#Defining Multimedia

[rohitdigitalsblog]

Best Multimedia Iinstitute in Rohini 

[probablyasocialecologist]

The image of the hippie is now so thoroughly entrenched in the public mind that some of the very strangest aspects of the counterculture can easily be forgotten. Those in the rural commune movement were frequently not in any sense running away from technological society. Indeed, the commune builders were often some of the staunchest believers in the transformative power of new technology, making experimental multimedia artworks and installations, pioneering many passive and renewable architectural technologies and construction methods. While some communes attempted to recreate pre-Columbian patterns of life, building pueblos and tepees for their new society, others became in thrall to Buckminster Fuller, creating delirious versions of his ecological technocracy and reinforcing the strange links between the military and the hippies, the government and the counterculture, that so defined those times. And eventually, some of those who fled the city as part of the ‘back to the land’ movement ended up as powerful members of new elites as the Cold War drew to a close.

Douglas Murphy, Last Futures: Nature, Technology and the End of Architecture

[legends-expo]

With the passing of iconic artist Greg Hildebrandt, we thought we'd take a chance this week to shine a highlight on Shadows of the Empire, starting with the amazing work Greg and his brother Tim put into the ambitious multimedia project, that helped to launch the classic EU as we know it. The Hildebrandt brothers' art defined for many this gigantic leap into expanding the universe, when their artwork was used to capture and tie together scenes from all aspects of the project (book, comic, and game), in a series of Topps trading cards. The process of their endeavor is captured in the artbook "Star Wars: The Art of the Brothers Hildebrandt."

[deepdreamnights]

Terms and Conditions Do Not Overrule the USTPO

Originally from reddit. I am not a lawyer, but this hardly needs one.

I use Suno, but it being a useful tool doesn't mean they're off the hook for trying to be sneaky. Also, this isn't just about them. Pretty much every Generative AI tool has some similar such claim or clause in place.

Any so-called controlling rights on public domain works are entirely unenforceable.

This is a long post, so enjoy this public domain song which you can use for whatever purpose you like.

Terms and conditions do not override the determinations of the USTPO, which is that without significant human modification, generative AI generations do not qualify for copyright protections and thus are in the public domain.

So for Suno, you own your lyrics if you wrote them. You own any modifications you make to the song in post. You might own the tune if it was prompted directly using Suno's weird symbols/tabulature stuff, but at this point there's been no judgement on whether a significantly complex prompt makes a resulting generation have "significant human expression".

Not to say Suno can't pull DMCA BS or issue takedowns, but it wouldn't be hard to prove they lack the standing. You'd probably have to go to court to do it, so if you're not willing to roll the dice on having to do that sending an email is easier, and that's what the company is counting on.

The important part, is to remember that human authorship is required for copyright. If you want those rights, you gotta make sure you're putting in the authorship (lyrics, editing, remixing, etc.)

Or, you can be cool with the commons and be open about the copyleft nature of AI generations.

I tend to approach my own work in a "making parts" sense because I've been doing multimedia collage for far longer than there's been generative AI. The final work is the faux trailer, fake commercial, music video or the comic or the mini-episode or whatnot.

But everyone's process is going to be different.

Part of countering misinformation around generative AI is breaking the hype side of things as much as the doom.

The corporate dream of an endless IP machine is a paper tiger, because all they've made is an infinite public domain machine. A century of trying to control and hoard the "rights" to our culture have drained the commons dry and this new tech just pumps solely into it's parched reservoir.

On the other end, the idea that one is going to get rich just because they've got some generative tools is just mist and vapor awaiting a light breeze. It's a great force multiplier, but anyone can get access to the same tools. The things the robot can't bring to the table are the things that matter, and they're going to matter even more now.

I like to compare most AI to toys (an object's use defines its function) and a way of making parts of a whole, so Lego is a good metaphor here. The creations that get attention are the ones that aren't out-of-the-box and made from the instructions.

I don't say this to discourage anyone from trying to use the tech to fulfill their expressive vision, but to emphasize that it's not a push-button-get-end-result situation.

Everyone has access to the same bricks. Everyone can use your bricks if they find them in an out of the box state. This is a feature, not a bug.

[alex-the-bard]

i finished the KOSA

On the Subject of Safety 

Blaine/Alex Smith 

A paper on the harmful effects of the Kid’s Online Safety Act (informally known as KOSA) on the internet as a whole, as written by a minor. 

