development, and a third for finance.
Potential analogue of a general producer
If we consider the analogy with general producer, then we can distinguish several roles that can combine the functions inherent in a producer in the film business:
Lead Product Manager or Product Director: He can take on project management at a higher level, coordinating not only the technical aspects, but also the overall product strategy, its market prospects, as well as interaction with various stakeholders (investors, partners, etc.).
Chief Operating Officer (COO): In large companies, the COO role may cover functions similar to a general producer. He oversees all operational aspects of the business, including finances, resources, team and strategies.
Executive Director (CEO) or founder: In startups and small projects, the founder or CEO often performs functions similar to the producer. They may be responsible for everything from concept to marketing to financing, overseeing the project at every level.
Thus, although the role general producer in its full sense is not always present in technology projects, elements of this function can be distributed among several key roles in the team.
In context open-source projects role similar general producer, may also not be as clearly defined, but several analogies can be drawn with more traditional business roles. Open-source projects have a unique structure where responsibilities are often distributed among many participants, but certain individuals can still perform functions similar to those of a film producer. This is what it looks like:
1. Project Lead or Lead Developer
Role in an open-source project project leader will often perform functions similar to the general producer:
Development coordination: The project leader manages the overall direction of development, makes key architectural decisions, and coordinates the work of other participants.
Responsibility for vision and strategy: Like the CEO, the leader shapes the project's development strategy, deciding which features to implement and which to reject, depending on the needs of the community and users.
Attracting participants: A leader often works with other developers, just as a film producer works with actors and creators. This may include managing community contributions, attracting new contributors, and maintaining engagement.
2. Technical Lead
In open-source projects, especially if the project is large, the role of a technical manager can be similar to some of the functions of a producer:
Technical management: The technical leader resolves key issues related to the implementation of functionality, technologies and tools that will be used.
Code quality control: Just as a producer ensures the quality of the final product in a movie, a technical leader ensures that the code meets quality standards and safety requirements.
3. Community Manager
Although the role community manager in an open-source project is not a direct analogue of a producer, he plays an important role in organizing interactions with the outside world, which is also typical for producers:
Engaging and motivating participants: The community manager works with external participants, organizing communication between them and the main developers.
Marketing and promotion of the project: The manager is actively working to disseminate information about the project, attracting new users and developers.
Organization of events and meetings: He can organize meetups, webinars or other events aimed at developing the project.
4. Project Sponsor or Funding Organizations
In the open-source world there may be financial sponsors, such as large companies, organizations or individual donors who support the project with funds. Although the role sponsor in open-source is different from a producer in cinema, they also play an important role in the support and development of the project:
Financing: Sponsors often provide the project with the financial resources needed for its growth, infrastructure, and developers.
Resources and advertising: Sponsors can help a project gain more attention, as well as help build infrastructure and attract new participants.
5. Founder of the project (Founder)
The founder of an open-source project can perform functions similar to the role of a producer:
Initiator of idea and strategy: The founder forms the concept of the project, creates its mission and vision.
Attracting a team and partners: Just like a film producer assembles a team and manages the entire process, the founder of an open-source project can attract other developers, organize teams and decide how to develop the project in the future.
6. Consultants or mentors
In large open-source projects there may be consultants or mentors, who serve as external experts, helping to guide the project in the right direction. While this role is not exactly the same as a producer, it can involve helping make important decisions, especially at a more senior level.
Summary
In open-source projects, the role general producer somewhat breaks down into several separate functions:
Project leader Responsible for strategy, management and vision.
Technical Leader manages technical aspects.
Community Manager deals with external relations, engagement and popularization.
Sponsors or funding organizations provide resources.
Although in the open-source world there is no clear-cut role analogous to the general producer in film, all of these participants collectively perform tasks that ensure the successful development of the project and the achievement of its goals.
Finally, to output the project Ygdrassil to the next level, it is necessary to focus on improving the user interface (UI), providing more flexible customization for users and adding new opportunities for interacting with the project. This may include improving navigation, adding new visual elements and tools for effective project management. In addition, it is worth considering introducing functionality that will more effectively integrate teamwork and the exchange of ideas, which is especially important for open-source projects. Improving these aspects will not only increase the project's appeal to a wider audience, but will also create opportunities for greater community engagement and increased user numbers. The question "Where are you going?" in the context of Ygdrassil, one can answer this way: towards creating an intuitive, powerful and convenient tool for everyone who is looking for opportunities to organize and manage projects in the world of programming.
Here is a list of possible project touchpoints Ygdrassil with other projects that can significantly improve the user experience, expand the functionality and PC/software combination, and also make these technologies more accessible and useful for specialists and beginners, especially in the face of current challenges:
1. Integration with tools for remote work (for example, Slack, Microsoft Teams)
Provide easy integration with popular communication and teamwork platforms, improving collaboration and communication across projects.
2. Support for cloud technologies (for example, AWS, Google Cloud, Azure)
Implementation of integration with cloud services for data storage, application deployment and scalability to expand the functionality of the project.
3. API for interaction with external services
The ability to integrate with other services via API, which will open up new opportunities for expanding the functionality of Igdrassil, including synchronization with other projects and task automation.
4. Data visualization and analytics (for example, integration with Power BI, Tableau)
Adding functions for data visualization, which will allow users to easily analyze project statistics, draw conclusions and make informed decisions.
5. Integration with project management systems (for example, Jira, Trello, Asana)
Built-in support for popular project management systems will improve planning, control and reporting of tasks, which will provide greater flexibility in the work of teams.
6. Using blockchain technologies to verify and track changes
Integration with blockchain platforms to ensure transparency and security of transactions, as well as to track the history of changes in the project.
7. Integration with Git and other version control systems
The ability to more easily interact with Git repositories for convenient storage and synchronization of source code.
8. Using machine learning to analyze project data
Implementation of machine learning algorithms that will analyze user behavior and predict needs, improving interaction with the interface and optimizing functionality.
9. Interfaces for users with special needs (accessibility)
Development of adaptive interfaces that will be convenient for people with disabilities, for example, support for screen readers, high-contrast themes and voice control.
10. Supports Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) to showcase projects
Introducing AR/VR to demonstrate and interact with projects in a more interactive format, which can be useful for presentations and training.
11. Implementation of neural network solutions for task automation
Using neural networks to automate routine tasks such as reporting, code analysis, or documentation generation.
12. Integration with online learning platforms (e.g. Coursera, Udemy)
Implementation of educational modules or courses available directly through the Igdrassil interface to train new users or improve their skills.
13. Supports multitasking and real-time collaboration
Creation of tools for effective work on a project in real time with the possibility of parallel editing and instant exchange of information.
14. Flexibility in customizing UI/UX for different types of users
The ability to customize the interface for different types of users: from beginners to experts, providing simplicity for some and deep customization for others.
15. Integration with monitoring and logging systems (for example, Prometheus, Grafana)
Ability to monitor project activity, performance and errors using popular monitoring and visualization tools.
16. Integration with automated testing platforms (for example, Selenium, Jenkins)
Incorporating capabilities for automated software testing within a project, improving the quality of the released product.
17. Support for DevOps practices to automate deployment and CI/CD
Introducing capabilities for automated deployment and integration with CI/CD pipelines, improving development speed and stability.
18. Integration with services for managing finances and resources (for example, QuickBooks, Xero)
The ability to manage project finances, track budgets, expenses and income using integration with popular financial platforms.
19. API support for working with the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ability to interact with IoT devices to create more complex and integrated software development solutions.
20. Integration with video conferencing systems (for example, Zoom, Google Meet)
Seamlessly integrate with video communication platforms for meetings and discussions, ensuring effective collaboration among teams located in different locations.
21. Implementation of cybersecurity and data protection solutions
Integration with data security, leak and malware protection tools, and access rights management.
22. Support for integration with social networks to promote projects
Implementation of functions for automatic dissemination of information about the project through social networks, which will help in popularizing it and attracting users.
23. Use of cryptocurrencies for financing and transactions within the project
The introduction of support for cryptocurrency payments and financing facilities, which will give the project additional flexibility in financing and attracting investments.
24. Flexible notification and reminder system
Implementation of a notification system that will be flexibly customized to the needs of users and remind them of key events, deadlines and changes in the project.
25. Support for language packs and interface localization
The ability to choose the interface language and support users from different countries and regions, which will make the project more accessible and expand the audience.
26. Mechanisms for managing the life cycle of software and its versions
Implementation of version and release management tools that will simplify the process of deploying and updating the application.
These improvements can significantly increase the functionality of Igdrassil, improve the user experience and make the project more convenient and accessible to a wide audience, including both experts and beginners. Importantly, most of these changes are relevant to current trends and challenges related to remote work, security, efficiency and accessibility of technology.
Self-hosting is indeed becoming increasingly attractive in the context of privacy and anonymity, especially with increasing attention to data protection and the value of personal information. In connection with the objectives of the project Ygdrassil Several directions can be considered that could improve the project and support the idea of autonomy, privacy and security for users. Here are some of them that may be useful and practical to implement:
1. Self-hosting as an alternative to cloud solutions
Description: Offer users the ability to deploy Ygdrassil on their own servers or local machines. This will ensure complete control over the data and the project, minimizing the risks of leaks or unauthorized access.
How to implement: Develop detailed documentation for installing and configuring Igdrassil on various platforms (Linux, Windows, macOS) with simple instructions and scripts for automatic configuration.
Advantages: Increased security, data protection and the ability to work in completely closed or local networks.
2. Support for anonymous networks (for example, Tor, I2P)
Description: Integration with anonymous networks such as Tor or I2P will allow users to use the project in an environment with the maximum degree of privacy and anonymity.
How to implement: Enable the ability for users to connect to the project via Tor, ensuring their IP address is hidden and improved protection from surveillance. You can offer separate configurations and settings for using such networks.
Advantages: Privacy and protection from monitoring or tracking, which is especially important for users who value anonymity.
3. Data encryption on the client side (End-to-Encryption)
Description: Implement client-side data encryption before sending it to the server, so that only users can decrypt their data and even project administrators cannot access the content.
How to implement: Use standard and proven cryptographic methods such as AES for encryption and integrate them into the project so that only authorized users can decrypt their data.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, protecting data from potential leaks, attacks or unauthorized access attempts.
4. Decentralized data stores
Description: Possibility of using decentralized data storage systems such as IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) or Sia. This will allow users to store data on distributed networks, making them less vulnerable to attacks and giving them more control over their data.
How to implement: Integrate support for IPFS or other similar services so that users can store and share data through decentralized storage.
Advantages: Censorship protection, increased data availability, decentralized storage and improved privacy.
5. Local and secure databases
Description: Offer the ability to use local databases to store information rather than relying on cloud solutions. You can also offer the option of using protected and encrypted databases.
How to implement: Integrate SQLite, local or distribution databases with the ability to encrypt data on the user side, without requiring centralized storage.
Advantages: Users have full control over their data, which improves security and protects it from external control.
6. Confidential authentication methods
Description: Design and implement authentication mechanisms that maintain confidentiality, such as using cryptographic methods or two-factor authentication (2FA) over secure channels.
How to implement: Supports authentication through secure and anonymous channels, such as one-time passwords, biometrics, or tokens that do not require linking to personal information.
Advantages: Increased security, protection against phishing attacks and minimizing the need to collect personal information.
7. Autonomous update and patch systems
Description: Offer a solution that allows users to receive updates and security patches through offline channels, not tied to external servers, to avoid the risk of surveillance or data leaks.
How to implement: Use an automatic update system that will check for patches and updates across a distributed network, without the need to connect to centralized servers.
Advantages: Security from external monitoring, the ability to update autonomously and minimize privacy risks.
8. Local or private networks for data synchronization
Description: Implementation of functionality for data synchronization and interaction between users on local networks or private VPNs, excluding external servers and minimizing the risk of leaks.
How to implement: Develop functionality for exchanging data through secure channels, such as local networks or VPNs, without the need to use cloud servers.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, eliminating dependence on cloud providers.
9. Data recovery mechanisms using cryptographic keys
Description: Implementation of a system for restoring access to data using cryptographic keys, which will allow the user to restore data in the event of loss of access, without resorting to external sources.
How to implement: Implement functionality to create backup keys or tokens that can be used to restore data.
Advantages: Protection against data loss, ease of access restoration without the participation of third parties.
10. Supports multi-factor authentication via key storage devices (such as YubiKey)
Description: To improve security, you can offer support for authentication through devices that generate one-time keys, such as YubiKey or other hardware devices.
How to implement: Integrate support for such devices into the project's authentication system.
Advantages: Enhanced security, protection against phishing and other authentication attacks.
These solutions can make a project Ygdrassil more attractive to users who value privacy, security and autonomy. Implementing such capabilities will ensure reliable data protection and help build trust among users, especially in the face of growing threats to personal information online.
Implement all these possibilities within the project Ygdrassilmaking them work “out of the box” for an untrained user is certainly difficult, but possible if you approach the implementation step by step. However, there are a few important points to consider:
1. Keep it simple for untrained users
Implementing most of these functions in a finished product requires creating an intuitive interface that hides all the complexity behind convenient settings and smart assistants. For untrained users, it is important that most operations are performed automatically, without the need for intervention.
How to implement it:
For self-hosting You can develop simple scripts or installation wizards that automate the deployment, configuration, and upgrade processes. This can be achieved through the use of containers (such as Docker), which can be configured with minimal effort.
Integration with Tor and I2P should not only be possible, but also offered as an easy setup in the interface. A couple of clicks to connect through these networks, with pre-configured settings, will improve the experience for beginners.
Encryption data must be transparent. For example, automatically encrypting data on the client side without the user needing to know how it works can be implemented as on/off settings.
2. Technical complexity and documentation
One important aspect will be the quality of documentation and training materials. For an untrained user, it will be useful if all the information is presented in a step-by-step format with clear explanations.
How to implement it:
Add built-in hints And interactive tutorials, which will help the user go through all the setup steps.
Provide flexible interface settings using templates for different types of users (newbies, experienced users, administrators).
Turn on automatic updates, which will eliminate the need to manually search for patches and updates, as well as integration with services for restoring from backups.
3. Performance issues and hardware requirements
Some of the proposed solutions may require quite powerful resources, such as encryption and decentralized data storage (IPFS). For the casual user, it is important that such features work effectively even on less powerful devices.
How to implement it:
Enable feature step-by-step setup, where the user can choose which features and services to activate based on the power of their device.
For remote hosting and use of cloud services You can offer options with minimal requirements, for example, using cloud providers for data storage, which will reduce the load on the local computer.
4. Transparency in use and user interface
Integration process with technologies such as Tor, IPFS, or machine learning, may be difficult to understand for beginners. It is important that such systems operate in the background, with clear and understandable status alerts, and provide the user with the ability to enable or disable these features at their discretion.
How to implement it:
Simple and intuitive interface with visual indicators what's happening in the background (for example, when data is encrypted or when a Tor connection is active).
Enable ready-made presets with safe settings for beginners, and more complex, customizable settings for experienced users.
5. Problems with network infrastructure and dependencies on third-party solutions
The use of decentralized technologies and anonymous networks such as Tor, can cause performance and connection stability issues, which can be frustrating for the untrained user.
How to implement it:
Simplify the process of switching between main network And anonymous network, so that the user can easily return to normal operation if problems with anonymity arise.
The out-of-the-box approach means that most of these dependencies and technologies will work automatically, hiding technical details and providing stable work.
What can be realistically implemented for untrained users:
Basic functions (e.g. self-hosting, basic encryption, Tor connection) can be made accessible to beginners with simple tools and instructions.
Cloud and decentralized solutions can be implemented through standard interfaces with basic settings for beginners, but with the possibility of deeper customization for experienced users.
Updates and patches: You can implement automatic update and patch mechanisms to protect against vulnerabilities without user intervention.
Easy security setup: Users can enable or disable security features (such as encryption and anonymous networks) through the interface with minimal settings.
What is the way out:
In order to do this “really out of the box”, you need to consider two important aspects:
Simplicity of the interface and automation of all complex technical processes.
Accessibility for different types of users, including those without technical experience.
Creating such software may require a lot of effort at the development stage, but the result can be a very powerful tool for users seeking privacy, security and independence.#Programming #RolesInTheProject #SoftwareDevelopment #OpenSource #CareerPath #NewToProgramming #DevelopmentProcess #Startups #NonTechnicalRoles #IT #TechIndustry #ProjectManagement #UIUX #Marketing #CommunityBuilding #ProductManagement #CareerGrowth #TechLeadership #TechMarketing #Agile #LearnToCode #TechCareers #TechProjects #InnovationInTech #TechPathways
Qoto Mastodon
https://qoto.org/web/@tyden/113815686277448963 -
"Roles in the world of programming: The path to the industry through non-technical professions and their analogies with the film industry"
Introduction:
In the modern world, programming has become one of the most popular and dynamically developing professions. However, success in this field is not limited solely to technical skills. In the world of software development, as in the film industry, there are important roles that are not directly related to coding, but are key to the successful delivery of a project. Just as in cinema there are not only directors and camera operators, but also producers, marketing managers, PR specialists and other professionals, in the IT field there is also a number of non-technical professions that support and develop the project, ensuring its successful implementation.
This work is aimed at helping novice developers and anyone interested in understanding the structure of projects that exist in the world of programming and understanding what roles there may be in such projects in addition to developers. We'll look at how the software development process works, what key people work on the project, and how a newcomer without a technical background can find a role in the industry.
As an example, we will take a hypothetical project improvement Ygdrassil. This project has already attracted the attention of many developers and users, and there is every reason to believe that it can be supplemented with new functionality, especially in the field of user interface (UI). We will look at how the introduction of new roles and improved communication between the various development participants can affect the success of such a project, as well as its further development.
Rationale:
The world of programming is vast and multifaceted, and to successfully become a part of this world, it is important to understand not only the technical aspects, but also the organizational, management and communication roles. Roles in software development, as in film production, are not always limited to technical people, but include professionals who manage the project, interact with stakeholders, handle marketing issues and develop the community. These roles are equally valuable and are necessary for the project to be successful and attract the attention of the audience.
For many aspiring developers, the process of choosing a path in the industry can be daunting, and they are often confused about what opportunities exist outside of technical work. This work aims to provide a clear understanding of how the world of programming works, what key roles exist in a project, and how a beginner can choose his or her path beyond just technical skills.
Key words:
Programming
Roles in the project
Software development
An open-source project
Career path
New to programming
Development process
Startups and large companies
Skill development
Non-technical roles
Labor market in IT
The authors' goal:
The purpose of this work is to provide novice programmers and anyone interested with a complete and clear idea of how the world of programming works. We strive to:
Describe the main roles that may exist in a project and their relationships.
Explain how a newbie can enter this world and what skills and knowledge are required for each role.
Provide insight into the development process, how different specialists interact, and how to choose your path in this area.
Talk about career development and opportunities for growth in programming, including in the context of open-source projects and startups.
Conclusion:
We are confident that understanding the structure of projects, roles in the team and development paths will help beginning professionals make an informed choice and quickly adapt to the world of programming. This work serves as a guide for those who want to enter the industry, as well as for those who are already in it and want to expand their horizons.
Now this is a complete description with title, introduction, rationale, keywords and purpose of the work.
Yes, improving Yggdrasil code can be beneficial in several ways, depending on your goals and needs. Here are some reasons to improve your code:
Performance: Code optimization can improve code performance by reducing the use of resources such as memory and CPU time.
Safety: If the code has not been updated or vulnerabilities have been identified, improving it and updating it to meet modern security standards is an important task.
Readability and Maintainability: Improving the structure and quality of the code can make it easier to maintain and develop, especially if the project is maintained by multiple developers.
Compatibility and Extensibility: Perhaps the project can be improved by making it more compatible with modern technologies and extensible for new use cases.
Integration with other projects: If new features or integrations with other systems are added to the project, improving the code will better support such extensions.
Testability: Improving the code may include creating more convenient testing methods, which is important for the reliability and stability of the system.
If there are specific areas for improvement or bottlenecks in a project, this can be particularly important in improving the overall efficiency and quality of the system.
Successful development and maintenance of a project such as Yggdrasil requires several key participants with different skills and experience. Here is a list of required roles:
Project Manager:
Responsible for planning, coordinating, managing deadlines and priorities.
Monitors task completion, sets goals, and evaluates progress.
Interacts with other project participants and customers.
System Architect:
Develops the system architecture, defines the main components and their interactions.
Conducts requirements analysis and makes recommendations on technology selection.
Developers (Backend/Full-stack):
They write the main code of the system, including the server side, working with databases and API.
They are engaged in performance optimization, bug fixes, and functionality improvements.
Security Engineer:
Ensures system security, including work with cryptography, authentication, and protection against attacks.
Checks code for vulnerabilities, implements and maintains security systems.
Network Engineer:
Specializes in setting up and optimizing network connections.
Works with protocols and distributed systems such as p2p and VPN.
Testers (QA):
Conduct software testing, identify bugs and errors.
Working on test automation and creating tests for new features.
Technical Writer:
Creates technical documentation describing the architecture, code, instructions for developers and users.
Keeps documentation current and accessible.
UI/UX designer (if required):
Responsible for the user interface (if the project includes a client side with UI).
Works on ease of use, improves user interaction with the system.
System Administrator (DevOps):
Provides infrastructure deployment, monitoring and support.
Works on automating CI/CD processes, managing servers and containers.
Analyst/Researcher:
Conducts requirements and market analysis, assesses user needs and technology trends.
May also research new approaches and algorithms to improve the system.
Each of these roles plays an important role in supporting and developing the project. Team structure may vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, and some roles may be combined into one person, especially on smaller projects.
Yes, a similar role in project development can be identified "Product Manager", who performs functions similar to a producer in the film business.
Product manager:
General Product Management: Just as a producer manages the creation of a film, a product manager is responsible for the entire life cycle of a product, from idea to release and support.
Coordination between teams: A product manager often coordinates the interaction of various teams (developers, designers, marketers, testers) and ensures that tasks are completed on time.
Making key decisions: Just as a producer makes strategic decisions, a product manager determines development directions, functional priorities, and also negotiates with stakeholders (for example, customers or investors).
Resources and budget: A product manager also manages resources, controls the project budget, assigns tasks so that the product is delivered on time and within budget.
Differences from the producer:
Unlike a producer, who may be involved in financing and promotion in the film industry, a product manager focuses more on the actual development of the product and its features, as well as interaction with users.
If the project is large and complex, there may be several product managers, each of whom is responsible for separate parts of the project, such as the frontend, backend or infrastructure.
The initiator of a project similar to Yggdrasil could be founder or initiator of the idea (for example, in the context of a startup or open-source project). This is a person or group of people who:
Form the basic concept: The project initiator often defines the project's vision, goals and mission. They can be theoreticians, practitioners or enthusiasts who see a need to solve a problem and propose their own approach.
Attract resources and partners: It is important that the initiator can assemble a team, attract investors, volunteers or even influential partners to implement the idea.
Starting development: The proponent may organize the initial phase of the project, including basic concept development, prototypes, or research, to prove the viability of the idea and gain support from other stakeholders.
Define strategy and goals: The initiator sets the tone for the project and determines what problems or needs it solves. In the case of open-source projects, the initiator may be the person who has set himself the task of solving technical or social problems, which in turn attracts other developers.
In a more formal structure, such as a startup, the initiator may be founder or general director, while in the open-source community it might be project leader or even several people coordinating the initial development.
Thus, an initiator is someone who launches an idea and inspires others to pursue it, whether through technical or financial efforts.
In a more formalized project team context, there are several key roles associated with the initiative and launch of the project. Here's how it could be:
1. Project Initiator
This is the person or group of people who initiates the project. They may be:
Founders (especially in startups or within new organizations).
Ideologists or thought leaders — people who propose a solution to a specific problem or create a project concept, setting a general strategy and goals.
Sponsors - financial or resource initiators who provide start-up capital or support the project at its initial stage.
2. Project Manager
A formalized manager who can be appointed to coordinate all aspects of the project. This person:
Manages all phases of development including planning, execution and control.
Ensures project completion is on time, within budget and in compliance with requirements.
Coordinates teams and stakeholders, monitors risks and resolves issues that arise during the process.
3. Product Owner
In the context of Agile development or Scrum methodology, this person is responsible for the product development strategy:
Serves as a link between customers (or users) and the development team.
Makes key decisions regarding product functionality and its priorities.
Responsible for maintaining the product backlog and can initiate changes at various stages of development.
4. Development team
This is a group of technical specialists working on the implementation of the project:
Developers (Backend, Frontend, Full-stack).
Security Engineers.
Testers (QA).
System administrators or DevOps specialists.
5. Head of department or program (Program Manager)
If the project is part of a larger enterprise (for example, in large organizations), this role may be allocated:
Oversees several projects aimed at achieving a common business goal.
Responsible for ensuring synergy between various projects and their interdependence.
6. Investor/Project Sponsor
A project sponsor or investor is a person or organization that provides financing for a project:
Supports the project financially and strategically.
Can actively participate in key senior-level decisions.
Provides resources and mentorship to the project.
Thus, in a formalized structure, the project has a clear hierarchy, where project initiator is the key figure who forms the strategy and initial ideas, and project Manager or product manager ensure the implementation of these ideas through team coordination and project management.
Interesting question! Role general producer in the film business has several unique aspects that do not always translate easily to technology projects such as software development or startups. However, there are several factors that may explain why the equivalent of such a role is not as prominent in software development projects.
Reasons for the absence of an obvious analogue of the “general producer”:
Distributed responsibilities: In film, a producer (including a general producer) often performs many tasks, including financial management, crew selection, production management, marketing and distribution. In technology projects, these tasks are distributed among different roles:
Project Manager or product manager can take charge of time management, task management and team coordination.
System Architects And technical leaders are responsible for the technological direction.
Finance executives or investors manage financing and budget planning.
Differences in approaches to risk and financing: In the film business, a producer manages a project as a complex business with high risks and investors, often with many uncertain factors such as the success of the film, audience reactions and marketing strategies. In software development projects, risks are more predictable and can be reduced to managing the team, time and budget. Investors or sponsors are often involved in the project, but do not take on such comprehensive responsibility for the development process itself.
Focus on technology: In technology and software development, the role focuses on creating the product. Here, the success of a product primarily depends on the team of developers, engineers and managers who are responsible for the technical side, unlike in film, where the producer can make a wider range of decisions, including the choice of actors and scripts.
Flexibility and Agile approaches: Modern IT projects often use flexible methodology (Agile, Scrum, etc.), where the focus is on an iterative process and constant adaptation of the product. This means that project roles often focus on specific tasks and goals at each stage, and product management is more collaborative than centralized. The role of "general producer" might be perceived as redundant, since coordination is already delegated to various roles.
Division into narrower roles: In an IT environment, there is a clearer division of labor between technical, business and operational roles. This reduces the need for a single person to cover all aspects, as a film producer does. For example, one person may be responsible for marketing, another for product development, and a third for finance.
Potential analogue of a general producer
If we consider the analogy with general producer, then we can distinguish several roles that can combine the functions inherent in a producer in the film business:
Lead Product Manager or Product Director: He can take on project management at a higher level, coordinating not only the technical aspects, but also the overall product strategy, its market prospects, as well as interaction with various stakeholders (investors, partners, etc.).
Chief Operating Officer (COO): In large companies, the COO role may cover functions similar to a general producer. He oversees all operational aspects of the business, including finances, resources, team and strategies.
Executive Director (CEO) or founder: In startups and small projects, the founder or CEO often performs functions similar to the producer. They may be responsible for everything from concept to marketing to financing, overseeing the project at every level.
Thus, although the role general producer in its full sense is not always present in technology projects, elements of this function can be distributed among several key roles in the team.
In context open-source projects role similar general producer, may also not be as clearly defined, but several analogies can be drawn with more traditional business roles. Open-source projects have a unique structure where responsibilities are often distributed among many participants, but certain individuals can still perform functions similar to those of a film producer. This is what it looks like:
1. Project Lead or Lead Developer
Role in an open-source project project leader will often perform functions similar to the general producer:
Development coordination: The project leader manages the overall direction of development, makes key architectural decisions, and coordinates the work of other participants.
Responsibility for vision and strategy: Like the CEO, the leader shapes the project's development strategy, deciding which features to implement and which to reject, depending on the needs of the community and users.
Attracting participants: A leader often works with other developers, just as a film producer works with actors and creators. This may include managing community contributions, attracting new contributors, and maintaining engagement.
2. Technical Lead
In open-source projects, especially if the project is large, the role of a technical manager can be similar to some of the functions of a producer:
Technical management: The technical leader resolves key issues related to the implementation of functionality, technologies and tools that will be used.
Code quality control: Just as a producer ensures the quality of the final product in a movie, a technical leader ensures that the code meets quality standards and safety requirements.
3. Community Manager
Although the role community manager in an open-source project is not a direct analogue of a producer, he plays an important role in organizing interactions with the outside world, which is also typical for producers:
Engaging and motivating participants: The community manager works with external participants, organizing communication between them and the main developers.
Marketing and promotion of the project: The manager is actively working to disseminate information about the project, attracting new users and developers.
Organization of events and meetings: He can organize meetups, webinars or other events aimed at developing the project.
4. Project Sponsor or Funding Organizations
In the open-source world there may be financial sponsors, such as large companies, organizations or individual donors who support the project with funds. Although the role sponsor in open-source is different from a producer in cinema, they also play an important role in the support and development of the project:
Financing: Sponsors often provide the project with the financial resources needed for its growth, infrastructure, and developers.
Resources and advertising: Sponsors can help a project gain more attention, as well as help build infrastructure and attract new participants.
5. Founder of the project (Founder)
The founder of an open-source project can perform functions similar to the role of a producer:
Initiator of idea and strategy: The founder forms the concept of the project, creates its mission and vision.
Attracting a team and partners: Just like a film producer assembles a team and manages the entire process, the founder of an open-source project can attract other developers, organize teams and decide how to develop the project in the future.
6. Consultants or mentors
In large open-source projects there may be consultants or mentors, who serve as external experts, helping to guide the project in the right direction. While this role is not exactly the same as a producer, it can involve helping make important decisions, especially at a more senior level.
Summary
In open-source projects, the role general producer somewhat breaks down into several separate functions:
Project leader Responsible for strategy, management and vision.
Technical Leader manages technical aspects.
Community Manager deals with external relations, engagement and popularization.
Sponsors or funding organizations provide resources.
Although in the open-source world there is no clear-cut role analogous to the general producer in film, all of these participants collectively perform tasks that ensure the successful development of the project and the achievement of its goals.
Finally, to output the project Ygdrassil to the next level, it is necessary to focus on improving the user interface (UI), providing more flexible customization for users and adding new opportunities for interacting with the project. This may include improving navigation, adding new visual elements and tools for effective project management. In addition, it is worth considering introducing functionality that will more effectively integrate teamwork and the exchange of ideas, which is especially important for open-source projects. Improving these aspects will not only increase the project's appeal to a wider audience, but will also create opportunities for greater community engagement and increased user numbers. The question "Where are you going?" in the context of Ygdrassil, one can answer this way: towards creating an intuitive, powerful and convenient tool for everyone who is looking for opportunities to organize and manage projects in the world of programming.
Here is a list of possible project touchpoints Ygdrassil with other projects that can significantly improve the user experience, expand the functionality and PC/software combination, and also make these technologies more accessible and useful for specialists and beginners, especially in the face of current challenges:
1. Integration with tools for remote work (for example, Slack, Microsoft Teams)
Provide easy integration with popular communication and teamwork platforms, improving collaboration and communication across projects.
2. Support for cloud technologies (for example, AWS, Google Cloud, Azure)
Implementation of integration with cloud services for data storage, application deployment and scalability to expand the functionality of the project.
3. API for interaction with external services
The ability to integrate with other services via API, which will open up new opportunities for expanding the functionality of Igdrassil, including synchronization with other projects and task automation.
4. Data visualization and analytics (for example, integration with Power BI, Tableau)
Adding functions for data visualization, which will allow users to easily analyze project statistics, draw conclusions and make informed decisions.
5. Integration with project management systems (for example, Jira, Trello, Asana)
Built-in support for popular project management systems will improve planning, control and reporting of tasks, which will provide greater flexibility in the work of teams.
6. Using blockchain technologies to verify and track changes
Integration with blockchain platforms to ensure transparency and security of transactions, as well as to track the history of changes in the project.
7. Integration with Git and other version control systems
The ability to more easily interact with Git repositories for convenient storage and synchronization of source code.
8. Using machine learning to analyze project data
Implementation of machine learning algorithms that will analyze user behavior and predict needs, improving interaction with the interface and optimizing functionality.
9. Interfaces for users with special needs (accessibility)
Development of adaptive interfaces that will be convenient for people with disabilities, for example, support for screen readers, high-contrast themes and voice control.
10. Supports Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) to showcase projects
Introducing AR/VR to demonstrate and interact with projects in a more interactive format, which can be useful for presentations and training.
11. Implementation of neural network solutions for task automation
Using neural networks to automate routine tasks such as reporting, code analysis, or documentation generation.
12. Integration with online learning platforms (e.g. Coursera, Udemy)
Implementation of educational modules or courses available directly through the Igdrassil interface to train new users or improve their skills.
13. Supports multitasking and real-time collaboration
Creation of tools for effective work on a project in real time with the possibility of parallel editing and instant exchange of information.
14. Flexibility in customizing UI/UX for different types of users
The ability to customize the interface for different types of users: from beginners to experts, providing simplicity for some and deep customization for others.
15. Integration with monitoring and logging systems (for example, Prometheus, Grafana)
Ability to monitor project activity, performance and errors using popular monitoring and visualization tools.
16. Integration with automated testing platforms (for example, Selenium, Jenkins)
Incorporating capabilities for automated software testing within a project, improving the quality of the released product.
17. Support for DevOps practices to automate deployment and CI/CD
Introducing capabilities for automated deployment and integration with CI/CD pipelines, improving development speed and stability.
18. Integration with services for managing finances and resources (for example, QuickBooks, Xero)
The ability to manage project finances, track budgets, expenses and income using integration with popular financial platforms.
19. API support for working with the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ability to interact with IoT devices to create more complex and integrated software development solutions.
20. Integration with video conferencing systems (for example, Zoom, Google Meet)
Seamlessly integrate with video communication platforms for meetings and discussions, ensuring effective collaboration among teams located in different locations.
21. Implementation of cybersecurity and data protection solutions
Integration with data security, leak and malware protection tools, and access rights management.
22. Support for integration with social networks to promote projects
Implementation of functions for automatic dissemination of information about the project through social networks, which will help in popularizing it and attracting users.
23. Use of cryptocurrencies for financing and transactions within the project
The introduction of support for cryptocurrency payments and financing facilities, which will give the project additional flexibility in financing and attracting investments.
24. Flexible notification and reminder system
Implementation of a notification system that will be flexibly customized to the needs of users and remind them of key events, deadlines and changes in the project.
25. Support for language packs and interface localization
The ability to choose the interface language and support users from different countries and regions, which will make the project more accessible and expand the audience.
26. Mechanisms for managing the life cycle of software and its versions
Implementation of version and release management tools that will simplify the process of deploying and updating the application.
These improvements can significantly increase the functionality of Igdrassil, improve the user experience and make the project more convenient and accessible to a wide audience, including both experts and beginners. Importantly, most of these changes are relevant to current trends and challenges related to remote work, security, efficiency and accessibility of technology.
Self-hosting is indeed becoming increasingly attractive in the context of privacy and anonymity, especially with increasing attention to data protection and the value of personal information. In connection with the objectives of the project Ygdrassil Several directions can be considered that could improve the project and support the idea of autonomy, privacy and security for users. Here are some of them that may be useful and practical to implement:
1. Self-hosting as an alternative to cloud solutions
Description: Offer users the ability to deploy Ygdrassil on their own servers or local machines. This will ensure complete control over the data and the project, minimizing the risks of leaks or unauthorized access.
How to implement: Develop detailed documentation for installing and configuring Igdrassil on various platforms (Linux, Windows, macOS) with simple instructions and scripts for automatic configuration.
Advantages: Increased security, data protection and the ability to work in completely closed or local networks.
2. Support for anonymous networks (for example, Tor, I2P)
Description: Integration with anonymous networks such as Tor or I2P will allow users to use the project in an environment with the maximum degree of privacy and anonymity.
How to implement: Enable the ability for users to connect to the project via Tor, ensuring their IP address is hidden and improved protection from surveillance. You can offer separate configurations and settings for using such networks.
Advantages: Privacy and protection from monitoring or tracking, which is especially important for users who value anonymity.
3. Data encryption on the client side (End-to-Encryption)
Description: Implement client-side data encryption before sending it to the server, so that only users can decrypt their data and even project administrators cannot access the content.
How to implement: Use standard and proven cryptographic methods such as AES for encryption and integrate them into the project so that only authorized users can decrypt their data.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, protecting data from potential leaks, attacks or unauthorized access attempts.
4. Decentralized data stores
Description: Possibility of using decentralized data storage systems such as IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) or Sia. This will allow users to store data on distributed networks, making them less vulnerable to attacks and giving them more control over their data.
How to implement: Integrate support for IPFS or other similar services so that users can store and share data through decentralized storage.
Advantages: Censorship protection, increased data availability, decentralized storage and improved privacy.
5. Local and secure databases
Description: Offer the ability to use local databases to store information rather than relying on cloud solutions. You can also offer the option of using protected and encrypted databases.
How to implement: Integrate SQLite, local or distribution databases with the ability to encrypt data on the user side, without requiring centralized storage.
Advantages: Users have full control over their data, which improves security and protects it from external control.
6. Confidential authentication methods
Description: Design and implement authentication mechanisms that maintain confidentiality, such as using cryptographic methods or two-factor authentication (2FA) over secure channels.
How to implement: Supports authentication through secure and anonymous channels, such as one-time passwords, biometrics, or tokens that do not require linking to personal information.
Advantages: Increased security, protection against phishing attacks and minimizing the need to collect personal information.
7. Autonomous update and patch systems
Description: Offer a solution that allows users to receive updates and security patches through offline channels, not tied to external servers, to avoid the risk of surveillance or data leaks.
How to implement: Use an automatic update system that will check for patches and updates across a distributed network, without the need to connect to centralized servers.
Advantages: Security from external monitoring, the ability to update autonomously and minimize privacy risks.
8. Local or private networks for data synchronization
Description: Implementation of functionality for data synchronization and interaction between users on local networks or private VPNs, excluding external servers and minimizing the risk of leaks.
How to implement: Develop functionality for exchanging data through secure channels, such as local networks or VPNs, without the need to use cloud servers.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, eliminating dependence on cloud providers.
9. Data recovery mechanisms using cryptographic keys
Description: Implementation of a system for restoring access to data using cryptographic keys, which will allow the user to restore data in the event of loss of access, without resorting to external sources.
How to implement: Implement functionality to create backup keys or tokens that can be used to restore data.
Advantages: Protection against data loss, ease of access restoration without the participation of third parties.
10. Supports multi-factor authentication via key storage devices (such as YubiKey)
Description: To improve security, you can offer support for authentication through devices that generate one-time keys, such as YubiKey or other hardware devices.
How to implement: Integrate support for such devices into the project's authentication system.
Advantages: Enhanced security, protection against phishing and other authentication attacks.
These solutions can make a project Ygdrassil more attractive to users who value privacy, security and autonomy. Implementing such capabilities will ensure reliable data protection and help build trust among users, especially in the face of growing threats to personal information online.
Implement all these possibilities within the project Ygdrassilmaking them work “out of the box” for an untrained user is certainly difficult, but possible if you approach the implementation step by step. However, there are a few important points to consider:
1. Keep it simple for untrained users
Implementing most of these functions in a finished product requires creating an intuitive interface that hides all the complexity behind convenient settings and smart assistants. For untrained users, it is important that most operations are performed automatically, without the need for intervention.
How to implement it:
For self-hosting You can develop simple scripts or installation wizards that automate the deployment, configuration, and upgrade processes. This can be achieved through the use of containers (such as Docker), which can be configured with minimal effort.
Integration with Tor and I2P should not only be possible, but also offered as an easy setup in the interface. A couple of clicks to connect through these networks, with pre-configured settings, will improve the experience for beginners.
Encryption data must be transparent. For example, automatically encrypting data on the client side without the user needing to know how it works can be implemented as on/off settings.
2. Technical complexity and documentation
One important aspect will be the quality of documentation and training materials. For an untrained user, it will be useful if all the information is presented in a step-by-step format with clear explanations.
How to implement it:
Add built-in hints And interactive tutorials, which will help the user go through all the setup steps.
Provide flexible interface settings using templates for different types of users (newbies, experienced users, administrators).
Turn on automatic updates, which will eliminate the need to manually search for patches and updates, as well as integration with services for restoring from backups.
3. Performance issues and hardware requirements
Some of the proposed solutions may require quite powerful resources, such as encryption and decentralized data storage (IPFS). For the casual user, it is important that such features work effectively even on less powerful devices.
How to implement it:
Enable feature step-by-step setup, where the user can choose which features and services to activate based on the power of their device.
For remote hosting and use of cloud services You can offer options with minimal requirements, for example, using cloud providers for data storage, which will reduce the load on the local computer.
4. Transparency in use and user interface
Integration process with technologies such as Tor, IPFS, or machine learning, may be difficult to understand for beginners. It is important that such systems operate in the background, with clear and understandable status alerts, and provide the user with the ability to enable or disable these features at their discretion.
How to implement it:
Simple and intuitive interface with visual indicators what's happening in the background (for example, when data is encrypted or when a Tor connection is active).
Enable ready-made presets with safe settings for beginners, and more complex, customizable settings for experienced users.
5. Problems with network infrastructure and dependencies on third-party solutions
The use of decentralized technologies and anonymous networks such as Tor, can cause performance and connection stability issues, which can be frustrating for the untrained user.
How to implement it:
Simplify the process of switching between main network And anonymous network, so that the user can easily return to normal operation if problems with anonymity arise.
The out-of-the-box approach means that most of these dependencies and technologies will work automatically, hiding technical details and providing stable work.
What can be realistically implemented for untrained users:
Basic functions (e.g. self-hosting, basic encryption, Tor connection) can be made accessible to beginners with simple tools and instructions.
Cloud and decentralized solutions can be implemented through standard interfaces with basic settings for beginners, but with the possibility of deeper customization for experienced users.
Updates and patches: You can implement automatic update and patch mechanisms to protect against vulnerabilities without user intervention.
Easy security setup: Users can enable or disable security features (such as encryption and anonymous networks) through the interface with minimal settings.
What is the way out:
In order to do this “really out of the box”, you need to consider two important aspects:
Simplicity of the interface and automation of all complex technical processes.
Accessibility for different types of users, including those without technical experience.