Censorship. Control. Tyranny. All of these will come to pass if we allow the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) to become law and cause the internet as we know it to cease to exist, completely and utterly. KOSA is a new bill that has been introduced by senators Blumenthal and Blackburn, which has the stated goal “to protect the safety of children on the internet” (found on the official website of the United States Congress, here.) This is either a lie, or an incredibly misguided attempt to do what it says it sets out to do. Though it is more likely a lie, or at the very least not the entire truth. First, I must note, if for no other reason than posterity and comprehensiveness, that the bill was introduced by both a Republican senator (Blackburn) and a Democratic senator (Blumenthal). It was also backed by twenty-one Democrats (Lujan, Baldwin, Klobuchar, Peters, Hickenlooper, Warner, Coons, Schatz, Murphy, Welch, Hassan, Durbin, Casey, Whitehouse, Kelly, Carper, Cardin, Menendez, Warren, Kaine, and Shaheen) and nineteen Republicans (Capito, Cassidy, Ernst, Daines, Rubio, Sullivan, Young, Grassley, Graham, Marshall, Hyde-Smith, Mullin, Risch, Britt, Lummis, Murkowski, Lankford, Crapo, and Hawley). That totals forty-two supporters of this heinous piece of legislature. Considering that there are one-hundred Senators, if you do some simple math, you will realize that fifty-eight Senators did not support KOSA. In the context of this monumental decision, that is a frighteningly close vote. If this bill were to pass, nearly all online fandom presence would be completely eradicated, and online privacy, as well as personal autonomy, would become nonexistent. And so, I say it again, KOSA supporters are just barely not the majority in the Senate, by a margin of sixteen individuals. Even though the rewrite of the bill is a slight improvement, at it’s core, KOSA is still a harmful internet censorship bill that will damage the very communities it claims to try protect. 

In this bill, a “child” is defined as any person under the age of thirteen, and a “minor” is defined as any person under the age of seventeen. A "parent” is defined as any legal adult who is the biological or adopted parent of a minor, or holds legal custody over a minor. “Compulsive usage” is defined as “any response stimulated by external factors that causes an individual to engage in repetitive behavior reasonably likely to cause psychological distress, loss of control, anxiety or depression”, “Covered platforms” are defined as “an online platform (i.e. Snapchat, Tumblr, Reddit, Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram, etc.), online video game (i.e. Helldivers 2, Halo, Mario Kart, Civilization 6, etc.), messaging platform (i.e. Snapchat, 4chan, etc.), or video streaming service (i.e. Twitch, YouTube, etc.) that connects to the internet that is used, or is reasonably likely to be used, by a minor” with the exception of “an entity acting in its capacity of: a common carrier service subject to the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) and all Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, a broadband internet access service (as such term is defined for purposes of section 8.1(b) of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation), an email service, a teleconferencing or video conferencing service that allows reception and transmission of audio and video signals for real-time communication, provided that it is not an online platform, including a social media service or social network; and the real-time communication is initiated using a unique link or identifier to facilitate access, or a wireless messaging service, including such a service provided through short messaging service or multimedia messaging service protocols, that is not a component of or linked to an online platform and where the predominant or exclusive function is direct messaging consisting of the transmission of text, photos or videos that are sent by electronic means, where messages are transmitted from the sender to a recipient, and are not posted within an online platform or publicly, an organization not organized to carry on business for its own profit or that of its members, any public or private institution of education, a library, a news platform where the inclusion of video content on the platform is related to the platform’s own gathering, reporting or publishing of news content or the website or app is not otherwise an online platform, a product or service the primarily functions as a business to business software or a VPN or similar service that exists solely to route internet traffic between locations. 

Geolocation is defined as “information sufficient to identify a street name and name of a city or town.” Individual-specific advertising to minors is defined as any form of targeted advertising towards a person who is or reasonably could be a minor, with the exception of advertising in the context of the website or app the advertising is present on, (i.e. an ad for Grammarly on a dictionary website), or for research on the effectiveness of the advertising. The rule of construction is stated to be that "no part of KOSA should be misconstrued to prohibit a lawfully operating entity from delivering content to any person that they know to be or reasonably believe is over the age of seventeen, provided that content is appropriate for the age of the person involved". To "know" something in the context of this bill is to have actual information, or to have information that is fairly implied or assumed under the basis of objective circumstances. A “mental health disorder” is defined as “a condition which causes a clinically significant disturbance or impairment on one’s cognition, emotional regulation, or behavior. “Online platform” is defined as any public platform that mainly provides a means of communication through the form of a public forum or private chatroom (i.e., Discord, Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, TikTok, etc.). An “online video game” is defined as any video game or game-adjacent service, including those that provide an educational element, that allows users to create or upload content, engage in microtransactions, communicate with other users, or includes minor specific advertising (i.e., Happy Wheels, Adventure Academy, Meet Your Maker, etc.). “Personal data” is defined as any data or information that is linked or could reasonably be linked to a minor. A “personalized recommendation system (PRS)” is defined as any system that presents content to a user based on date and/or analytics from the user or similar users (i.e., a like-based system, a view-based system, a “for you” system, or a “people that watched also liked” system). Finally, “sexual exploitation or abuse” is defined as: coercion and enticement, as described in section 2422 of title 18, United States Code, child sexual abuse material, as described in sections 2251, 2252, 2252A, and 2260 of title 18, United States Code, trafficking for the production of images (child pornography), as described in section 2251A of title 18, United States Code, or sex trafficking of children, as described in section 1591 of title 18, United States Code. 