Creating such software may require a lot of effort at the development stage, but the result can be a very powerful tool for users seeking privacy, security and independence.#Programming #RolesInTheProject #SoftwareDevelopment #OpenSource #CareerPath #NewToProgramming #DevelopmentProcess #Startups #NonTechnicalRoles #IT #TechIndustry #ProjectManagement #UIUX #Marketing #CommunityBuilding #ProductManagement #CareerGrowth #TechLeadership #TechMarketing #Agile #LearnToCode #TechCareers #TechProjects #InnovationInTech #TechPathways
Qoto Mastodon
https://qoto.org/web/@tyden/113815686277448963 -
"Roles in the world of programming: The path to the industry through non-technical professions and their analogies with the film industry"
Introduction:
In the modern world, programming has become one of the most popular and dynamically developing professions. However, success in this field is not limited solely to technical skills. In the world of software development, as in the film industry, there are important roles that are not directly related to coding, but are key to the successful delivery of a project. Just as in cinema there are not only directors and camera operators, but also producers, marketing managers, PR specialists and other professionals, in the IT field there is also a number of non-technical professions that support and develop the project, ensuring its successful implementation.
This work is aimed at helping novice developers and anyone interested in understanding the structure of projects that exist in the world of programming and understanding what roles there may be in such projects in addition to developers. We'll look at how the software development process works, what key people work on the project, and how a newcomer without a technical background can find a role in the industry.
As an example, we will take a hypothetical project improvement Ygdrassil. This project has already attracted the attention of many developers and users, and there is every reason to believe that it can be supplemented with new functionality, especially in the field of user interface (UI). We will look at how the introduction of new roles and improved communication between the various development participants can affect the success of such a project, as well as its further development.
Rationale:
The world of programming is vast and multifaceted, and to successfully become a part of this world, it is important to understand not only the technical aspects, but also the organizational, management and communication roles. Roles in software development, as in film production, are not always limited to technical people, but include professionals who manage the project, interact with stakeholders, handle marketing issues and develop the community. These roles are equally valuable and are necessary for the project to be successful and attract the attention of the audience.
For many aspiring developers, the process of choosing a path in the industry can be daunting, and they are often confused about what opportunities exist outside of technical work. This work aims to provide a clear understanding of how the world of programming works, what key roles exist in a project, and how a beginner can choose his or her path beyond just technical skills.
Key words:
Programming
Roles in the project
Software development
An open-source project
Career path
New to programming
Development process
Startups and large companies
Skill development
Non-technical roles
Labor market in IT
The authors' goal:
The purpose of this work is to provide novice programmers and anyone interested with a complete and clear idea of how the world of programming works. We strive to:
Describe the main roles that may exist in a project and their relationships.
Explain how a newbie can enter this world and what skills and knowledge are required for each role.
Provide insight into the development process, how different specialists interact, and how to choose your path in this area.
Talk about career development and opportunities for growth in programming, including in the context of open-source projects and startups.
Conclusion:
We are confident that understanding the structure of projects, roles in the team and development paths will help beginning professionals make an informed choice and quickly adapt to the world of programming. This work serves as a guide for those who want to enter the industry, as well as for those who are already in it and want to expand their horizons.
Now this is a complete description with title, introduction, rationale, keywords and purpose of the work.
Yes, improving Yggdrasil code can be beneficial in several ways, depending on your goals and needs. Here are some reasons to improve your code:
Performance: Code optimization can improve code performance by reducing the use of resources such as memory and CPU time.
Safety: If the code has not been updated or vulnerabilities have been identified, improving it and updating it to meet modern security standards is an important task.
Readability and Maintainability: Improving the structure and quality of the code can make it easier to maintain and develop, especially if the project is maintained by multiple developers.
Compatibility and Extensibility: Perhaps the project can be improved by making it more compatible with modern technologies and extensible for new use cases.
Integration with other projects: If new features or integrations with other systems are added to the project, improving the code will better support such extensions.
Testability: Improving the code may include creating more convenient testing methods, which is important for the reliability and stability of the system.
If there are specific areas for improvement or bottlenecks in a project, this can be particularly important in improving the overall efficiency and quality of the system.
Successful development and maintenance of a project such as Yggdrasil requires several key participants with different skills and experience. Here is a list of required roles:
Project Manager:
Responsible for planning, coordinating, managing deadlines and priorities.
Monitors task completion, sets goals, and evaluates progress.
Interacts with other project participants and customers.
System Architect:
Develops the system architecture, defines the main components and their interactions.
Conducts requirements analysis and makes recommendations on technology selection.
Developers (Backend/Full-stack):
They write the main code of the system, including the server side, working with databases and API.
They are engaged in performance optimization, bug fixes, and functionality improvements.
Security Engineer:
Ensures system security, including work with cryptography, authentication, and protection against attacks.
Checks code for vulnerabilities, implements and maintains security systems.
Network Engineer:
Specializes in setting up and optimizing network connections.
Works with protocols and distributed systems such as p2p and VPN.
Testers (QA):
Conduct software testing, identify bugs and errors.
Working on test automation and creating tests for new features.
Technical Writer:
Creates technical documentation describing the architecture, code, instructions for developers and users.
Keeps documentation current and accessible.
UI/UX designer (if required):
Responsible for the user interface (if the project includes a client side with UI).
Works on ease of use, improves user interaction with the system.
System Administrator (DevOps):
Provides infrastructure deployment, monitoring and support.
Works on automating CI/CD processes, managing servers and containers.
Analyst/Researcher:
Conducts requirements and market analysis, assesses user needs and technology trends.
May also research new approaches and algorithms to improve the system.
Each of these roles plays an important role in supporting and developing the project. Team structure may vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, and some roles may be combined into one person, especially on smaller projects.
Yes, a similar role in project development can be identified "Product Manager", who performs functions similar to a producer in the film business.
Product manager:
General Product Management: Just as a producer manages the creation of a film, a product manager is responsible for the entire life cycle of a product, from idea to release and support.
Coordination between teams: A product manager often coordinates the interaction of various teams (developers, designers, marketers, testers) and ensures that tasks are completed on time.
Making key decisions: Just as a producer makes strategic decisions, a product manager determines development directions, functional priorities, and also negotiates with stakeholders (for example, customers or investors).
Resources and budget: A product manager also manages resources, controls the project budget, assigns tasks so that the product is delivered on time and within budget.
Differences from the producer:
Unlike a producer, who may be involved in financing and promotion in the film industry, a product manager focuses more on the actual development of the product and its features, as well as interaction with users.
If the project is large and complex, there may be several product managers, each of whom is responsible for separate parts of the project, such as the frontend, backend or infrastructure.
The initiator of a project similar to Yggdrasil could be founder or initiator of the idea (for example, in the context of a startup or open-source project). This is a person or group of people who:
Form the basic concept: The project initiator often defines the project's vision, goals and mission. They can be theoreticians, practitioners or enthusiasts who see a need to solve a problem and propose their own approach.
Attract resources and partners: It is important that the initiator can assemble a team, attract investors, volunteers or even influential partners to implement the idea.
Starting development: The proponent may organize the initial phase of the project, including basic concept development, prototypes, or research, to prove the viability of the idea and gain support from other stakeholders.
Define strategy and goals: The initiator sets the tone for the project and determines what problems or needs it solves. In the case of open-source projects, the initiator may be the person who has set himself the task of solving technical or social problems, which in turn attracts other developers.
In a more formal structure, such as a startup, the initiator may be founder or general director, while in the open-source community it might be project leader or even several people coordinating the initial development.
Thus, an initiator is someone who launches an idea and inspires others to pursue it, whether through technical or financial efforts.
In a more formalized project team context, there are several key roles associated with the initiative and launch of the project. Here's how it could be:
1. Project Initiator
This is the person or group of people who initiates the project. They may be:
Founders (especially in startups or within new organizations).
Ideologists or thought leaders — people who propose a solution to a specific problem or create a project concept, setting a general strategy and goals.
Sponsors - financial or resource initiators who provide start-up capital or support the project at its initial stage.
2. Project Manager
A formalized manager who can be appointed to coordinate all aspects of the project. This person:
Manages all phases of development including planning, execution and control.
Ensures project completion is on time, within budget and in compliance with requirements.
Coordinates teams and stakeholders, monitors risks and resolves issues that arise during the process.
3. Product Owner
In the context of Agile development or Scrum methodology, this person is responsible for the product development strategy:
Serves as a link between customers (or users) and the development team.
Makes key decisions regarding product functionality and its priorities.
Responsible for maintaining the product backlog and can initiate changes at various stages of development.
4. Development team
This is a group of technical specialists working on the implementation of the project:
Developers (Backend, Frontend, Full-stack).
Security Engineers.
Testers (QA).
System administrators or DevOps specialists.
5. Head of department or program (Program Manager)
If the project is part of a larger enterprise (for example, in large organizations), this role may be allocated:
Oversees several projects aimed at achieving a common business goal.
Responsible for ensuring synergy between various projects and their interdependence.
6. Investor/Project Sponsor
A project sponsor or investor is a person or organization that provides financing for a project:
Supports the project financially and strategically.
Can actively participate in key senior-level decisions.
Provides resources and mentorship to the project.
Thus, in a formalized structure, the project has a clear hierarchy, where project initiator is the key figure who forms the strategy and initial ideas, and project Manager or product manager ensure the implementation of these ideas through team coordination and project management.
Interesting question! Role general producer in the film business has several unique aspects that do not always translate easily to technology projects such as software development or startups. However, there are several factors that may explain why the equivalent of such a role is not as prominent in software development projects.
Reasons for the absence of an obvious analogue of the “general producer”:
Distributed responsibilities: In film, a producer (including a general producer) often performs many tasks, including financial management, crew selection, production management, marketing and distribution. In technology projects, these tasks are distributed among different roles:
Project Manager or product manager can take charge of time management, task management and team coordination.
System Architects And technical leaders are responsible for the technological direction.
Finance executives or investors manage financing and budget planning.
Differences in approaches to risk and financing: In the film business, a producer manages a project as a complex business with high risks and investors, often with many uncertain factors such as the success of the film, audience reactions and marketing strategies. In software development projects, risks are more predictable and can be reduced to managing the team, time and budget. Investors or sponsors are often involved in the project, but do not take on such comprehensive responsibility for the development process itself.
Focus on technology: In technology and software development, the role focuses on creating the product. Here, the success of a product primarily depends on the team of developers, engineers and managers who are responsible for the technical side, unlike in film, where the producer can make a wider range of decisions, including the choice of actors and scripts.
Flexibility and Agile approaches: Modern IT projects often use flexible methodology (Agile, Scrum, etc.), where the focus is on an iterative process and constant adaptation of the product. This means that project roles often focus on specific tasks and goals at each stage, and product management is more collaborative than centralized. The role of "general producer" might be perceived as redundant, since coordination is already delegated to various roles.
Division into narrower roles: In an IT environment, there is a clearer division of labor between technical, business and operational roles. This reduces the need for a single person to cover all aspects, as a film producer does. For example, one person may be responsible for marketing, another for product development, and a third for finance.
Potential analogue of a general producer
If we consider the analogy with general producer, then we can distinguish several roles that can combine the functions inherent in a producer in the film business:
Lead Product Manager or Product Director: He can take on project management at a higher level, coordinating not only the technical aspects, but also the overall product strategy, its market prospects, as well as interaction with various stakeholders (investors, partners, etc.).
Chief Operating Officer (COO): In large companies, the COO role may cover functions similar to a general producer. He oversees all operational aspects of the business, including finances, resources, team and strategies.
Executive Director (CEO) or founder: In startups and small projects, the founder or CEO often performs functions similar to the producer. They may be responsible for everything from concept to marketing to financing, overseeing the project at every level.
Thus, although the role general producer in its full sense is not always present in technology projects, elements of this function can be distributed among several key roles in the team.
In context open-source projects role similar general producer, may also not be as clearly defined, but several analogies can be drawn with more traditional business roles. Open-source projects have a unique structure where responsibilities are often distributed among many participants, but certain individuals can still perform functions similar to those of a film producer. This is what it looks like:
1. Project Lead or Lead Developer
Role in an open-source project project leader will often perform functions similar to the general producer:
Development coordination: The project leader manages the overall direction of development, makes key architectural decisions, and coordinates the work of other participants.
Responsibility for vision and strategy: Like the CEO, the leader shapes the project's development strategy, deciding which features to implement and which to reject, depending on the needs of the community and users.
Attracting participants: A leader often works with other developers, just as a film producer works with actors and creators. This may include managing community contributions, attracting new contributors, and maintaining engagement.
2. Technical Lead
In open-source projects, especially if the project is large, the role of a technical manager can be similar to some of the functions of a producer:
Technical management: The technical leader resolves key issues related to the implementation of functionality, technologies and tools that will be used.
Code quality control: Just as a producer ensures the quality of the final product in a movie, a technical leader ensures that the code meets quality standards and safety requirements.
3. Community Manager
Although the role community manager in an open-source project is not a direct analogue of a producer, he plays an important role in organizing interactions with the outside world, which is also typical for producers:
Engaging and motivating participants: The community manager works with external participants, organizing communication between them and the main developers.
Marketing and promotion of the project: The manager is actively working to disseminate information about the project, attracting new users and developers.
Organization of events and meetings: He can organize meetups, webinars or other events aimed at developing the project.
4. Project Sponsor or Funding Organizations
In the open-source world there may be financial sponsors, such as large companies, organizations or individual donors who support the project with funds. Although the role sponsor in open-source is different from a producer in cinema, they also play an important role in the support and development of the project:
Financing: Sponsors often provide the project with the financial resources needed for its growth, infrastructure, and developers.
Resources and advertising: Sponsors can help a project gain more attention, as well as help build infrastructure and attract new participants.
5. Founder of the project (Founder)
The founder of an open-source project can perform functions similar to the role of a producer:
Initiator of idea and strategy: The founder forms the concept of the project, creates its mission and vision.
Attracting a team and partners: Just like a film producer assembles a team and manages the entire process, the founder of an open-source project can attract other developers, organize teams and decide how to develop the project in the future.
6. Consultants or mentors
In large open-source projects there may be consultants or mentors, who serve as external experts, helping to guide the project in the right direction. While this role is not exactly the same as a producer, it can involve helping make important decisions, especially at a more senior level.
Summary
In open-source projects, the role general producer somewhat breaks down into several separate functions:
Project leader Responsible for strategy, management and vision.
Technical Leader manages technical aspects.
Community Manager deals with external relations, engagement and popularization.
Sponsors or funding organizations provide resources.
Although in the open-source world there is no clear-cut role analogous to the general producer in film, all of these participants collectively perform tasks that ensure the successful development of the project and the achievement of its goals.
Finally, to output the project Ygdrassil to the next level, it is necessary to focus on improving the user interface (UI), providing more flexible customization for users and adding new opportunities for interacting with the project. This may include improving navigation, adding new visual elements and tools for effective project management. In addition, it is worth considering introducing functionality that will more effectively integrate teamwork and the exchange of ideas, which is especially important for open-source projects. Improving these aspects will not only increase the project's appeal to a wider audience, but will also create opportunities for greater community engagement and increased user numbers. The question "Where are you going?" in the context of Ygdrassil, one can answer this way: towards creating an intuitive, powerful and convenient tool for everyone who is looking for opportunities to organize and manage projects in the world of programming.
Here is a list of possible project touchpoints Ygdrassil with other projects that can significantly improve the user experience, expand the functionality and PC/software combination, and also make these technologies more accessible and useful for specialists and beginners, especially in the face of current challenges:
1. Integration with tools for remote work (for example, Slack, Microsoft Teams)
Provide easy integration with popular communication and teamwork platforms, improving collaboration and communication across projects.
2. Support for cloud technologies (for example, AWS, Google Cloud, Azure)
Implementation of integration with cloud services for data storage, application deployment and scalability to expand the functionality of the project.
3. API for interaction with external services
The ability to integrate with other services via API, which will open up new opportunities for expanding the functionality of Igdrassil, including synchronization with other projects and task automation.
4. Data visualization and analytics (for example, integration with Power BI, Tableau)
Adding functions for data visualization, which will allow users to easily analyze project statistics, draw conclusions and make informed decisions.
5. Integration with project management systems (for example, Jira, Trello, Asana)
Built-in support for popular project management systems will improve planning, control and reporting of tasks, which will provide greater flexibility in the work of teams.
6. Using blockchain technologies to verify and track changes
Integration with blockchain platforms to ensure transparency and security of transactions, as well as to track the history of changes in the project.
7. Integration with Git and other version control systems
The ability to more easily interact with Git repositories for convenient storage and synchronization of source code.
8. Using machine learning to analyze project data
Implementation of machine learning algorithms that will analyze user behavior and predict needs, improving interaction with the interface and optimizing functionality.
9. Interfaces for users with special needs (accessibility)
Development of adaptive interfaces that will be convenient for people with disabilities, for example, support for screen readers, high-contrast themes and voice control.
10. Supports Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) to showcase projects
Introducing AR/VR to demonstrate and interact with projects in a more interactive format, which can be useful for presentations and training.
11. Implementation of neural network solutions for task automation
Using neural networks to automate routine tasks such as reporting, code analysis, or documentation generation.
12. Integration with online learning platforms (e.g. Coursera, Udemy)
Implementation of educational modules or courses available directly through the Igdrassil interface to train new users or improve their skills.
13. Supports multitasking and real-time collaboration
Creation of tools for effective work on a project in real time with the possibility of parallel editing and instant exchange of information.
14. Flexibility in customizing UI/UX for different types of users
The ability to customize the interface for different types of users: from beginners to experts, providing simplicity for some and deep customization for others.
15. Integration with monitoring and logging systems (for example, Prometheus, Grafana)
Ability to monitor project activity, performance and errors using popular monitoring and visualization tools.
16. Integration with automated testing platforms (for example, Selenium, Jenkins)
Incorporating capabilities for automated software testing within a project, improving the quality of the released product.
17. Support for DevOps practices to automate deployment and CI/CD
Introducing capabilities for automated deployment and integration with CI/CD pipelines, improving development speed and stability.
18. Integration with services for managing finances and resources (for example, QuickBooks, Xero)
The ability to manage project finances, track budgets, expenses and income using integration with popular financial platforms.
19. API support for working with the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ability to interact with IoT devices to create more complex and integrated software development solutions.
20. Integration with video conferencing systems (for example, Zoom, Google Meet)
Seamlessly integrate with video communication platforms for meetings and discussions, ensuring effective collaboration among teams located in different locations.
21. Implementation of cybersecurity and data protection solutions
Integration with data security, leak and malware protection tools, and access rights management.
22. Support for integration with social networks to promote projects
Implementation of functions for automatic dissemination of information about the project through social networks, which will help in popularizing it and attracting users.
23. Use of cryptocurrencies for financing and transactions within the project
The introduction of support for cryptocurrency payments and financing facilities, which will give the project additional flexibility in financing and attracting investments.
24. Flexible notification and reminder system
Implementation of a notification system that will be flexibly customized to the needs of users and remind them of key events, deadlines and changes in the project.
25. Support for language packs and interface localization
The ability to choose the interface language and support users from different countries and regions, which will make the project more accessible and expand the audience.
26. Mechanisms for managing the life cycle of software and its versions
Implementation of version and release management tools that will simplify the process of deploying and updating the application.
These improvements can significantly increase the functionality of Igdrassil, improve the user experience and make the project more convenient and accessible to a wide audience, including both experts and beginners. Importantly, most of these changes are relevant to current trends and challenges related to remote work, security, efficiency and accessibility of technology.
Self-hosting is indeed becoming increasingly attractive in the context of privacy and anonymity, especially with increasing attention to data protection and the value of personal information. In connection with the objectives of the project Ygdrassil Several directions can be considered that could improve the project and support the idea of autonomy, privacy and security for users. Here are some of them that may be useful and practical to implement:
1. Self-hosting as an alternative to cloud solutions
Description: Offer users the ability to deploy Ygdrassil on their own servers or local machines. This will ensure complete control over the data and the project, minimizing the risks of leaks or unauthorized access.
How to implement: Develop detailed documentation for installing and configuring Igdrassil on various platforms (Linux, Windows, macOS) with simple instructions and scripts for automatic configuration.
Advantages: Increased security, data protection and the ability to work in completely closed or local networks.
2. Support for anonymous networks (for example, Tor, I2P)
Description: Integration with anonymous networks such as Tor or I2P will allow users to use the project in an environment with the maximum degree of privacy and anonymity.
How to implement: Enable the ability for users to connect to the project via Tor, ensuring their IP address is hidden and improved protection from surveillance. You can offer separate configurations and settings for using such networks.
Advantages: Privacy and protection from monitoring or tracking, which is especially important for users who value anonymity.
3. Data encryption on the client side (End-to-Encryption)
Description: Implement client-side data encryption before sending it to the server, so that only users can decrypt their data and even project administrators cannot access the content.
How to implement: Use standard and proven cryptographic methods such as AES for encryption and integrate them into the project so that only authorized users can decrypt their data.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, protecting data from potential leaks, attacks or unauthorized access attempts.
4. Decentralized data stores
Description: Possibility of using decentralized data storage systems such as IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) or Sia. This will allow users to store data on distributed networks, making them less vulnerable to attacks and giving them more control over their data.
How to implement: Integrate support for IPFS or other similar services so that users can store and share data through decentralized storage.
Advantages: Censorship protection, increased data availability, decentralized storage and improved privacy.
5. Local and secure databases
Description: Offer the ability to use local databases to store information rather than relying on cloud solutions. You can also offer the option of using protected and encrypted databases.
How to implement: Integrate SQLite, local or distribution databases with the ability to encrypt data on the user side, without requiring centralized storage.
Advantages: Users have full control over their data, which improves security and protects it from external control.
6. Confidential authentication methods
Description: Design and implement authentication mechanisms that maintain confidentiality, such as using cryptographic methods or two-factor authentication (2FA) over secure channels.
How to implement: Supports authentication through secure and anonymous channels, such as one-time passwords, biometrics, or tokens that do not require linking to personal information.
Advantages: Increased security, protection against phishing attacks and minimizing the need to collect personal information.
7. Autonomous update and patch systems
Description: Offer a solution that allows users to receive updates and security patches through offline channels, not tied to external servers, to avoid the risk of surveillance or data leaks.
How to implement: Use an automatic update system that will check for patches and updates across a distributed network, without the need to connect to centralized servers.
Advantages: Security from external monitoring, the ability to update autonomously and minimize privacy risks.
8. Local or private networks for data synchronization
Description: Implementation of functionality for data synchronization and interaction between users on local networks or private VPNs, excluding external servers and minimizing the risk of leaks.
How to implement: Develop functionality for exchanging data through secure channels, such as local networks or VPNs, without the need to use cloud servers.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, eliminating dependence on cloud providers.
9. Data recovery mechanisms using cryptographic keys
Description: Implementation of a system for restoring access to data using cryptographic keys, which will allow the user to restore data in the event of loss of access, without resorting to external sources.
How to implement: Implement functionality to create backup keys or tokens that can be used to restore data.
Advantages: Protection against data loss, ease of access restoration without the participation of third parties.
10. Supports multi-factor authentication via key storage devices (such as YubiKey)
Description: To improve security, you can offer support for authentication through devices that generate one-time keys, such as YubiKey or other hardware devices.
How to implement: Integrate support for such devices into the project's authentication system.
Advantages: Enhanced security, protection against phishing and other authentication attacks.
These solutions can make a project Ygdrassil more attractive to users who value privacy, security and autonomy. Implementing such capabilities will ensure reliable data protection and help build trust among users, especially in the face of growing threats to personal information online.
Implement all these possibilities within the project Ygdrassilmaking them work “out of the box” for an untrained user is certainly difficult, but possible if you approach the implementation step by step. However, there are a few important points to consider:
1. Keep it simple for untrained users
Implementing most of these functions in a finished product requires creating an intuitive interface that hides all the complexity behind convenient settings and smart assistants. For untrained users, it is important that most operations are performed automatically, without the need for intervention.
How to implement it:
For self-hosting You can develop simple scripts or installation wizards that automate the deployment, configuration, and upgrade processes. This can be achieved through the use of containers (such as Docker), which can be configured with minimal effort.
Integration with Tor and I2P should not only be possible, but also offered as an easy setup in the interface. A couple of clicks to connect through these networks, with pre-configured settings, will improve the experience for beginners.
Encryption data must be transparent. For example, automatically encrypting data on the client side without the user needing to know how it works can be implemented as on/off settings.
2. Technical complexity and documentation
One important aspect will be the quality of documentation and training materials. For an untrained user, it will be useful if all the information is presented in a step-by-step format with clear explanations.
How to implement it:
Add built-in hints And interactive tutorials, which will help the user go through all the setup steps.
Provide flexible interface settings using templates for different types of users (newbies, experienced users, administrators).
Turn on automatic updates, which will eliminate the need to manually search for patches and updates, as well as integration with services for restoring from backups.
3. Performance issues and hardware requirements
Some of the proposed solutions may require quite powerful resources, such as encryption and decentralized data storage (IPFS). For the casual user, it is important that such features work effectively even on less powerful devices.
How to implement it:
Enable feature step-by-step setup, where the user can choose which features and services to activate based on the power of their device.
For remote hosting and use of cloud services You can offer options with minimal requirements, for example, using cloud providers for data storage, which will reduce the load on the local computer.
4. Transparency in use and user interface
Integration process with technologies such as Tor, IPFS, or machine learning, may be difficult to understand for beginners. It is important that such systems operate in the background, with clear and understandable status alerts, and provide the user with the ability to enable or disable these features at their discretion.
How to implement it:
Simple and intuitive interface with visual indicators what's happening in the background (for example, when data is encrypted or when a Tor connection is active).
Enable ready-made presets with safe settings for beginners, and more complex, customizable settings for experienced users.
5. Problems with network infrastructure and dependencies on third-party solutions
The use of decentralized technologies and anonymous networks such as Tor, can cause performance and connection stability issues, which can be frustrating for the untrained user.
How to implement it:
Simplify the process of switching between main network And anonymous network, so that the user can easily return to normal operation if problems with anonymity arise.
The out-of-the-box approach means that most of these dependencies and technologies will work automatically, hiding technical details and providing stable work.
What can be realistically implemented for untrained users:
Basic functions (e.g. self-hosting, basic encryption, Tor connection) can be made accessible to beginners with simple tools and instructions.
Cloud and decentralized solutions can be implemented through standard interfaces with basic settings for beginners, but with the possibility of deeper customization for experienced users.
Updates and patches: You can implement automatic update and patch mechanisms to protect against vulnerabilities without user intervention.
Easy security setup: Users can enable or disable security features (such as encryption and anonymous networks) through the interface with minimal settings.
What is the way out:
In order to do this “really out of the box”, you need to consider two important aspects:
Simplicity of the interface and automation of all complex technical processes.
Accessibility for different types of users, including those without technical experience.
Creating such software may require a lot of effort at the development stage, but the result can be a very powerful tool for users seeking privacy, security and independence.#Programming #RolesInTheProject #SoftwareDevelopment #OpenSource #CareerPath #NewToProgramming #DevelopmentProcess #Startups #NonTechnicalRoles #IT #TechIndustry #ProjectManagement #UIUX #Marketing #CommunityBuilding #ProductManagement #CareerGrowth #TechLeadership #TechMarketing #Agile #LearnToCode #TechCareers #TechProjects #InnovationInTech #TechPathways
Qoto Mastodon
https://qoto.org/web/@tyden/113815686277448963 -
"Roles in the world of programming: The path to the industry through non-technical professions and their analogies with the film industry"
Introduction:
In the modern world, programming has become one of the most popular and dynamically developing professions. However, success in this field is not limited solely to technical skills. In the world of software development, as in the film industry, there are important roles that are not directly related to coding, but are key to the successful delivery of a project. Just as in cinema there are not only directors and camera operators, but also producers, marketing managers, PR specialists and other professionals, in the IT field there is also a number of non-technical professions that support and develop the project, ensuring its successful implementation.
This work is aimed at helping novice developers and anyone interested in understanding the structure of projects that exist in the world of programming and understanding what roles there may be in such projects in addition to developers. We'll look at how the software development process works, what key people work on the project, and how a newcomer without a technical background can find a role in the industry.
As an example, we will take a hypothetical project improvement Ygdrassil. This project has already attracted the attention of many developers and users, and there is every reason to believe that it can be supplemented with new functionality, especially in the field of user interface (UI). We will look at how the introduction of new roles and improved communication between the various development participants can affect the success of such a project, as well as its further development.
Rationale:
The world of programming is vast and multifaceted, and to successfully become a part of this world, it is important to understand not only the technical aspects, but also the organizational, management and communication roles. Roles in software development, as in film production, are not always limited to technical people, but include professionals who manage the project, interact with stakeholders, handle marketing issues and develop the community. These roles are equally valuable and are necessary for the project to be successful and attract the attention of the audience.
For many aspiring developers, the process of choosing a path in the industry can be daunting, and they are often confused about what opportunities exist outside of technical work. This work aims to provide a clear understanding of how the world of programming works, what key roles exist in a project, and how a beginner can choose his or her path beyond just technical skills.
Key words:
Programming
Roles in the project
Software development
An open-source project
Career path
New to programming
Development process
Startups and large companies
Skill development
Non-technical roles
Labor market in IT
The authors' goal:
The purpose of this work is to provide novice programmers and anyone interested with a complete and clear idea of how the world of programming works. We strive to:
Describe the main roles that may exist in a project and their relationships.
Explain how a newbie can enter this world and what skills and knowledge are required for each role.
Provide insight into the development process, how different specialists interact, and how to choose your path in this area.
Talk about career development and opportunities for growth in programming, including in the context of open-source projects and startups.
Conclusion:
We are confident that understanding the structure of projects, roles in the team and development paths will help beginning professionals make an informed choice and quickly adapt to the world of programming. This work serves as a guide for those who want to enter the industry, as well as for those who are already in it and want to expand their horizons.
Now this is a complete description with title, introduction, rationale, keywords and purpose of the work.
Yes, improving Yggdrasil code can be beneficial in several ways, depending on your goals and needs. Here are some reasons to improve your code:
Performance: Code optimization can improve code performance by reducing the use of resources such as memory and CPU time.
Safety: If the code has not been updated or vulnerabilities have been identified, improving it and updating it to meet modern security standards is an important task.
Readability and Maintainability: Improving the structure and quality of the code can make it easier to maintain and develop, especially if the project is maintained by multiple developers.
Compatibility and Extensibility: Perhaps the project can be improved by making it more compatible with modern technologies and extensible for new use cases.
Integration with other projects: If new features or integrations with other systems are added to the project, improving the code will better support such extensions.
Testability: Improving the code may include creating more convenient testing methods, which is important for the reliability and stability of the system.
If there are specific areas for improvement or bottlenecks in a project, this can be particularly important in improving the overall efficiency and quality of the system.
Successful development and maintenance of a project such as Yggdrasil requires several key participants with different skills and experience. Here is a list of required roles:
Project Manager:
Responsible for planning, coordinating, managing deadlines and priorities.
Monitors task completion, sets goals, and evaluates progress.
Interacts with other project participants and customers.
System Architect:
Develops the system architecture, defines the main components and their interactions.
Conducts requirements analysis and makes recommendations on technology selection.
Developers (Backend/Full-stack):
They write the main code of the system, including the server side, working with databases and API.
They are engaged in performance optimization, bug fixes, and functionality improvements.
Security Engineer:
Ensures system security, including work with cryptography, authentication, and protection against attacks.
Checks code for vulnerabilities, implements and maintains security systems.
Network Engineer:
Specializes in setting up and optimizing network connections.
Works with protocols and distributed systems such as p2p and VPN.
Testers (QA):
Conduct software testing, identify bugs and errors.
Working on test automation and creating tests for new features.
Technical Writer:
Creates technical documentation describing the architecture, code, instructions for developers and users.
Keeps documentation current and accessible.
UI/UX designer (if required):
Responsible for the user interface (if the project includes a client side with UI).
Works on ease of use, improves user interaction with the system.
System Administrator (DevOps):
Provides infrastructure deployment, monitoring and support.
Works on automating CI/CD processes, managing servers and containers.
Analyst/Researcher:
Conducts requirements and market analysis, assesses user needs and technology trends.
May also research new approaches and algorithms to improve the system.
Each of these roles plays an important role in supporting and developing the project. Team structure may vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, and some roles may be combined into one person, especially on smaller projects.
Yes, a similar role in project development can be identified "Product Manager", who performs functions similar to a producer in the film business.
Product manager:
General Product Management: Just as a producer manages the creation of a film, a product manager is responsible for the entire life cycle of a product, from idea to release and support.
Coordination between teams: A product manager often coordinates the interaction of various teams (developers, designers, marketers, testers) and ensures that tasks are completed on time.
Making key decisions: Just as a producer makes strategic decisions, a product manager determines development directions, functional priorities, and also negotiates with stakeholders (for example, customers or investors).
Resources and budget: A product manager also manages resources, controls the project budget, assigns tasks so that the product is delivered on time and within budget.
Differences from the producer:
Unlike a producer, who may be involved in financing and promotion in the film industry, a product manager focuses more on the actual development of the product and its features, as well as interaction with users.
If the project is large and complex, there may be several product managers, each of whom is responsible for separate parts of the project, such as the frontend, backend or infrastructure.
The initiator of a project similar to Yggdrasil could be founder or initiator of the idea (for example, in the context of a startup or open-source project). This is a person or group of people who:
Form the basic concept: The project initiator often defines the project's vision, goals and mission. They can be theoreticians, practitioners or enthusiasts who see a need to solve a problem and propose their own approach.
Attract resources and partners: It is important that the initiator can assemble a team, attract investors, volunteers or even influential partners to implement the idea.
Starting development: The proponent may organize the initial phase of the project, including basic concept development, prototypes, or research, to prove the viability of the idea and gain support from other stakeholders.
Define strategy and goals: The initiator sets the tone for the project and determines what problems or needs it solves. In the case of open-source projects, the initiator may be the person who has set himself the task of solving technical or social problems, which in turn attracts other developers.
In a more formal structure, such as a startup, the initiator may be founder or general director, while in the open-source community it might be project leader or even several people coordinating the initial development.
Thus, an initiator is someone who launches an idea and inspires others to pursue it, whether through technical or financial efforts.
In a more formalized project team context, there are several key roles associated with the initiative and launch of the project. Here's how it could be:
1. Project Initiator
This is the person or group of people who initiates the project. They may be:
Founders (especially in startups or within new organizations).
Ideologists or thought leaders — people who propose a solution to a specific problem or create a project concept, setting a general strategy and goals.
Sponsors - financial or resource initiators who provide start-up capital or support the project at its initial stage.
2. Project Manager
A formalized manager who can be appointed to coordinate all aspects of the project. This person:
Manages all phases of development including planning, execution and control.
Ensures project completion is on time, within budget and in compliance with requirements.
Coordinates teams and stakeholders, monitors risks and resolves issues that arise during the process.
3. Product Owner
In the context of Agile development or Scrum methodology, this person is responsible for the product development strategy:
Serves as a link between customers (or users) and the development team.
Makes key decisions regarding product functionality and its priorities.
Responsible for maintaining the product backlog and can initiate changes at various stages of development.
4. Development team
This is a group of technical specialists working on the implementation of the project:
Developers (Backend, Frontend, Full-stack).
Security Engineers.
Testers (QA).
System administrators or DevOps specialists.
5. Head of department or program (Program Manager)
If the project is part of a larger enterprise (for example, in large organizations), this role may be allocated:
Oversees several projects aimed at achieving a common business goal.
Responsible for ensuring synergy between various projects and their interdependence.
6. Investor/Project Sponsor
A project sponsor or investor is a person or organization that provides financing for a project:
Supports the project financially and strategically.
Can actively participate in key senior-level decisions.
Provides resources and mentorship to the project.
Thus, in a formalized structure, the project has a clear hierarchy, where project initiator is the key figure who forms the strategy and initial ideas, and project Manager or product manager ensure the implementation of these ideas through team coordination and project management.
Interesting question! Role general producer in the film business has several unique aspects that do not always translate easily to technology projects such as software development or startups. However, there are several factors that may explain why the equivalent of such a role is not as prominent in software development projects.
Reasons for the absence of an obvious analogue of the “general producer”:
Distributed responsibilities: In film, a producer (including a general producer) often performs many tasks, including financial management, crew selection, production management, marketing and distribution. In technology projects, these tasks are distributed among different roles:
Project Manager or product manager can take charge of time management, task management and team coordination.
System Architects And technical leaders are responsible for the technological direction.
Finance executives or investors manage financing and budget planning.
Differences in approaches to risk and financing: In the film business, a producer manages a project as a complex business with high risks and investors, often with many uncertain factors such as the success of the film, audience reactions and marketing strategies. In software development projects, risks are more predictable and can be reduced to managing the team, time and budget. Investors or sponsors are often involved in the project, but do not take on such comprehensive responsibility for the development process itself.
Focus on technology: In technology and software development, the role focuses on creating the product. Here, the success of a product primarily depends on the team of developers, engineers and managers who are responsible for the technical side, unlike in film, where the producer can make a wider range of decisions, including the choice of actors and scripts.
Flexibility and Agile approaches: Modern IT projects often use flexible methodology (Agile, Scrum, etc.), where the focus is on an iterative process and constant adaptation of the product. This means that project roles often focus on specific tasks and goals at each stage, and product management is more collaborative than centralized. The role of "general producer" might be perceived as redundant, since coordination is already delegated to various roles.
Division into narrower roles: In an IT environment, there is a clearer division of labor between technical, business and operational roles. This reduces the need for a single person to cover all aspects, as a film producer does. For example, one person may be responsible for marketing, another for product development, and a third for finance.
Potential analogue of a general producer
If we consider the analogy with general producer, then we can distinguish several roles that can combine the functions inherent in a producer in the film business:
Lead Product Manager or Product Director: He can take on project management at a higher level, coordinating not only the technical aspects, but also the overall product strategy, its market prospects, as well as interaction with various stakeholders (investors, partners, etc.).
Chief Operating Officer (COO): In large companies, the COO role may cover functions similar to a general producer. He oversees all operational aspects of the business, including finances, resources, team and strategies.
Executive Director (CEO) or founder: In startups and small projects, the founder or CEO often performs functions similar to the producer. They may be responsible for everything from concept to marketing to financing, overseeing the project at every level.
Thus, although the role general producer in its full sense is not always present in technology projects, elements of this function can be distributed among several key roles in the team.
In context open-source projects role similar general producer, may also not be as clearly defined, but several analogies can be drawn with more traditional business roles. Open-source projects have a unique structure where responsibilities are often distributed among many participants, but certain individuals can still perform functions similar to those of a film producer. This is what it looks like:
1. Project Lead or Lead Developer
Role in an open-source project project leader will often perform functions similar to the general producer:
Development coordination: The project leader manages the overall direction of development, makes key architectural decisions, and coordinates the work of other participants.
Responsibility for vision and strategy: Like the CEO, the leader shapes the project's development strategy, deciding which features to implement and which to reject, depending on the needs of the community and users.
Attracting participants: A leader often works with other developers, just as a film producer works with actors and creators. This may include managing community contributions, attracting new contributors, and maintaining engagement.
2. Technical Lead
In open-source projects, especially if the project is large, the role of a technical manager can be similar to some of the functions of a producer:
Technical management: The technical leader resolves key issues related to the implementation of functionality, technologies and tools that will be used.
Code quality control: Just as a producer ensures the quality of the final product in a movie, a technical leader ensures that the code meets quality standards and safety requirements.
3. Community Manager
Although the role community manager in an open-source project is not a direct analogue of a producer, he plays an important role in organizing interactions with the outside world, which is also typical for producers:
Engaging and motivating participants: The community manager works with external participants, organizing communication between them and the main developers.
Marketing and promotion of the project: The manager is actively working to disseminate information about the project, attracting new users and developers.
Organization of events and meetings: He can organize meetups, webinars or other events aimed at developing the project.
4. Project Sponsor or Funding Organizations
In the open-source world there may be financial sponsors, such as large companies, organizations or individual donors who support the project with funds. Although the role sponsor in open-source is different from a producer in cinema, they also play an important role in the support and development of the project:
Financing: Sponsors often provide the project with the financial resources needed for its growth, infrastructure, and developers.
Resources and advertising: Sponsors can help a project gain more attention, as well as help build infrastructure and attract new participants.
5. Founder of the project (Founder)
The founder of an open-source project can perform functions similar to the role of a producer:
Initiator of idea and strategy: The founder forms the concept of the project, creates its mission and vision.
Attracting a team and partners: Just like a film producer assembles a team and manages the entire process, the founder of an open-source project can attract other developers, organize teams and decide how to develop the project in the future.
6. Consultants or mentors
In large open-source projects there may be consultants or mentors, who serve as external experts, helping to guide the project in the right direction. While this role is not exactly the same as a producer, it can involve helping make important decisions, especially at a more senior level.
Summary
In open-source projects, the role general producer somewhat breaks down into several separate functions:
Project leader Responsible for strategy, management and vision.
Technical Leader manages technical aspects.
Community Manager deals with external relations, engagement and popularization.
Sponsors or funding organizations provide resources.
Although in the open-source world there is no clear-cut role analogous to the general producer in film, all of these participants collectively perform tasks that ensure the successful development of the project and the achievement of its goals.
Finally, to output the project Ygdrassil to the next level, it is necessary to focus on improving the user interface (UI), providing more flexible customization for users and adding new opportunities for interacting with the project. This may include improving navigation, adding new visual elements and tools for effective project management. In addition, it is worth considering introducing functionality that will more effectively integrate teamwork and the exchange of ideas, which is especially important for open-source projects. Improving these aspects will not only increase the project's appeal to a wider audience, but will also create opportunities for greater community engagement and increased user numbers. The question "Where are you going?" in the context of Ygdrassil, one can answer this way: towards creating an intuitive, powerful and convenient tool for everyone who is looking for opportunities to organize and manage projects in the world of programming.
Here is a list of possible project touchpoints Ygdrassil with other projects that can significantly improve the user experience, expand the functionality and PC/software combination, and also make these technologies more accessible and useful for specialists and beginners, especially in the face of current challenges:
1. Integration with tools for remote work (for example, Slack, Microsoft Teams)
Provide easy integration with popular communication and teamwork platforms, improving collaboration and communication across projects.
2. Support for cloud technologies (for example, AWS, Google Cloud, Azure)
Implementation of integration with cloud services for data storage, application deployment and scalability to expand the functionality of the project.
3. API for interaction with external services
The ability to integrate with other services via API, which will open up new opportunities for expanding the functionality of Igdrassil, including synchronization with other projects and task automation.
4. Data visualization and analytics (for example, integration with Power BI, Tableau)
Adding functions for data visualization, which will allow users to easily analyze project statistics, draw conclusions and make informed decisions.
5. Integration with project management systems (for example, Jira, Trello, Asana)
Built-in support for popular project management systems will improve planning, control and reporting of tasks, which will provide greater flexibility in the work of teams.
6. Using blockchain technologies to verify and track changes
Integration with blockchain platforms to ensure transparency and security of transactions, as well as to track the history of changes in the project.
7. Integration with Git and other version control systems
The ability to more easily interact with Git repositories for convenient storage and synchronization of source code.
8. Using machine learning to analyze project data
Implementation of machine learning algorithms that will analyze user behavior and predict needs, improving interaction with the interface and optimizing functionality.
9. Interfaces for users with special needs (accessibility)
Development of adaptive interfaces that will be convenient for people with disabilities, for example, support for screen readers, high-contrast themes and voice control.
10. Supports Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) to showcase projects
Introducing AR/VR to demonstrate and interact with projects in a more interactive format, which can be useful for presentations and training.
11. Implementation of neural network solutions for task automation
Using neural networks to automate routine tasks such as reporting, code analysis, or documentation generation.
12. Integration with online learning platforms (e.g. Coursera, Udemy)
Implementation of educational modules or courses available directly through the Igdrassil interface to train new users or improve their skills.
13. Supports multitasking and real-time collaboration
Creation of tools for effective work on a project in real time with the possibility of parallel editing and instant exchange of information.
14. Flexibility in customizing UI/UX for different types of users
The ability to customize the interface for different types of users: from beginners to experts, providing simplicity for some and deep customization for others.
15. Integration with monitoring and logging systems (for example, Prometheus, Grafana)
Ability to monitor project activity, performance and errors using popular monitoring and visualization tools.
16. Integration with automated testing platforms (for example, Selenium, Jenkins)
Incorporating capabilities for automated software testing within a project, improving the quality of the released product.
17. Support for DevOps practices to automate deployment and CI/CD
Introducing capabilities for automated deployment and integration with CI/CD pipelines, improving development speed and stability.
18. Integration with services for managing finances and resources (for example, QuickBooks, Xero)
The ability to manage project finances, track budgets, expenses and income using integration with popular financial platforms.
19. API support for working with the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ability to interact with IoT devices to create more complex and integrated software development solutions.
20. Integration with video conferencing systems (for example, Zoom, Google Meet)
Seamlessly integrate with video communication platforms for meetings and discussions, ensuring effective collaboration among teams located in different locations.
21. Implementation of cybersecurity and data protection solutions
Integration with data security, leak and malware protection tools, and access rights management.
22. Support for integration with social networks to promote projects
Implementation of functions for automatic dissemination of information about the project through social networks, which will help in popularizing it and attracting users.
23. Use of cryptocurrencies for financing and transactions within the project
The introduction of support for cryptocurrency payments and financing facilities, which will give the project additional flexibility in financing and attracting investments.
24. Flexible notification and reminder system
Implementation of a notification system that will be flexibly customized to the needs of users and remind them of key events, deadlines and changes in the project.
25. Support for language packs and interface localization
The ability to choose the interface language and support users from different countries and regions, which will make the project more accessible and expand the audience.
26. Mechanisms for managing the life cycle of software and its versions
Implementation of version and release management tools that will simplify the process of deploying and updating the application.
These improvements can significantly increase the functionality of Igdrassil, improve the user experience and make the project more convenient and accessible to a wide audience, including both experts and beginners. Importantly, most of these changes are relevant to current trends and challenges related to remote work, security, efficiency and accessibility of technology.
Self-hosting is indeed becoming increasingly attractive in the context of privacy and anonymity, especially with increasing attention to data protection and the value of personal information. In connection with the objectives of the project Ygdrassil Several directions can be considered that could improve the project and support the idea of autonomy, privacy and security for users. Here are some of them that may be useful and practical to implement:
1. Self-hosting as an alternative to cloud solutions
Description: Offer users the ability to deploy Ygdrassil on their own servers or local machines. This will ensure complete control over the data and the project, minimizing the risks of leaks or unauthorized access.
How to implement: Develop detailed documentation for installing and configuring Igdrassil on various platforms (Linux, Windows, macOS) with simple instructions and scripts for automatic configuration.
Advantages: Increased security, data protection and the ability to work in completely closed or local networks.
2. Support for anonymous networks (for example, Tor, I2P)
Description: Integration with anonymous networks such as Tor or I2P will allow users to use the project in an environment with the maximum degree of privacy and anonymity.
How to implement: Enable the ability for users to connect to the project via Tor, ensuring their IP address is hidden and improved protection from surveillance. You can offer separate configurations and settings for using such networks.
Advantages: Privacy and protection from monitoring or tracking, which is especially important for users who value anonymity.
3. Data encryption on the client side (End-to-Encryption)
Description: Implement client-side data encryption before sending it to the server, so that only users can decrypt their data and even project administrators cannot access the content.
How to implement: Use standard and proven cryptographic methods such as AES for encryption and integrate them into the project so that only authorized users can decrypt their data.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, protecting data from potential leaks, attacks or unauthorized access attempts.
4. Decentralized data stores
Description: Possibility of using decentralized data storage systems such as IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) or Sia. This will allow users to store data on distributed networks, making them less vulnerable to attacks and giving them more control over their data.
How to implement: Integrate support for IPFS or other similar services so that users can store and share data through decentralized storage.
Advantages: Censorship protection, increased data availability, decentralized storage and improved privacy.
5. Local and secure databases
Description: Offer the ability to use local databases to store information rather than relying on cloud solutions. You can also offer the option of using protected and encrypted databases.
How to implement: Integrate SQLite, local or distribution databases with the ability to encrypt data on the user side, without requiring centralized storage.
Advantages: Users have full control over their data, which improves security and protects it from external control.
6. Confidential authentication methods
Description: Design and implement authentication mechanisms that maintain confidentiality, such as using cryptographic methods or two-factor authentication (2FA) over secure channels.
How to implement: Supports authentication through secure and anonymous channels, such as one-time passwords, biometrics, or tokens that do not require linking to personal information.
Advantages: Increased security, protection against phishing attacks and minimizing the need to collect personal information.
7. Autonomous update and patch systems
Description: Offer a solution that allows users to receive updates and security patches through offline channels, not tied to external servers, to avoid the risk of surveillance or data leaks.
How to implement: Use an automatic update system that will check for patches and updates across a distributed network, without the need to connect to centralized servers.
Advantages: Security from external monitoring, the ability to update autonomously and minimize privacy risks.
8. Local or private networks for data synchronization
Description: Implementation of functionality for data synchronization and interaction between users on local networks or private VPNs, excluding external servers and minimizing the risk of leaks.
How to implement: Develop functionality for exchanging data through secure channels, such as local networks or VPNs, without the need to use cloud servers.
Advantages: Increased security and privacy, eliminating dependence on cloud providers.
9. Data recovery mechanisms using cryptographic keys
Description: Implementation of a system for restoring access to data using cryptographic keys, which will allow the user to restore data in the event of loss of access, without resorting to external sources.
How to implement: Implement functionality to create backup keys or tokens that can be used to restore data.
Advantages: Protection against data loss, ease of access restoration without the participation of third parties.
10. Supports multi-factor authentication via key storage devices (such as YubiKey)
Description: To improve security, you can offer support for authentication through devices that generate one-time keys, such as YubiKey or other hardware devices.
How to implement: Integrate support for such devices into the project's authentication system.
Advantages: Enhanced security, protection against phishing and other authentication attacks.
These solutions can make a project Ygdrassil more attractive to users who value privacy, security and autonomy. Implementing such capabilities will ensure reliable data protection and help build trust among users, especially in the face of growing threats to personal information online.
Implement all these possibilities within the project Ygdrassilmaking them work “out of the box” for an untrained user is certainly difficult, but possible if you approach the implementation step by step. However, there are a few important points to consider:
1. Keep it simple for untrained users
Implementing most of these functions in a finished product requires creating an intuitive interface that hides all the complexity behind convenient settings and smart assistants. For untrained users, it is important that most operations are performed automatically, without the need for intervention.
How to implement it:
For self-hosting You can develop simple scripts or installation wizards that automate the deployment, configuration, and upgrade processes. This can be achieved through the use of containers (such as Docker), which can be configured with minimal effort.
Integration with Tor and I2P should not only be possible, but also offered as an easy setup in the interface. A couple of clicks to connect through these networks, with pre-configured settings, will improve the experience for beginners.
Encryption data must be transparent. For example, automatically encrypting data on the client side without the user needing to know how it works can be implemented as on/off settings.
2. Technical complexity and documentation
One important aspect will be the quality of documentation and training materials. For an untrained user, it will be useful if all the information is presented in a step-by-step format with clear explanations.
How to implement it:
Add built-in hints And interactive tutorials, which will help the user go through all the setup steps.
Provide flexible interface settings using templates for different types of users (newbies, experienced users, administrators).
Turn on automatic updates, which will eliminate the need to manually search for patches and updates, as well as integration with services for restoring from backups.
3. Performance issues and hardware requirements
Some of the proposed solutions may require quite powerful resources, such as encryption and decentralized data storage (IPFS). For the casual user, it is important that such features work effectively even on less powerful devices.
How to implement it:
Enable feature step-by-step setup, where the user can choose which features and services to activate based on the power of their device.
For remote hosting and use of cloud services You can offer options with minimal requirements, for example, using cloud providers for data storage, which will reduce the load on the local computer.
4. Transparency in use and user interface
Integration process with technologies such as Tor, IPFS, or machine learning, may be difficult to understand for beginners. It is important that such systems operate in the background, with clear and understandable status alerts, and provide the user with the ability to enable or disable these features at their discretion.
How to implement it:
Simple and intuitive interface with visual indicators what's happening in the background (for example, when data is encrypted or when a Tor connection is active).
Enable ready-made presets with safe settings for beginners, and more complex, customizable settings for experienced users.
5. Problems with network infrastructure and dependencies on third-party solutions
The use of decentralized technologies and anonymous networks such as Tor, can cause performance and connection stability issues, which can be frustrating for the untrained user.
How to implement it:
Simplify the process of switching between main network And anonymous network, so that the user can easily return to normal operation if problems with anonymity arise.
The out-of-the-box approach means that most of these dependencies and technologies will work automatically, hiding technical details and providing stable work.
What can be realistically implemented for untrained users:
Basic functions (e.g. self-hosting, basic encryption, Tor connection) can be made accessible to beginners with simple tools and instructions.
Cloud and decentralized solutions can be implemented through standard interfaces with basic settings for beginners, but with the possibility of deeper customization for experienced users.
Updates and patches: You can implement automatic update and patch mechanisms to protect against vulnerabilities without user intervention.
Easy security setup: Users can enable or disable security features (such as encryption and anonymous networks) through the interface with minimal settings.
What is the way out:
In order to do this “really out of the box”, you need to consider two important aspects:
Simplicity of the interface and automation of all complex technical processes.
Accessibility for different types of users, including those without technical experience.
Creating such software may require a lot of effort at the development stage, but the result can be a very powerful tool for users seeking privacy, security and independence.#Programming #RolesInTheProject #SoftwareDevelopment #OpenSource #CareerPath #NewToProgramming #DevelopmentProcess #Startups #NonTechnicalRoles #IT #TechIndustry #ProjectManagement #UIUX #Marketing #CommunityBuilding #ProductManagement #CareerGrowth #TechLeadership #TechMarketing #Agile #LearnToCode #TechCareers #TechProjects #InnovationInTech #TechPathways
Qoto Mastodon
https://qoto.org/web/@tyden/113815686277448963 -
Are AI-Restricted 3D Printers Killing Innovation?
5,595 words, 30 minutes read time.
Introduction: The Unintended Consequences of AI Restrictions in 3D Printing
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into the world of 3D printing, offering unprecedented capabilities for efficiency, precision, and speed. The implementation of AI-driven controls aims to enhance safety, protect intellectual property, and help manufacturers comply with various legal standards. However, while these restrictions represent a major step forward in terms of security and compliance, they also introduce a host of challenges that could significantly hinder innovation, alienate users, and even open the door to new types of security breaches.
AI systems are now capable of making decisions about what can and cannot be printed, often based on political, corporate, or social biases. This has created an environment where makers, hobbyists, and small businesses could feel increasingly restricted in what they are able to design and produce. For many in the 3D printing community, AI controls have begun to resemble the types of moderation systems seen on social media platforms—deciding what is permissible without much transparency or accountability. The concerns about AI-driven controls not only reflect broader debates about technology and freedom but also raise important questions about the balance between safety and innovation.
The challenge is that, while these systems are designed to help prevent illegal activity, protect proprietary information, and adhere to regulatory standards, they could unintentionally stifle creativity and block access to technologies that have been empowering makers and manufacturers. As companies impose more AI restrictions, especially in areas like aerospace, healthcare, and consumer electronics, some worry that it will push innovation and production into an underground, unregulated market. This could ultimately lead to a fragmented industry where legitimate businesses and individuals lose access to vital tools, and hackers or rogue elements dominate.
Furthermore, AI systems themselves are not foolproof. As we’ve seen in other contexts, AI-driven technologies can be susceptible to errors, biases, and vulnerabilities. The same applies to AI in 3D printing. As printers increasingly rely on cloud-based systems for decision-making, there are more points of attack for hackers looking to exploit these AI controls, either by bypassing restrictions or stealing sensitive data. This creates a real and pressing risk, not just for individuals but for industries that depend on 3D printing for their operations.
Ultimately, the ongoing debate about AI restrictions in 3D printing will require finding a balance between maintaining security and promoting openness. While AI systems offer unprecedented advantages for safety and efficiency, their overreach could stifle the very innovation and creativity that the technology was designed to support. The challenge for policymakers, manufacturers, and the 3D printing community will be to strike the right balance between regulation and freedom, ensuring that AI systems help protect valuable assets while also preserving access to the tools and possibilities that have made 3D printing such a game-changing technology.
The Growing Role of AI in Restricting 3D Printing
AI-powered 3D printers are now capable of scanning digital files to identify “restricted” items—such as firearms, controversial designs, or intellectual property violations—before they are printed. These systems use cloud-based monitoring to flag files that don’t meet pre-determined guidelines, ensuring compliance with safety regulations or copyright laws. On paper, it seems like a good solution for mitigating risks associated with the proliferation of dangerous or illegal items.
However, the growing reliance on these AI systems to enforce restrictions could have serious unintended consequences. One of the most concerning issues is the way in which these restrictions curtail the freedom that defines the 3D printing community. Much like how social media platforms have been accused of overreach when moderating content, 3D printer manufacturers are now assuming the role of gatekeepers over what can and cannot be made, potentially based on political or corporate interests rather than public safety or legality.
How Political Agendas Could Limit 3D Printing Freedom
Just like social media platforms selectively censor content they find objectionable, AI-restricted 3D printers could enforce ideological or corporate biases. Companies that produce 3D printers might block certain designs based on their own policies or external pressures, such as lobbying from interest groups or government agencies. For instance, the debate surrounding 3D-printed firearms has raised concerns that manufacturers might restrict designs that could be used to create guns, even when such printing is legal.
While these restrictions may be framed as a safety measure, many in the 3D printing community see them as an overreach—an attempt to control what people can create. This mirrors the challenges social media platforms face when they moderate speech, leading to concerns over who gets to decide what is “acceptable” and what is not. By restricting certain prints, manufacturers could inadvertently limit the potential of 3D printing to foster creativity, innovation, and collaboration.
Security Risks: Hacking AI-Driven Restrictions in 3D Printing
Despite manufacturers’ efforts to safeguard against misuse, AI-restricted 3D printers are not immune to hacking. As the technology becomes more integrated with cloud-based monitoring systems, the potential for breaches grows significantly. These cloud systems are often responsible for processing and storing design files, which means that if a hacker gains access to them, they could alter the files, bypass restrictions, or steal valuable data. In the worst-case scenario, this could lead to intellectual property theft, damaging the reputation and financial stability of businesses. Hackers may exploit vulnerabilities in cloud platforms, taking advantage of weak security measures or misconfigurations, enabling them to manipulate design files or disable the AI algorithms that govern the printing process.
Additionally, as 3D printers become more connected to the internet and rely on IoT systems, they become more susceptible to remote attacks. A hacker could gain unauthorized access to these devices, controlling the printing process without the need for physical access to the printer itself. By exploiting security loopholes, attackers can manipulate or completely disable the AI-driven restrictions, allowing them to print illegal or restricted items. This has significant implications for businesses that depend on these systems for secure production of sensitive products. Furthermore, such breaches could lead to the theft of proprietary designs, which could be copied or sold on the black market, undermining the integrity of the entire 3D printing industry. The risks of hacking underscore the need for stronger security measures and proactive defense mechanisms in the evolving landscape of 3D printing.
Examples of Hardware Being Hacked
There have already been notable instances of hardware vulnerabilities being exploited in the 3D printing world, highlighting the risks inherent in these systems:
- Stealing Intellectual Property in Aerospace: Hackers have exploited vulnerabilities in 3D printers used by aerospace companies. In one case, hackers accessed industrial 3D printers to steal design files of aircraft components, leading to the production of counterfeit parts that could be sold at cheaper prices, endangering safety standards.
- 3D Printer Firmware Hacks: In one incident, a researcher spent months cracking encrypted firmware of a 3D printer to fix software issues, discovering that such vulnerabilities could also be exploited to steal design files and bypass security measures. This vulnerability is particularly concerning in industrial settings where proprietary designs are crucial.
- Acoustic Hacking: At the University of California, Irvine, researchers demonstrated that the sounds a 3D printer makes during operation could be used to reverse-engineer parts. By recording these sounds, hackers could gain enough detail to reproduce parts with high accuracy, circumventing security that encrypts design files.
- Unauthorized Access to Cloud Storage: Hackers have targeted cloud-based storage platforms linked to 3D printers, stealing valuable design files and intellectual property. Once inside the cloud storage, attackers can alter files, bypass restrictions, and even inject malicious code into designs, potentially compromising the integrity of the printer’s output.
- Jailbreaking the Printer Software: Hackers have also used jailbreaking techniques to break into the software of 3D printers. This enables them to disable restrictions and gain unrestricted access to the printer’s functionality, allowing them to print illegal or unauthorized items.
These examples emphasize the growing threat of hacking in the 3D printing world. As AI-driven systems become more common, so do the opportunities for hackers to exploit weaknesses in these technologies. Stronger security measures and vigilance will be essential to maintaining the integrity of the industry and protecting against misuse.
Ways Hackers Could Bypass Restrictions
As AI-driven restrictions on 3D printers become more common, the potential for hackers to exploit vulnerabilities in these systems grows. While manufacturers are working to tighten security, the evolving nature of both AI and hacking techniques means these systems may not be as foolproof as intended. Let’s explore in more detail how unauthorized individuals could bypass these restrictions and what that could mean for the future of 3D printing.
Manipulating Printer Firmware and AI Controls
One of the most immediate ways hackers could circumvent AI-driven restrictions is by targeting the printer’s firmware. The firmware acts as the core software that controls the printer’s operations, including the AI algorithms that detect and prevent restricted items from being printed. If a hacker gains access to this firmware—perhaps by exploiting weak security protocols or gaining physical access to the printer—they could disable or alter the AI controls.
By modifying or removing the AI’s scanning algorithm, hackers could effectively allow printers to produce prohibited or restricted items. This opens the door for individuals to create dangerous weapons, counterfeit products, or other items that would otherwise be flagged. These exploits could be performed for personal use, or worse, sold on the black market to those with malicious intent. The potential scale of misuse here is significant, as once AI controls are disabled, the possibility for unethical or illegal prints becomes almost limitless. Additionally, such modifications might not be easily detectable, allowing hackers to operate without raising red flags for long periods.
Moreover, altering the printer’s firmware doesn’t just allow hackers to bypass restrictions; it could also be used to hide the origin of illicit designs. Hackers could reprogram the printer to generate “clean” print logs, erasing any trace of the banned content that was produced. Such sophisticated methods would make it harder for authorities or manufacturers to trace the misuse back to the culprit.
Exploiting Cloud-Based Vulnerabilities
Another major vulnerability in AI-restricted 3D printing systems is the reliance on cloud-based platforms for analyzing and storing designs. When 3D printers scan digital files for compliance with AI rules, these files are often uploaded to cloud servers for real-time processing. This centralized storage method simplifies the process for both users and manufacturers but also creates an attractive target for hackers.
If an attacker can gain access to the cloud platform, they could alter the design files being analyzed, bypass the AI’s detection system, or even upload malicious files designed to exploit flaws in the printer’s security. For example, an attacker could inject code into the digital files to override the AI’s scanning protocol or remove the identification markers that trigger the restrictions. This would allow users to print restricted items, all while bypassing the safety measures put in place.
Moreover, cloud breaches also expose the risk of intellectual property theft. Companies that rely on proprietary designs for their products or processes store valuable data in these cloud systems. If a hacker successfully infiltrates the cloud storage, they could steal these designs, leading to significant financial losses and even potential lawsuits if the stolen designs are used or sold without authorization. Not only does this undermine the trust users place in these platforms, but it could discourage businesses from using AI-restricted printers at all, fearing the security risks involved.
Jailbreaking and Unlocking 3D Printers
Similar to the techniques used to jailbreak smartphones or gaming consoles, 3D printers can also be “jailbroken” to remove restrictions imposed by the manufacturer. Jailbreaking typically involves altering or replacing the device’s operating system, allowing it to bypass the intended limitations. In the case of AI-restricted 3D printers, jailbreaking could involve unlocking the printer’s software to allow for unrestricted printing.
Once jailbroken, the printer would no longer follow the manufacturer’s rules or restrictions, making it possible for users to print anything they wish—whether legal or not. This could range from creating counterfeit goods to producing dangerous, banned items like firearms or drug-related paraphernalia. Since the software is no longer locked down, hackers can also install their own modified versions of the software, opening even more doors for malicious activity.
This type of hacking is particularly concerning because it’s a relatively accessible way for non-expert users to disable AI-driven restrictions. It’s not just large-scale hackers or criminals who can exploit this; everyday users with basic knowledge of software modifications could potentially gain full control over their printers. Once the system is compromised, the potential for misuse skyrockets, as the technology becomes as free to operate as the maker’s imagination allows.
Remote Hacking and Data Theft
While many 3D printing systems rely on local firmware or cloud-based processing, the growing trend toward Internet of Things (IoT)-connected devices introduces new risks. 3D printers that are connected to the internet for easier file transfers or remote monitoring could be targeted by hackers from anywhere in the world. These remote attacks could exploit known vulnerabilities in the printer’s software or its internet connection to bypass AI restrictions without the need for physical access.
Such remote hacking attempts can involve manipulating the printer’s communication protocols, gaining unauthorized access to the design data, or even installing malware that forces the printer to follow illicit instructions. For instance, hackers could inject a piece of code into the printer that causes it to ignore specific restrictions or print files that are flagged as dangerous.
This remote access could also lead to serious data theft. If a business is using a 3D printer to prototype products or create sensitive designs, remote hacking could expose these assets to theft. With cloud-based storage or IoT connectivity, valuable company data—ranging from trade secrets to new product designs—could be stolen, copied, or sold on the black market. This threat has been growing across all IoT-connected industries, and 3D printing could quickly become a prime target for cybercriminals looking to exploit weaknesses in these technologies.
The Future of Hacking 3D Printing Systems
As 3D printing technology continues to evolve, so too will the methods used by hackers to exploit vulnerabilities in AI-driven systems. The sophistication of attacks will likely increase, with hackers utilizing a combination of firmware manipulation, cloud exploits, jailbreaking, and remote hacking to circumvent restrictions. The challenge for manufacturers will be to stay one step ahead of these threats by continuously upgrading security measures and ensuring that AI-driven restrictions cannot be easily bypassed.
For users, the best defense against these risks is vigilance and understanding the potential dangers associated with AI-restricted 3D printers. By staying informed about the latest threats and adopting best practices for security, individuals and businesses can help mitigate the risks posed by hackers. However, the larger issue remains: if AI restrictions are too easily bypassed or manipulated, the value of these systems in securing 3D printing will diminish, ultimately forcing the industry to rethink its approach to safety and control.
The Risk of a Black Market for Unrestricted Printers
As 3D printing technology becomes more integrated with AI-driven restrictions, the potential for a black market offering unrestricted printers grows. These underground networks would cater to those who want to bypass the AI controls placed on commercial 3D printers. People willing to break the law or avoid the ethical considerations of printing restricted items could easily find access to machines that enable them to do so. This could lead to an increase in demand for hacked, modified, or counterfeit 3D printers capable of bypassing these built-in security measures. With the technology becoming more widespread and accessible, these black market operations would likely continue to grow in size and scope, potentially undermining the legitimacy of the entire 3D printing industry.
The presence of such a black market would complicate regulatory and legal efforts to control the technology. Governments and businesses would face challenges in identifying and controlling the use of unregulated machines, especially as these systems may not be traceable to a legitimate manufacturer. As these illegal printers spread, they could lead to the production of harmful or dangerous items, such as weapons, counterfeit parts for vehicles, or even hazardous products. With no oversight or accountability, the risk of unsafe printing practices would rise, putting the general public at risk. As more people gain access to these unrestricted printers, the scale of unethical or dangerous printing could increase rapidly, becoming a significant public safety concern.
The creation of a black market for printers could also negatively impact legitimate manufacturers, who already face significant pressure to maintain strict quality controls and security measures. As people turn to hacked or modified machines, manufacturers who maintain high standards may see a drop in sales, especially as consumers opt for cheaper, unregulated alternatives. This could reduce innovation in the market, as companies may fear that any advancements they make could be undermined by widespread hacking or the growth of the black market. Additionally, the legitimacy of the 3D printing industry as a whole could be questioned, as it becomes increasingly associated with illegal activity, overshadowing its legitimate uses in medical, engineering, and manufacturing fields.
Furthermore, the black market could foster a host of other criminal activities. As hackers gain expertise in modifying 3D printers, they may find new ways to exploit these systems for personal gain. This could include selling stolen designs, creating fake products to trick consumers, or even developing new ways to use printers for illegal or dangerous purposes. The combination of these illegal operations could lead to further degradation of trust in the 3D printing industry. If the public perceives 3D printing as a tool for illicit activity, rather than innovation and progress, the entire field could suffer reputational damage that would take years to recover from.
The Economic and Ethical Impact of Restrictions
AI-driven restrictions on 3D printing are not only a technical and security issue but also pose significant economic challenges, especially for industries that depend on 3D printing for innovation, production, and prototyping. Sectors like aerospace, automotive, and healthcare have made tremendous strides using 3D printing to create complex prototypes and functional parts, often in short runs that would otherwise be too costly or time-consuming to produce with traditional manufacturing. If manufacturers restrict certain designs or types of printing based on vague or politically motivated criteria, it could drastically limit these industries’ ability to innovate and push the boundaries of what’s possible. Companies that rely on the flexibility and customization that 3D printing offers may find themselves stifled by these limitations, hindering their competitiveness in an increasingly fast-paced global market.
For small businesses and independent creators, the financial impact of compliance with AI-driven systems could be prohibitively high. Many independent makers, startups, and entrepreneurs rely on 3D printing technology to prototype products quickly and affordably or to create unique, limited-edition items. If AI restrictions are introduced to prevent them from printing certain designs or products, they may face increased costs due to the need to invest in specialized printers or software to comply with these rules. Additionally, many of these businesses may not have the capital or resources to adhere to the rigid restrictions imposed by large manufacturers, leaving them at a significant disadvantage. As a result, small-scale creators may abandon official, regulated 3D printing systems altogether, turning to open-source, DIY, or unregulated alternatives in an attempt to remain competitive. This trend could contribute to an underground, fragmented marketplace that lacks security, oversight, and accountability.
This shift toward unregulated or underground 3D printing has far-reaching consequences for both innovation and security. By moving away from the official channels that support regulated designs, creators could inadvertently compromise the integrity of their products. Unrestricted printers, while cheaper, may not be subject to the same safety standards or quality control processes that legitimate systems undergo, leading to the proliferation of substandard or dangerous products. This trend could undermine the efforts of companies working to bring high-quality, safe, and reliable 3D-printed items to market, creating a more chaotic and potentially harmful environment. Moreover, as creators abandon ethical standards, the reputation of the entire 3D printing industry could be damaged, as consumers might associate the technology with unreliable or unsafe products.
Another major issue that could arise from these restrictions is the exacerbation of the digital divide. 3D printing has the potential to democratize manufacturing, allowing small creators, individuals, and developing nations to access tools for production that were once exclusive to larger companies with significant resources. However, with AI-driven restrictions forcing smaller creators to either adopt expensive, restricted models or use unregulated alternatives, the technology may become less accessible to those who need it the most. This could lock out innovators from lower-income areas or startups that lack the funds to purchase restricted machines or pay for compliance. At the same time, it would create a widening gap between major corporations and independent creators, potentially stifling competition and reducing the diversity of ideas within the market.
In addition to these economic concerns, the ethical implications of restricting 3D printing are profound. As the technology becomes more powerful and accessible, it has the potential to revolutionize fields ranging from medicine (e.g., printing custom prosthetics or organs) to sustainability (e.g., creating eco-friendly products with reduced waste). However, limiting certain designs based on political or arbitrary criteria could create a dangerous precedent for censorship and control over technology. If the criteria for restricting 3D printing become influenced by political pressure, corporate interests, or fear of misuse, it could stifle creativity, innovation, and even suppress access to life-changing technologies. The ethical debate will only continue to intensify as 3D printing becomes an integral part of more industries and personal projects, and it will be critical for society to find a balance that allows for innovation while protecting public safety.
What Can Be Done to Protect Innovation Without Sacrificing Security?
While the goal of keeping 3D printing safe and secure is understandable, it’s clear that imposing broad, restrictive controls on all users is not the solution. The future of 3D printing hinges on finding a balance between safety and freedom.
One possible solution is to offer optional restrictions rather than mandating them across the board. By allowing users to opt into more rigorous security features, manufacturers can cater to both those who want additional protections and those who prefer greater autonomy. Additionally, decentralizing AI systems—processing design files locally rather than relying on cloud storage—could reduce privacy concerns and increase trust within the 3D printing community.
Another way forward could be the introduction of educational initiatives that focus on ethical 3D printing practices. By empowering users with knowledge about safety and legality, manufacturers can encourage responsible use without resorting to heavy-handed enforcement.
3D Printing Without Internet: Challenges and Workarounds
One of the primary concerns with AI-driven restrictions in 3D printers is their reliance on cloud-based servers and internet connectivity to enforce limitations. These systems analyze and verify print files to determine if they meet predefined criteria, such as whether they contain restricted designs. But what happens when the printer is air-gapped—disconnected from the internet—either due to security concerns or in remote areas where connectivity is unreliable? In this scenario, the printer would likely still operate, but the AI restrictions may become ineffective or unable to function properly.
Functionality Without Cloud Access
When a 3D printer is offline, many of the cloud-based AI-driven controls that enforce restrictions become inaccessible. In such cases, the printer could default to more basic or local file verification methods. However, without the continuous data stream from the manufacturer’s servers, the printer might lack access to the most up-to-date restriction protocols, leading to a situation where restricted or unauthorized designs could be printed without AI interference. This is a potential vulnerability, as users could bypass controls simply by working offline. For instance, in military or high-security environments where printers are air-gapped to prevent hacking, the devices would still function, but there would be a greater risk of misuse or unauthorized printing.
Functionality Without Cloud Access: The Cost of Internet Outages
When a 3D printer is offline due to an internet outage or is deliberately air-gapped for security reasons, the cloud-based AI-driven controls that regulate what can and cannot be printed become inaccessible. Typically, these AI systems help to ensure that designs adhere to specific legal or safety protocols by verifying files before they’re printed. Without access to the continuous data stream from the manufacturer’s cloud servers, the printer may default to more basic, local file verification methods, which lack the sophistication and updates provided by the online system. In the absence of real-time validation, printers may either fail to operate altogether or operate without the necessary safeguards, potentially allowing restricted or unauthorized designs to be printed.
The financial and productivity costs of this type of disruption can be significant. In industries that rely on 3D printing for just-in-time manufacturing, prototyping, or rapid product development, the inability to access updated cloud protocols means the printer might print designs that are outdated, flawed, or even illegal. If such printing activities are discovered, companies could face fines, lawsuits, or damaged reputations, all of which result in considerable costs. For example, in sectors like aerospace or automotive, where strict regulatory compliance is mandatory, printing unauthorized parts could lead to product recalls, safety violations, or even regulatory sanctions. Beyond the legal ramifications, a delay in production due to a printer being offline or working with outdated guidelines could lead to missed deadlines, delayed product launches, and supply chain disruptions.
Additionally, the absence of AI-driven cloud protocols can also result in downtime and inefficiency in high-stakes environments. For instance, industries like healthcare or electronics manufacturing rely on 3D printing for precision and time-sensitive outputs. A single outage, whether due to internet failure or a more systemic issue with the cloud infrastructure, could halt an entire production line, causing a bottleneck that affects downstream operations. The resulting downtime is expensive, not only in terms of lost productivity but also in terms of the costs associated with reprogramming machines, verifying compliance with updated standards, or potentially reprinting faulty items.
Moreover, the productivity losses are compounded by the resources needed to troubleshoot offline systems. Without access to online customer support, updates, or remote diagnostics, manufacturers and businesses may need to invest in in-house technical expertise to ensure that the machines are still functioning properly. This is particularly costly for smaller companies that lack dedicated IT departments. The reliance on manual intervention to ensure compliance and system functionality leads to increased labor costs and can shift the focus away from more productive tasks like innovation and scaling.
Lastly, the long-term impact of frequent internet outages or air-gapping can damage the overall reliability of 3D printing as a core manufacturing tool. When companies face consistent disruptions in cloud access, they may begin to reconsider their reliance on cloud-connected printers, potentially turning to traditional, non-AI-driven 3D printers that do not have the same capabilities but are less susceptible to such interruptions. While this may mitigate some risks, it also eliminates the advantages of AI-driven innovation and efficiency, leading to slower production times, reduced quality, and ultimately higher operational costs. This shift could lead to a greater fragmentation of the market, as companies may turn to less sophisticated or outdated technologies that can handle production independently of cloud-based services, but at a much higher cost to long-term business agility and growth.
In conclusion, while air-gapping or offline modes may offer temporary relief from AI restrictions, they present considerable economic and productivity challenges. These disruptions can lead to delays, security vulnerabilities, and increased operational costs, all of which add up over time. The 3D printing industry must balance the need for secure, AI-driven systems with strategies that ensure functionality, minimize downtime, and maintain compliance, even in the event of an internet outage or cloud disruption.
The Risk of Hacking in Air-Gapped Environments
While being offline may seem like a secure solution, it does not make the 3D printer immune to hacking. Air-gapping a printer simply means that it is not directly connected to the internet, but it can still be accessed via physical means, such as USB drives or external storage devices. Hackers could exploit this by inserting compromised files into the printer via physical media, allowing them to bypass the AI restrictions that would otherwise prevent printing. As a result, even in isolated environments, there is a risk that unauthorized users could inject malicious code or print illicit designs. This is similar to how cybersecurity experts worry about air-gapped systems in other industries—while these systems are harder to hack remotely, they are still vulnerable to local breaches.
Workarounds and Countermeasures
To mitigate these risks, some manufacturers and organizations have implemented their own local verification systems. Instead of relying solely on cloud servers, these printers may include a local database of acceptable design files, print patterns, and encryption keys that the AI can check against before allowing the print job to proceed. In such cases, even though the printer is air-gapped, the security checks would still be based on predefined and vetted files, reducing the likelihood of printing unauthorized designs. Additionally, some air-gapped environments may use encrypted flash drives or other secure methods of transferring files to ensure that no malicious designs are introduced.
However, the trade-off with offline printing is that the printer would no longer receive real-time updates, meaning that security protocols could become outdated. As 3D printing technology rapidly advances, keeping these systems up-to-date with the latest security measures is crucial. Without internet access to push these updates, the risk of a security gap increases, and manufacturers may need to develop offline solutions that allow for periodic, secure updates to ensure that restrictions remain current.
The Future of Offline 3D Printing
As the 3D printing industry continues to evolve, the question of how printers will operate offline, while still adhering to legal and ethical standards, becomes even more pressing. Manufacturers may look into hybrid solutions, where printers can work offline for routine operations but also have periodic connectivity for updates and verifications. This could ensure that users can still print within the boundaries of the law while maintaining a level of security and functionality that prevents abuse. Ultimately, whether air-gapped or online, it will be essential to find the right balance between security and convenience for 3D printers in both commercial and industrial sectors.
In conclusion, while AI-driven restrictions on 3D printers may rely heavily on cloud access, printers operating without internet access still present challenges for both security and functionality. Hackers can exploit offline systems through local interventions, and manufacturers will need to devise creative ways to ensure these systems remain secure and compliant, regardless of their connectivity status.
Conclusion: Innovation Versus Control—The Future of 3D Printing
The debate surrounding AI-restricted 3D printing is a reflection of the broader conversation about technology, control, and freedom in our modern world. As the 3D printing industry matures, it faces increasing pressure from manufacturers and governments to impose stricter regulations—often under the guise of safety, security, or preventing illegal activity. However, this tightening of control runs the risk of stifling the very innovation that has made 3D printing one of the most transformative technologies of the 21st century.
Security is undeniably crucial in a world where the potential for misuse is real. Yet, overregulation—especially when driven by political or corporate interests—could severely damage the open, experimental culture that has allowed individuals, startups, and small businesses to thrive in the 3D printing space. The strength of 3D printing lies in its accessibility and flexibility. It has empowered hobbyists, engineers, and creators to push boundaries, experiment, and iterate rapidly on ideas. If manufacturers continue to act as gatekeepers, limiting access to certain designs or types of printing through AI-driven restrictions, they risk creating a more closed ecosystem. This would not only limit the ability to innovate but also create a fragmented market where underground, unregulated printing systems become the only viable option for those seeking to bypass the restrictions.
Moreover, the introduction of AI restrictions, while intended to prevent harmful designs, could inadvertently force entire industries, including aerospace, healthcare, and automotive, to abandon the very tools that have allowed them to thrive. These industries rely on 3D printing not just for prototyping but also for highly specialized, low-volume manufacturing, where flexibility and the ability to work with diverse designs are paramount. Restricting access to certain designs based on political or subjective criteria could lead to significant delays, inefficiencies, and innovation roadblocks.
The real question is whether we are willing to sacrifice the autonomy of makers, small businesses, and individuals for the sake of control. A growing body of evidence suggests that when access to innovation is curtailed, it doesn’t stop people from creating—it drives those creations underground, where they are far less safe, less regulated, and far more prone to exploitation. The advent of the black market for restricted 3D printers and modified machines only further complicates the issue, as it forces legitimate businesses to either adapt to an increasingly closed ecosystem or risk being left behind in a rapidly changing world.
In the end, the future of 3D printing will hinge on finding a balance between innovation and regulation. If manufacturers, lawmakers, and industry leaders take a heavy-handed approach to control, they will risk not only harming the creators and businesses that make the 3D printing revolution possible but also undermining the very principles of freedom, creativity, and accessibility that have driven its success. Instead, we must create a framework that allows for safety and security while ensuring that innovation is not quashed in the process.
D. Bryan King
Related Posts
Rate this:
#3DPrinterAccessibility #3DPrinterAutonomy #3DPrinterBlackMarket #3DPrinterDesignTheft #3DPrinterDowntime #3DPrinterHacking #3DPrinterInnovation #3DPrinterSecurity #3DPrinting #3DPrintingAILimitations #3DPrintingBusinessRisks #3DPrintingCommunity #3DPrintingCompliance #3DPrintingDisruptions #3DPrintingForBusinesses #3DPrintingFuture #3DPrintingPrivacyConcerns #3DPrintingRegulations #3DPrintingRisks #3DPrintingSafety #3DPrintingSecurityIssues #3DPrintingSoftwareManipulation #3DPrintingTechnology #AIAndIntellectualProperty #AIBiasIn3DPrinting #AIControls #AIModerationIn3DPrinting #AIRestrictions #AIDrivenDesignRestrictions #AIDrivenPrinting #airGapped3DPrinters #blackMarketFor3DPrinters #cloud3DPrintingRisks #cloudBased3DPrinting #DIY3DPrinting #futureOf3DPrintingIndustry #hacking3DPrinters #illegal3DPrintingDesigns #impactOfAIOn3DPrinting #innovationAndAIIn3DPrinting #innovationIn3DPrinting #internetOutageImpactOn3DPrinting #makersAnd3DPrinting #openSource3DPrinting #politicalControlIn3DPrinting #printerRestrictions #printerVulnerabilities #securityBreachesIn3DPrinting #securityIn3DPrinting #techRegulationIn3DPrinting #technologyAndFreedom #underground3DPrinting #unregulated3DPrinters
-
What To Use Instead of PGP
It’s been more than five years since The PGP Problem was published, and I still hear from people who believe that using PGP (whether GnuPG or another OpenPGP implementation) is a thing they should be doing.
It isn’t.
I don’t blame individual Internet users for this confusion. There is a lot of cargo-culting around communication tools in the software community, and the evangelists for the various projects muddy the waters for the rest of us.
HarubakiThe part of the free and open source software community that thinks PGP is just dandy, and therefore evangelize the hell out of it to unsuspecting people, are the same kind of people that happily use XMPP+OMEMO, Matrix, or weird Signal forks that remove forward secrecy and think it’s fine.
Not to mince words: The same people who believe PGP is good are also famously not great at cryptography engineering.
If you’re going to outsource your opinions on privacy technology to someone else, make sure it’s someone who has actually found vulnerabilities in cryptographic software before. Most evangelists have not.
CMYKatI’m not here to litigate the demerits of PGP. The Latacora article I linked above makes the same arguments I would make today, and is a more entertaining read.
It is of my opinion as a security engineer that specializes in applied cryptography that nobody should use PGP, because there’s virtually always a better tool for the job you want to use PGP for.
(And for the uncommon use cases, offering a secure, purpose-built replacement is a work-in-progress.)
Note: I’m deliberately being blunt in this post because literally more than a decade of softspokenness from cryptography experts has done nothing to talk users off the PGP cliff. Being direct seems more effective than being tactful.
If you want a gentler touch, ask your cryptographer. If you don’t have a cryptographer, hire one.
If you can accept that every billionaire is the result of a failed system, that’s how cryptographers feel about people using PGP.
Instead, let’s examine the “use cases” of PGP and what you should be using instead. (Some of this is redundant with the Latacora article, but I’m also writing it 5 years later, so some things have changed.)
CMYKatI’m focusing on the “what” in this post, not the “why”. If you want to know the why, read the Latacora blog, or the Matthew Green blog.
If you’re curious about the credibility of my recommendations, read my other blog posts or ask your cryptographer.
Instead of PGP, Use This
This section contains specific tools to solve the same problems that PGP tries to solve, but better.
What makes these recommendations better than PGP?
Simply, they don’t make cryptographers want to run the other way screaming when they look under the hood. PGP does.
Some people are forced to use PGP because they work for a government that legally requires them to use PGP. In that corner case, your hands are tied by lawyers, so you don’t need to bother with what cryptographers recommend.
CMYKatSigning Software Distributions
Use Sigstore.
Note that this is an ecosystem-wide consideration, not something that specific individuals must manually opt into for each of their hobby projects. The only downside to Sigstore is it hasn’t been widely adopted yet.
If you’re a Python developer, you can just use PEP 740 to get attestations with Trusted Publishers, which gives you Sigstore for free. For most developers, this is as simple as setting up a GitHub Action to publish to PyPI.
This is a developing trend: Other programming language and package management ecosystems are following suit. I expect to see Sigstore attestations baked into NPM and Maven before the next US presidential election. With any luck, your favorite programming language could be on this list too.
Sigstore doesn’t just give you a signature that you check with a long-lived public key, nor does it require you to do the Web Of Trust rigamarole.
Rather, Sigstore gives you a lot for free. Sigstore was designed around ephemeral signing certificates rather than a long-lived private key. It was purpose-built for preventing supply-chain attacks against open source software.
Combined with Reproducible Builds, Sigstore solves the triangle of secure code delivery.
Alternatively, use minisign. If your package ecosystem doesn’t support Sigstore yet, you can get by with minisign (which is signify-compatible) until they modernize.
You can also use SSH signatures, if you’d prefer. (More on that below.)
CMYKatSigning Git Tags/Commits
Use SSH Signatures, not PGP signatures.
With Ed25519. Stop using RSA.
Art by HarubakiSending Files Between Computers
Use Magic Wormhole.
You could also use SSH + rsync to do this job. That’s fine too.
CMYKatEncrypting Backups
Tarsnap is the usual recommendation here.
There are a lot of other encrypted backup tools that work fine, if you don’t want to give Colin Percival your business. I don’t have a financial stake in any of them, nor have I audited them thoroughly.
Borg uses reasonable cryptography, but I haven’t had the time to review it carefully.
Kopia looks fine, but I really hate that they misuse “zero knowledge” to describe an encryption protocol (rather than a proof system). We should not reward this misbehavior by marketers.
The point is: You’ve got options.
Too many options, in my opinion, to settle for PGP.
CMYKatEncrypting Application Data
Avoid: OpenPGP, OpenSSL and its competitors.
Not a lot to say here. I’ve written a lot about this over the years. Misuse-resistant cryptography libraries–especially ones that make key management less painful for users–are the way to go.
HarubakiEncrypting Files
Use age.
Age is what PGP file encryption would be if PGP didn’t suck shit.
Age has two modes: Public-key encryption, and password-based key derivation.
Here’s a quick comparison table between what age offers, and what PGP uses in the installed base:
agePGPData encryption modeAEAD (ChaPoly)CAST5 (64-bit block cipher) in CFB mode with a strippable SHA1 “MDC”Key-commitmentYes (via the header)Pah! You wish! Dream on.
PGP isn’t even AEAD.Password KDF memory hard?Yes, with scrypt.No.Vulnerable to chosen-ciphertext attacks?No.Yes, but PGP proponents stupidly consider this a good thing.Supports 90’s-era cryptography?No.Yes.Releases unauthenticated plaintext?No.Yes.Uses versioned protocols rather than “cipher agility”?Yes.No. See: 90’s era cryptography.Most common implementations are memory-safe?Yes (Go, Rust).No (C).Like, it’s not even close.
CMYKatSome PGP proponents will insist that AEAD is possible now, but as long as the installed base of PGP remains backwards compatible with the lowest common denominator, that’s what your software uses.
Just use age. Or rage, if you’re a Rust enthusiast.
(And if you have concerns about “which age key should I trust?”, I’m already planning an age-v1 extension for the Public Key Directory project. More on that below.)
Art by ScruffPrivate Messaging
Use Signal.
Security teams around the world insist that they need PGP for bug bounty submissions or security operations, but Signal does this job better than PGP ever did.
Once upon a time, you needed to give people a phone number to use Signal, but that hasn’t been the case for a long time. Still, many people have missed that memo and think it’s a requirement.
My Signal username is soatok.45. Go ahead and message me. You won’t learn my phone number that way.
In the near future, I plan on developing end-to-end encryption for direct messages on the Fediverse (including Mastodon). This is what motivated my work on the Public Key Directory to begin with.
But this is not intended to be a Signal competitor by any measure. It’s a bar-raising activity, nothing more.
CMYKatI understand some people don’t like or trust Signal for whatever reason, but every single alternative that’s been suggested to Signal has offered inferior cryptography to Signal’s. So I will continue to recommend Signal.
Miscellaneous PGP Alternatives
This section contains things people think they need PGP for.
Identity Verification
I’m actively working on something better!
via XKCDIf you want the ability to vend a transparently verifiable public key for a given user, that’s one of the use cases for the Public Key Directory I’m designing in order to build end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse.
Although this is purpose-built for the Fediverse, I’ve deliberately included support for Auxiliary Data messages, whose formats will be specified by protocol extensions.
Rather than trying to grok the Web-of-Trust, you can simply have your software check that multiple independent Public Key Directories have verified the record, since its inclusion is published in an append-only transparency log, secured by a Merkle tree.
My design doesn’t preclude any manual key verification, or key-signing parties, or whatever other PGP cultural weirdness you want to do with these public keys. It just establishes a baseline trustworthiness even if you’re not a paranoid computer nerd.
My project isn’t finished yet. In the meantime, you can manually check public keys when using the other recommendations on this page.
HarubakiEncrypted Email
Don’t encrypt email. From the Latacora article:
Email is insecure. Even with PGP, it’s default-plaintext, which means that even if you do everything right, some totally reasonable person you mail, doing totally reasonable things, will invariably CC the quoted plaintext of your encrypted message to someone else (we don’t know a PGP email user who hasn’t seen this happen). PGP email is forward-insecure. Email metadata, including the subject (which is literally message content), are always plaintext.
There isn’t a recommendation for encrypted email because that’s not a thing people should be doing.
Art by AJNow, there exists a minority of extremely technical computer user for which Signal is a nonstarter (because you need a smartphone and valid phone number to enroll in the first place).
Because those people are generally not the highest priority of cryptographers (who are commonly focused on the privacy of common folk–including people in poor and developing countries where smartphones are more common than desktop computers), there presently isn’t really a good recommendation for private messaging that meets their constraints.
Certainly not PGP, either.
What PGP offers here is security theater: the illusion of safety. But it’s not actually a robust private communication mechanism, as Latacora argues.
CMYKat“I insist that I need encrypted email!”
If you find someone insisting that they “need” encrypted email, read up on the XY Problem. In a lot of cases, that’s what’s happening here.
Do they ipso facto need email (as in, specifically the email protocols and email software)?
And do they care more about this constraint, or the privacy of their communications?
Because if their goal just to communicate privately, see above.
If the tool they’re using being email is more important than privacy, they should consider sending empty messages with an attachment, and use age to encrypt the actual message before attaching it.
That’s serviceable, just beware that everything Latacora wrote about encrypted emails still applies to your use case, so expect someone to CC or forward your message as plaintext.
(Unless you’re legally required to use PGP because of a government regulation… in which case, why do you care about my recommendations if you’re chained by the ankle to your government’s bad technology choices?)
Finally, miss me with the “but someone can screenshot Signal” genre of objections.
As Latacora noted, people accidentally fuck up PGP all the time! It’s very easy to do.
Conversely, you have to deliberately leak something from Signal. There is no plaintext mode.
That’s the fucking bar you need to meet to compete with Signal.
PGP fails to be a Signal competitor, in ways that are worse than Threema, Matrix, or OMEMO.
Watch This Space
With all that said, I am actually designing an encrypted messaging protocol that will have an email-like user experience, except:
- Everything is always end-to-end encrypted, with forward secrecy.
- It’s not backwards compatible with insecure email.
- It doesn’t use PGP, or any 1990’s era cryptography.
I can’t promise a release date yet. I’m prioritizing end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse before I write the specification for that project (tentatively called AWOO, but the cryptography underpinning both projects should be similar).
Maybe 2026? We’ll see!
If someone beats me to the punch, and their design is actually good, I’ll update the post and replace this with a specific recommendation.
CMYKatAgainst PGP
I don’t know how to get the message out louder or clearer about how cryptographers feel about PGP than what I wrote here.
Latacora wrote their criticism in 2019. As I write this, 2024 is almost over. When will the PGP-induced madness end?
CMYKatExperts are not divided here. There is no controversy to teach.
Every time a cryptographer has talked about PGP, it’s been to complain about how bad it is and opine that people shouldn’t be using it.
If you’ve read this far, you already know what you should be using instead.
Header art credits: CMYKat and the GnuPG logo.
Update (2024-11-16)
Someone tried to use their Fediverse software to submit an anti-furry comment to this blog post.
Therefore, I’ve added more furry art to it.
loviesophieeIf you’re curious about the cryptography used by other messaging apps, please refer to this page that collects my blogs about this topic.
#alternatives #codeSigning #digitalSignatures #encryption #PGP #security #SecurityGuidance #signing
-
What To Use Instead of PGP
It’s been more than five years since The PGP Problem was published, and I still hear from people who believe that using PGP (whether GnuPG or another OpenPGP implementation) is a thing they should be doing.
It isn’t.
I don’t blame individual Internet users for this confusion. There is a lot of cargo-culting around communication tools in the software community, and the evangelists for the various projects muddy the waters for the rest of us.
HarubakiThe part of the free and open source software community that thinks PGP is just dandy, and therefore evangelize the hell out of it to unsuspecting people, are the same kind of people that happily use XMPP+OMEMO, Matrix, or weird Signal forks that remove forward secrecy and think it’s fine.
Not to mince words: The same people who believe PGP is good are also famously not great at cryptography engineering.
If you’re going to outsource your opinions on privacy technology to someone else, make sure it’s someone who has actually found vulnerabilities in cryptographic software before. Most evangelists have not.
CMYKatI’m not here to litigate the demerits of PGP. The Latacora article I linked above makes the same arguments I would make today, and is a more entertaining read.
It is of my opinion as a security engineer that specializes in applied cryptography that nobody should use PGP, because there’s virtually always a better tool for the job you want to use PGP for.
(And for the uncommon use cases, offering a secure, purpose-built replacement is a work-in-progress.)
Note: I’m deliberately being blunt in this post because literally more than a decade of softspokenness from cryptography experts has done nothing to talk users off the PGP cliff. Being direct seems more effective than being tactful.
If you want a gentler touch, ask your cryptographer. If you don’t have a cryptographer, hire one.
If you can accept that every billionaire is the result of a failed system, that’s how cryptographers feel about people using PGP.
Instead, let’s examine the “use cases” of PGP and what you should be using instead. (Some of this is redundant with the Latacora article, but I’m also writing it 5 years later, so some things have changed.)
CMYKatI’m focusing on the “what” in this post, not the “why”. If you want to know the why, read the Latacora blog, or the Matthew Green blog.
If you’re curious about the credibility of my recommendations, read my other blog posts or ask your cryptographer.
Instead of PGP, Use This
This section contains specific tools to solve the same problems that PGP tries to solve, but better.
What makes these recommendations better than PGP?
Simply, they don’t make cryptographers want to run the other way screaming when they look under the hood. PGP does.
Some people are forced to use PGP because they work for a government that legally requires them to use PGP. In that corner case, your hands are tied by lawyers, so you don’t need to bother with what cryptographers recommend.
CMYKatSigning Software Distributions
Use Sigstore.
Note that this is an ecosystem-wide consideration, not something that specific individuals must manually opt into for each of their hobby projects. The only downside to Sigstore is it hasn’t been widely adopted yet.
If you’re a Python developer, you can just use PEP 740 to get attestations with Trusted Publishers, which gives you Sigstore for free. For most developers, this is as simple as setting up a GitHub Action to publish to PyPI.
This is a developing trend: Other programming language and package management ecosystems are following suit. I expect to see Sigstore attestations baked into NPM and Maven before the next US presidential election. With any luck, your favorite programming language could be on this list too.
Sigstore doesn’t just give you a signature that you check with a long-lived public key, nor does it require you to do the Web Of Trust rigamarole.
Rather, Sigstore gives you a lot for free. Sigstore was designed around ephemeral signing certificates rather than a long-lived private key. It was purpose-built for preventing supply-chain attacks against open source software.
Combined with Reproducible Builds, Sigstore solves the triangle of secure code delivery.
Alternatively, use minisign. If your package ecosystem doesn’t support Sigstore yet, you can get by with minisign (which is signify-compatible) until they modernize.
You can also use SSH signatures, if you’d prefer. (More on that below.)
CMYKatSigning Git Tags/Commits
Use SSH Signatures, not PGP signatures.
With Ed25519. Stop using RSA.
Art by HarubakiSending Files Between Computers
Use Magic Wormhole.
You could also use SSH + rsync to do this job. That’s fine too.
CMYKatEncrypting Backups
Tarsnap is the usual recommendation here.
There are a lot of other encrypted backup tools that work fine, if you don’t want to give Colin Percival your business. I don’t have a financial stake in any of them, nor have I audited them thoroughly.
Borg uses reasonable cryptography, but I haven’t had the time to review it carefully.
Kopia looks fine, but I really hate that they misuse “zero knowledge” to describe an encryption protocol (rather than a proof system). We should not reward this misbehavior by marketers.
The point is: You’ve got options.
Too many options, in my opinion, to settle for PGP.
CMYKatEncrypting Application Data
Avoid: OpenPGP, OpenSSL and its competitors.
Not a lot to say here. I’ve written a lot about this over the years. Misuse-resistant cryptography libraries–especially ones that make key management less painful for users–are the way to go.
HarubakiEncrypting Files
Use age.
Age is what PGP file encryption would be if PGP didn’t suck shit.
Age has two modes: Public-key encryption, and password-based key derivation.
Here’s a quick comparison table between what age offers, and what PGP uses in the installed base:
agePGPData encryption modeAEAD (ChaPoly)CAST5 (64-bit block cipher) in CFB mode with a strippable SHA1 “MDC”Key-commitmentYes (via the header)Pah! You wish! Dream on.
PGP isn’t even AEAD.Password KDF memory hard?Yes, with scrypt.No.Vulnerable to chosen-ciphertext attacks?No.Yes, but PGP proponents stupidly consider this a good thing.Supports 90’s-era cryptography?No.Yes.Releases unauthenticated plaintext?No.Yes.Uses versioned protocols rather than “cipher agility”?Yes.No. See: 90’s era cryptography.Most common implementations are memory-safe?Yes (Go, Rust).No (C).Like, it’s not even close.
CMYKatSome PGP proponents will insist that AEAD is possible now, but as long as the installed base of PGP remains backwards compatible with the lowest common denominator, that’s what your software uses.
Just use age. Or rage, if you’re a Rust enthusiast.
(And if you have concerns about “which age key should I trust?”, I’m already planning an age-v1 extension for the Public Key Directory project. More on that below.)
Art by ScruffPrivate Messaging
Use Signal.
Security teams around the world insist that they need PGP for bug bounty submissions or security operations, but Signal does this job better than PGP ever did.
Once upon a time, you needed to give people a phone number to use Signal, but that hasn’t been the case for a long time. Still, many people have missed that memo and think it’s a requirement.
My Signal username is soatok.45. Go ahead and message me. You won’t learn my phone number that way.
In the near future, I plan on developing end-to-end encryption for direct messages on the Fediverse (including Mastodon). This is what motivated my work on the Public Key Directory to begin with.
But this is not intended to be a Signal competitor by any measure. It’s a bar-raising activity, nothing more.
CMYKatI understand some people don’t like or trust Signal for whatever reason, but every single alternative that’s been suggested to Signal has offered inferior cryptography to Signal’s. So I will continue to recommend Signal.
Miscellaneous PGP Alternatives
This section contains things people think they need PGP for.
Identity Verification
I’m actively working on something better!
via XKCDIf you want the ability to vend a transparently verifiable public key for a given user, that’s one of the use cases for the Public Key Directory I’m designing in order to build end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse.
Although this is purpose-built for the Fediverse, I’ve deliberately included support for Auxiliary Data messages, whose formats will be specified by protocol extensions.
Rather than trying to grok the Web-of-Trust, you can simply have your software check that multiple independent Public Key Directories have verified the record, since its inclusion is published in an append-only transparency log, secured by a Merkle tree.
My design doesn’t preclude any manual key verification, or key-signing parties, or whatever other PGP cultural weirdness you want to do with these public keys. It just establishes a baseline trustworthiness even if you’re not a paranoid computer nerd.
My project isn’t finished yet. In the meantime, you can manually check public keys when using the other recommendations on this page.
HarubakiEncrypted Email
Don’t encrypt email. From the Latacora article:
Email is insecure. Even with PGP, it’s default-plaintext, which means that even if you do everything right, some totally reasonable person you mail, doing totally reasonable things, will invariably CC the quoted plaintext of your encrypted message to someone else (we don’t know a PGP email user who hasn’t seen this happen). PGP email is forward-insecure. Email metadata, including the subject (which is literally message content), are always plaintext.
There isn’t a recommendation for encrypted email because that’s not a thing people should be doing.
Art by AJNow, there exists a minority of extremely technical computer user for which Signal is a nonstarter (because you need a smartphone and valid phone number to enroll in the first place).
Because those people are generally not the highest priority of cryptographers (who are commonly focused on the privacy of common folk–including people in poor and developing countries where smartphones are more common than desktop computers), there presently isn’t really a good recommendation for private messaging that meets their constraints.
Certainly not PGP, either.
What PGP offers here is security theater: the illusion of safety. But it’s not actually a robust private communication mechanism, as Latacora argues.
CMYKat“I insist that I need encrypted email!”
If you find someone insisting that they “need” encrypted email, read up on the XY Problem. In a lot of cases, that’s what’s happening here.
Do they ipso facto need email (as in, specifically the email protocols and email software)?
And do they care more about this constraint, or the privacy of their communications?
Because if their goal just to communicate privately, see above.
If the tool they’re using being email is more important than privacy, they should consider sending empty messages with an attachment, and use age to encrypt the actual message before attaching it.
That’s serviceable, just beware that everything Latacora wrote about encrypted emails still applies to your use case, so expect someone to CC or forward your message as plaintext.
(Unless you’re legally required to use PGP because of a government regulation… in which case, why do you care about my recommendations if you’re chained by the ankle to your government’s bad technology choices?)
Finally, miss me with the “but someone can screenshot Signal” genre of objections.
As Latacora noted, people accidentally fuck up PGP all the time! It’s very easy to do.
Conversely, you have to deliberately leak something from Signal. There is no plaintext mode.
That’s the fucking bar you need to meet to compete with Signal.
PGP fails to be a Signal competitor, in ways that are worse than Threema, Matrix, or OMEMO.
Watch This Space
With all that said, I am actually designing an encrypted messaging protocol that will have an email-like user experience, except:
- Everything is always end-to-end encrypted, with forward secrecy.
- It’s not backwards compatible with insecure email.
- It doesn’t use PGP, or any 1990’s era cryptography.
I can’t promise a release date yet. I’m prioritizing end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse before I write the specification for that project (tentatively called AWOO, but the cryptography underpinning both projects should be similar).
Maybe 2026? We’ll see!
If someone beats me to the punch, and their design is actually good, I’ll update the post and replace this with a specific recommendation.
CMYKatAgainst PGP
I don’t know how to get the message out louder or clearer about how cryptographers feel about PGP than what I wrote here.
Latacora wrote their criticism in 2019. As I write this, 2024 is almost over. When will the PGP-induced madness end?
CMYKatExperts are not divided here. There is no controversy to teach.
Every time a cryptographer has talked about PGP, it’s been to complain about how bad it is and opine that people shouldn’t be using it.
If you’ve read this far, you already know what you should be using instead.
Header art credits: CMYKat and the GnuPG logo.
Update (2024-11-16)
Someone tried to use their Fediverse software to submit an anti-furry comment to this blog post.
Therefore, I’ve added more furry art to it.
loviesophiee#alternatives #codeSigning #digitalSignatures #encryption #PGP #security #SecurityGuidance #signing
-
What To Use Instead of PGP
It’s been more than five years since The PGP Problem was published, and I still hear from people who believe that using PGP (whether GnuPG or another OpenPGP implementation) is a thing they should be doing.
It isn’t.
I don’t blame individual Internet users for this confusion. There is a lot of cargo-culting around communication tools in the software community, and the evangelists for the various projects muddy the waters for the rest of us.
HarubakiThe part of the free and open source software community that thinks PGP is just dandy, and therefore evangelize the hell out of it to unsuspecting people, are the same kind of people that happily use XMPP+OMEMO, Matrix, or weird Signal forks that remove forward secrecy and think it’s fine.
Not to mince words: The same people who believe PGP is good are also famously not great at cryptography engineering.
If you’re going to outsource your opinions on privacy technology to someone else, make sure it’s someone who has actually found vulnerabilities in cryptographic software before. Most evangelists have not.
CMYKatI’m not here to litigate the demerits of PGP. The Latacora article I linked above makes the same arguments I would make today, and is a more entertaining read.
It is of my opinion as a security engineer that specializes in applied cryptography that nobody should use PGP, because there’s virtually always a better tool for the job you want to use PGP for.
(And for the uncommon use cases, offering a secure, purpose-built replacement is a work-in-progress.)
Note: I’m deliberately being blunt in this post because literally more than a decade of softspokenness from cryptography experts has done nothing to talk users off the PGP cliff. Being direct seems more effective than being tactful.
If you want a gentler touch, ask your cryptographer. If you don’t have a cryptographer, hire one.
If you can accept that every billionaire is the result of a failed system, that’s how cryptographers feel about people using PGP.
Instead, let’s examine the “use cases” of PGP and what you should be using instead. (Some of this is redundant with the Latacora article, but I’m also writing it 5 years later, so some things have changed.)
CMYKatI’m focusing on the “what” in this post, not the “why”. If you want to know the why, read the Latacora blog, or the Matthew Green blog.
If you’re curious about the credibility of my recommendations, read my other blog posts or ask your cryptographer.
Instead of PGP, Use This
This section contains specific tools to solve the same problems that PGP tries to solve, but better.
What makes these recommendations better than PGP?
Simply, they don’t make cryptographers want to run the other way screaming when they look under the hood. PGP does.
Some people are forced to use PGP because they work for a government that legally requires them to use PGP. In that corner case, your hands are tied by lawyers, so you don’t need to bother with what cryptographers recommend.
CMYKatSigning Software Distributions
Use Sigstore.
Note that this is an ecosystem-wide consideration, not something that specific individuals must manually opt into for each of their hobby projects. The only downside to Sigstore is it hasn’t been widely adopted yet.
If you’re a Python developer, you can just use PEP 740 to get attestations with Trusted Publishers, which gives you Sigstore for free. For most developers, this is as simple as setting up a GitHub Action to publish to PyPI.
This is a developing trend: Other programming language and package management ecosystems are following suit. I expect to see Sigstore attestations baked into NPM and Maven before the next US presidential election. With any luck, your favorite programming language could be on this list too.
Sigstore doesn’t just give you a signature that you check with a long-lived public key, nor does it require you to do the Web Of Trust rigamarole.
Rather, Sigstore gives you a lot for free. Sigstore was designed around ephemeral signing certificates rather than a long-lived private key. It was purpose-built for preventing supply-chain attacks against open source software.
Combined with Reproducible Builds, Sigstore solves the triangle of secure code delivery.
Alternatively, use minisign. If your package ecosystem doesn’t support Sigstore yet, you can get by with minisign (which is signify-compatible) until they modernize.
You can also use SSH signatures, if you’d prefer. (More on that below.)
CMYKatSigning Git Tags/Commits
Use SSH Signatures, not PGP signatures.
With Ed25519. Stop using RSA.
Art by HarubakiSending Files Between Computers
Use Magic Wormhole.
You could also use SSH + rsync to do this job. That’s fine too.
CMYKatEncrypting Backups
Tarsnap is the usual recommendation here.
There are a lot of other encrypted backup tools that work fine, if you don’t want to give Colin Percival your business. I don’t have a financial stake in any of them, nor have I audited them thoroughly.
Borg uses reasonable cryptography, but I haven’t had the time to review it carefully.
Kopia looks fine, but I really hate that they misuse “zero knowledge” to describe an encryption protocol (rather than a proof system). We should not reward this misbehavior by marketers.
The point is: You’ve got options.
Too many options, in my opinion, to settle for PGP.
CMYKatEncrypting Application Data
Avoid: OpenPGP, OpenSSL and its competitors.
Not a lot to say here. I’ve written a lot about this over the years. Misuse-resistant cryptography libraries–especially ones that make key management less painful for users–are the way to go.
HarubakiEncrypting Files
Use age.
Age is what PGP file encryption would be if PGP didn’t suck shit.
Age has two modes: Public-key encryption, and password-based key derivation.
Here’s a quick comparison table between what age offers, and what PGP uses in the installed base:
agePGPData encryption modeAEAD (ChaPoly)CAST5 (64-bit block cipher) in CFB mode with a strippable SHA1 “MDC”Key-commitmentYes (via the header)Pah! You wish! Dream on.
PGP isn’t even AEAD.Password KDF memory hard?Yes, with scrypt.No.Vulnerable to chosen-ciphertext attacks?No.Yes, but PGP proponents stupidly consider this a good thing.Supports 90’s-era cryptography?No.Yes.Releases unauthenticated plaintext?No.Yes.Uses versioned protocols rather than “cipher agility”?Yes.No. See: 90’s era cryptography.Most common implementations are memory-safe?Yes (Go, Rust).No (C).Like, it’s not even close.
CMYKatSome PGP proponents will insist that AEAD is possible now, but as long as the installed base of PGP remains backwards compatible with the lowest common denominator, that’s what your software uses.
Just use age. Or rage, if you’re a Rust enthusiast.
(And if you have concerns about “which age key should I trust?”, I’m already planning an age-v1 extension for the Public Key Directory project. More on that below.)
Art by ScruffPrivate Messaging
Use Signal.
Security teams around the world insist that they need PGP for bug bounty submissions or security operations, but Signal does this job better than PGP ever did.
Once upon a time, you needed to give people a phone number to use Signal, but that hasn’t been the case for a long time. Still, many people have missed that memo and think it’s a requirement.
My Signal username is soatok.45. Go ahead and message me. You won’t learn my phone number that way.
In the near future, I plan on developing end-to-end encryption for direct messages on the Fediverse (including Mastodon). This is what motivated my work on the Public Key Directory to begin with.
But this is not intended to be a Signal competitor by any measure. It’s a bar-raising activity, nothing more.
CMYKatI understand some people don’t like or trust Signal for whatever reason, but every single alternative that’s been suggested to Signal has offered inferior cryptography to Signal’s. So I will continue to recommend Signal.
Miscellaneous PGP Alternatives
This section contains things people think they need PGP for.
Identity Verification
I’m actively working on something better!
via XKCDIf you want the ability to vend a transparently verifiable public key for a given user, that’s one of the use cases for the Public Key Directory I’m designing in order to build end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse.
Although this is purpose-built for the Fediverse, I’ve deliberately included support for Auxiliary Data messages, whose formats will be specified by protocol extensions.
Rather than trying to grok the Web-of-Trust, you can simply have your software check that multiple independent Public Key Directories have verified the record, since its inclusion is published in an append-only transparency log, secured by a Merkle tree.
My design doesn’t preclude any manual key verification, or key-signing parties, or whatever other PGP cultural weirdness you want to do with these public keys. It just establishes a baseline trustworthiness even if you’re not a paranoid computer nerd.
My project isn’t finished yet. In the meantime, you can manually check public keys when using the other recommendations on this page.
HarubakiEncrypted Email
Don’t encrypt email. From the Latacora article:
Email is insecure. Even with PGP, it’s default-plaintext, which means that even if you do everything right, some totally reasonable person you mail, doing totally reasonable things, will invariably CC the quoted plaintext of your encrypted message to someone else (we don’t know a PGP email user who hasn’t seen this happen). PGP email is forward-insecure. Email metadata, including the subject (which is literally message content), are always plaintext.
There isn’t a recommendation for encrypted email because that’s not a thing people should be doing.
Art by AJNow, there exists a minority of extremely technical computer user for which Signal is a nonstarter (because you need a smartphone and valid phone number to enroll in the first place).
Because those people are generally not the highest priority of cryptographers (who are commonly focused on the privacy of common folk–including people in poor and developing countries where smartphones are more common than desktop computers), there presently isn’t really a good recommendation for private messaging that meets their constraints.
Certainly not PGP, either.
What PGP offers here is security theater: the illusion of safety. But it’s not actually a robust private communication mechanism, as Latacora argues.
CMYKat“I insist that I need encrypted email!”
If you find someone insisting that they “need” encrypted email, read up on the XY Problem. In a lot of cases, that’s what’s happening here.
Do they ipso facto need email (as in, specifically the email protocols and email software)?
And do they care more about this constraint, or the privacy of their communications?
Because if their goal just to communicate privately, see above.
If the tool they’re using being email is more important than privacy, they should consider sending empty messages with an attachment, and use age to encrypt the actual message before attaching it.
That’s serviceable, just beware that everything Latacora wrote about encrypted emails still applies to your use case, so expect someone to CC or forward your message as plaintext.
(Unless you’re legally required to use PGP because of a government regulation… in which case, why do you care about my recommendations if you’re chained by the ankle to your government’s bad technology choices?)
Finally, miss me with the “but someone can screenshot Signal” genre of objections.
As Latacora noted, people accidentally fuck up PGP all the time! It’s very easy to do.
Conversely, you have to deliberately leak something from Signal. There is no plaintext mode.
That’s the fucking bar you need to meet to compete with Signal.
PGP fails to be a Signal competitor, in ways that are worse than Threema, Matrix, or OMEMO.
Watch This Space
With all that said, I am actually designing an encrypted messaging protocol that will have an email-like user experience, except:
- Everything is always end-to-end encrypted, with forward secrecy.
- It’s not backwards compatible with insecure email.
- It doesn’t use PGP, or any 1990’s era cryptography.
I can’t promise a release date yet. I’m prioritizing end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse before I write the specification for that project (tentatively called AWOO, but the cryptography underpinning both projects should be similar).
Maybe 2026? We’ll see!
If someone beats me to the punch, and their design is actually good, I’ll update the post and replace this with a specific recommendation.
CMYKatAgainst PGP
I don’t know how to get the message out louder or clearer about how cryptographers feel about PGP than what I wrote here.
Latacora wrote their criticism in 2019. As I write this, 2024 is almost over. When will the PGP-induced madness end?
CMYKatExperts are not divided here. There is no controversy to teach.
Every time a cryptographer has talked about PGP, it’s been to complain about how bad it is and opine that people shouldn’t be using it.
If you’ve read this far, you already know what you should be using instead.
Header art credits: CMYKat and the GnuPG logo.
Update (2024-11-16)
Someone tried to use their Fediverse software to submit an anti-furry comment to this blog post.
Therefore, I’ve added more furry art to it.
loviesophieeIf you’re curious about the cryptography used by other messaging apps, please refer to this page that collects my blogs about this topic.
#alternatives #codeSigning #digitalSignatures #encryption #PGP #security #SecurityGuidance #signing
-
What To Use Instead of PGP
It’s been more than five years since The PGP Problem was published, and I still hear from people who believe that using PGP (whether GnuPG or another OpenPGP implementation) is a thing they should be doing.
It isn’t.
I don’t blame individual Internet users for this confusion. There is a lot of cargo-culting around communication tools in the software community, and the evangelists for the various projects muddy the waters for the rest of us.
HarubakiThe part of the free and open source software community that thinks PGP is just dandy, and therefore evangelize the hell out of it to unsuspecting people, are the same kind of people that happily use XMPP+OMEMO, Matrix, or weird Signal forks that remove forward secrecy and think it’s fine.
Not to mince words: The same people who believe PGP is good are also famously not great at cryptography engineering.
If you’re going to outsource your opinions on privacy technology to someone else, make sure it’s someone who has actually found vulnerabilities in cryptographic software before. Most evangelists have not.
CMYKatI’m not here to litigate the demerits of PGP. The Latacora article I linked above makes the same arguments I would make today, and is a more entertaining read.
It is of my opinion as a security engineer that specializes in applied cryptography that nobody should use PGP, because there’s virtually always a better tool for the job you want to use PGP for.
(And for the uncommon use cases, offering a secure, purpose-built replacement is a work-in-progress.)
Note: I’m deliberately being blunt in this post because literally more than a decade of softspokenness from cryptography experts has done nothing to talk users off the PGP cliff. Being direct seems more effective than being tactful.
If you want a gentler touch, ask your cryptographer. If you don’t have a cryptographer, hire one.
If you can accept that every billionaire is the result of a failed system, that’s how cryptographers feel about people using PGP.
Instead, let’s examine the “use cases” of PGP and what you should be using instead. (Some of this is redundant with the Latacora article, but I’m also writing it 5 years later, so some things have changed.)
CMYKatI’m focusing on the “what” in this post, not the “why”. If you want to know the why, read the Latacora blog, or the Matthew Green blog.
If you’re curious about the credibility of my recommendations, read my other blog posts or ask your cryptographer.
Instead of PGP, Use This
This section contains specific tools to solve the same problems that PGP tries to solve, but better.
What makes these recommendations better than PGP?
Simply, they don’t make cryptographers want to run the other way screaming when they look under the hood. PGP does.
Some people are forced to use PGP because they work for a government that legally requires them to use PGP. In that corner case, your hands are tied by lawyers, so you don’t need to bother with what cryptographers recommend.
CMYKatSigning Software Distributions
Use Sigstore.
Note that this is an ecosystem-wide consideration, not something that specific individuals must manually opt into for each of their hobby projects. The only downside to Sigstore is it hasn’t been widely adopted yet.
If you’re a Python developer, you can just use PEP 740 to get attestations with Trusted Publishers, which gives you Sigstore for free. For most developers, this is as simple as setting up a GitHub Action to publish to PyPI.
This is a developing trend: Other programming language and package management ecosystems are following suit. I expect to see Sigstore attestations baked into NPM and Maven before the next US presidential election. With any luck, your favorite programming language could be on this list too.
Sigstore doesn’t just give you a signature that you check with a long-lived public key, nor does it require you to do the Web Of Trust rigamarole.
Rather, Sigstore gives you a lot for free. Sigstore was designed around ephemeral signing certificates rather than a long-lived private key. It was purpose-built for preventing supply-chain attacks against open source software.
Combined with Reproducible Builds, Sigstore solves the triangle of secure code delivery.
Alternatively, use minisign. If your package ecosystem doesn’t support Sigstore yet, you can get by with minisign (which is signify-compatible) until they modernize.
You can also use SSH signatures, if you’d prefer. (More on that below.)
CMYKatSigning Git Tags/Commits
Use SSH Signatures, not PGP signatures.
With Ed25519. Stop using RSA.
Art by HarubakiSending Files Between Computers
Use Magic Wormhole.
You could also use SSH + rsync to do this job. That’s fine too.
CMYKatEncrypting Backups
Tarsnap is the usual recommendation here.
There are a lot of other encrypted backup tools that work fine, if you don’t want to give Colin Percival your business. I don’t have a financial stake in any of them, nor have I audited them thoroughly.
Borg uses reasonable cryptography, but I haven’t had the time to review it carefully.
Kopia looks fine, but I really hate that they misuse “zero knowledge” to describe an encryption protocol (rather than a proof system). We should not reward this misbehavior by marketers.
The point is: You’ve got options.
Too many options, in my opinion, to settle for PGP.
CMYKatEncrypting Application Data
Avoid: OpenPGP, OpenSSL and its competitors.
Not a lot to say here. I’ve written a lot about this over the years. Misuse-resistant cryptography libraries–especially ones that make key management less painful for users–are the way to go.
HarubakiEncrypting Files
Use age.
Age is what PGP file encryption would be if PGP didn’t suck shit.
Age has two modes: Public-key encryption, and password-based key derivation.
Here’s a quick comparison table between what age offers, and what PGP uses in the installed base:
agePGPData encryption modeAEAD (ChaPoly)CAST5 (64-bit block cipher) in CFB mode with a strippable SHA1 “MDC”Key-commitmentYes (via the header)Pah! You wish! Dream on.
PGP isn’t even AEAD.Password KDF memory hard?Yes, with scrypt.No.Vulnerable to chosen-ciphertext attacks?No.Yes, but PGP proponents stupidly consider this a good thing.Supports 90’s-era cryptography?No.Yes.Releases unauthenticated plaintext?No.Yes.Uses versioned protocols rather than “cipher agility”?Yes.No. See: 90’s era cryptography.Most common implementations are memory-safe?Yes (Go, Rust).No (C).Like, it’s not even close.
CMYKatSome PGP proponents will insist that AEAD is possible now, but as long as the installed base of PGP remains backwards compatible with the lowest common denominator, that’s what your software uses.
Just use age. Or rage, if you’re a Rust enthusiast.
(And if you have concerns about “which age key should I trust?”, I’m already planning an age-v1 extension for the Public Key Directory project. More on that below.)
Art by ScruffPrivate Messaging
Use Signal.
Security teams around the world insist that they need PGP for bug bounty submissions or security operations, but Signal does this job better than PGP ever did.
Once upon a time, you needed to give people a phone number to use Signal, but that hasn’t been the case for a long time. Still, many people have missed that memo and think it’s a requirement.
My Signal username is soatok.45. Go ahead and message me. You won’t learn my phone number that way.
In the near future, I plan on developing end-to-end encryption for direct messages on the Fediverse (including Mastodon). This is what motivated my work on the Public Key Directory to begin with.
But this is not intended to be a Signal competitor by any measure. It’s a bar-raising activity, nothing more.
CMYKatI understand some people don’t like or trust Signal for whatever reason, but every single alternative that’s been suggested to Signal has offered inferior cryptography to Signal’s. So I will continue to recommend Signal.
Miscellaneous PGP Alternatives
This section contains things people think they need PGP for.
Identity Verification
I’m actively working on something better!
via XKCDIf you want the ability to vend a transparently verifiable public key for a given user, that’s one of the use cases for the Public Key Directory I’m designing in order to build end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse.
Although this is purpose-built for the Fediverse, I’ve deliberately included support for Auxiliary Data messages, whose formats will be specified by protocol extensions.
Rather than trying to grok the Web-of-Trust, you can simply have your software check that multiple independent Public Key Directories have verified the record, since its inclusion is published in an append-only transparency log, secured by a Merkle tree.
My design doesn’t preclude any manual key verification, or key-signing parties, or whatever other PGP cultural weirdness you want to do with these public keys. It just establishes a baseline trustworthiness even if you’re not a paranoid computer nerd.
My project isn’t finished yet. In the meantime, you can manually check public keys when using the other recommendations on this page.
HarubakiEncrypted Email
Don’t encrypt email. From the Latacora article:
Email is insecure. Even with PGP, it’s default-plaintext, which means that even if you do everything right, some totally reasonable person you mail, doing totally reasonable things, will invariably CC the quoted plaintext of your encrypted message to someone else (we don’t know a PGP email user who hasn’t seen this happen). PGP email is forward-insecure. Email metadata, including the subject (which is literally message content), are always plaintext.
There isn’t a recommendation for encrypted email because that’s not a thing people should be doing.
Art by AJNow, there exists a minority of extremely technical computer user for which Signal is a nonstarter (because you need a smartphone and valid phone number to enroll in the first place).
Because those people are generally not the highest priority of cryptographers (who are commonly focused on the privacy of common folk–including people in poor and developing countries where smartphones are more common than desktop computers), there presently isn’t really a good recommendation for private messaging that meets their constraints.
Certainly not PGP, either.
What PGP offers here is security theater: the illusion of safety. But it’s not actually a robust private communication mechanism, as Latacora argues.
CMYKat“I insist that I need encrypted email!”
If you find someone insisting that they “need” encrypted email, read up on the XY Problem. In a lot of cases, that’s what’s happening here.
Do they ipso facto need email (as in, specifically the email protocols and email software)?
And do they care more about this constraint, or the privacy of their communications?
Because if their goal just to communicate privately, see above.
If the tool they’re using being email is more important than privacy, they should consider sending empty messages with an attachment, and use age to encrypt the actual message before attaching it.
That’s serviceable, just beware that everything Latacora wrote about encrypted emails still applies to your use case, so expect someone to CC or forward your message as plaintext.
(Unless you’re legally required to use PGP because of a government regulation… in which case, why do you care about my recommendations if you’re chained by the ankle to your government’s bad technology choices?)
Finally, miss me with the “but someone can screenshot Signal” genre of objections.
As Latacora noted, people accidentally fuck up PGP all the time! It’s very easy to do.
Conversely, you have to deliberately leak something from Signal. There is no plaintext mode.
That’s the fucking bar you need to meet to compete with Signal.
PGP fails to be a Signal competitor, in ways that are worse than Threema, Matrix, or OMEMO.
Watch This Space
With all that said, I am actually designing an encrypted messaging protocol that will have an email-like user experience, except:
- Everything is always end-to-end encrypted, with forward secrecy.
- It’s not backwards compatible with insecure email.
- It doesn’t use PGP, or any 1990’s era cryptography.
I can’t promise a release date yet. I’m prioritizing end-to-end encryption for the Fediverse before I write the specification for that project (tentatively called AWOO, but the cryptography underpinning both projects should be similar).
Maybe 2026? We’ll see!
If someone beats me to the punch, and their design is actually good, I’ll update the post and replace this with a specific recommendation.
CMYKatAgainst PGP
I don’t know how to get the message out louder or clearer about how cryptographers feel about PGP than what I wrote here.
Latacora wrote their criticism in 2019. As I write this, 2024 is almost over. When will the PGP-induced madness end?
CMYKatExperts are not divided here. There is no controversy to teach.
Every time a cryptographer has talked about PGP, it’s been to complain about how bad it is and opine that people shouldn’t be using it.
If you’ve read this far, you already know what you should be using instead.
Header art credits: CMYKat and the GnuPG logo.
Update (2024-11-16)
Someone tried to use their Fediverse software to submit an anti-furry comment to this blog post.
Therefore, I’ve added more furry art to it.
loviesophieeIf you’re curious about the cryptography used by other messaging apps, please refer to this page that collects my blogs about this topic.
#alternatives #codeSigning #digitalSignatures #encryption #PGP #security #SecurityGuidance #signing