Before I continue with this paper, I would like to draw attention to the fact that nowhere in the defined terms does it define any form of physical, mental, or emotional violence towards minors, only sexual abuse or assault. This will become important later. 

Continuing with the bill, we arrive at the actual regulations, policies and laws proposed by the bill. Here begins Section 3 of the bill, or “Duty of care”. This section includes regulations on the online platform used by a minor, and the duties of it and its owner(s), creator(s), moderator(s), or manager(s). In this section, it is stated that a covered platform must, to the best of its reasonable ability, limit the following harms or dangers to any person who is known to be or reasonably believed to be a minor: 

Anxiety, depression, substance use disorders, suicidal disorders, and other similar conditions. 

Patterns of use that promote or encourage addiction-like behavior. 

Physical violence, online bullying, and harassment of the minor. 

Sexual exploitation or abuse. 

Promotion and marketing of narcotic drugs (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), tobacco products, gambling, or alcohol. 

Predatory, unfair, or deceptive marketing, or other financial harms. 

With the exception of: 

Any content that is deliberately, independently, and willingly requested or sought out by the minor. 

Any platform that provides resources or information to help mitigate the aforementioned harms to the minor. 

Again, I call attention to the fact that although physical violence is now mentioned and prohibited, it is done so by burying it in the middle of a wall of text. With as touchy of a subject as this is, one would think that more attention would be drawn to it. 

And now we get into the meat and potatoes of this rotten bill, with Section 4, or “Safeguards for minors”. In this section, it is stated that any covered platform shall provide any user who is known to be a minor or is reasonably believed to be a minor, with easy-to-use and readily accessible “safeguards” such as: 

Limiting the ability of other individuals to communicate with the minor. 

Restricting public access to the personal data of the minor. 

Limiting features that increase, sustain, or extend use of the covered platform by the minor, such as automatic playing of media, rewards for time spent on the platform, notifications, and other features that result in compulsive usage of the covered platform by the minor. 

Controlling personalized recommendation systems for the minor, and giving them the option to either opt out of the system entirely or to limit the types of content shown through the PRS. 

Restricting the sharing of GPS data of the minor sufficient for geolocation. 

As well as the options for the minor: 

Delete the account of the minor, as well as any data or content associated with the account, effectively removing any trace of the account’s existence from the platform, and the internet at large. 

Limit the amount of time spent on the platform. 

A covered platform shall also provide parents with the following tools: 

Requirements: 

The ability to manage a minor’s privacy and account settings, including the safeguards and options established under subsection (a), in a manner that allows parents to: 

View the privacy and account settings of the minor. 

In the case of a user that the platform knows is a child, change and control the privacy and account settings of the account of the minor. 

Restrict purchases and financial transactions by the minor, where applicable. 

View metrics of total time spent on the platform and restrict time spent on the covered platform by the minor. 

The bill also states that any minor(s) affected by the aforementioned systems should be given clear, prompt, and easily understood and accessible notice of if the systems have been applied, in what capacity they are applied in, and how they are applied.  

Default Tools: 

A covered platform shall provide the following tools and systems to both minor and parent(s) of that minor, and have them be enabled by default: 

A reporting mechanism, which is readily available and easily accessible and useable, to report any incidents or crimes involving the minor(s), as well as confirmation that such a report is received, and the means to track it. 

To respond to the report in a timely and appropriate manner, within a reasonable timeframe. 

An understanding and appreciation of the fact that a reasonable timeframe is: 

(A) 10 days (about 1 and a half weeks) after the receipt of a report, if, for the most recent calendar year, the platform averaged more than 10,000,000 active users monthly in the United States. 

(B) 21 days (about 3 weeks) after the receipt of a report, if, for the most recent calendar year, the platform averaged less than 10,000,000 active users monthly in the United States. 

(C) notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), if the report involves an imminent threat to the safety of a minor, as promptly as needed to address the reported threat to safety. 

Accessibility : 

With respect to the aforementioned safeguards, a covered platform shall provide: 

Information and control options in a clear and conspicuous manner that takes into consideration the differing ages, capacities, and developmental needs of the minors most likely to access the covered platform and does not encourage minors or parents to weaken or disable safeguards or parental controls. 

Readily accessible and easy-to-use controls to enable or disable safeguards or parental controls, as appropriate. 

Information and control options in the same language, form, and manner as the covered platform provides the product or service used by minors and their parents. 

The bill also states that no part of the previous statements should be construed to prohibit or prevent a covered platform from blocking, banning, filtering, flagging, or deleting content inappropriate for minors from their platform, or to prevent general management of spam, as well as security risks. It also states that regarding PRSs, it shall be illegal for a covered platform to alter or distort any analytics or data gathered from their platform with the purpose of limiting user autonomy. Also included in this section is that no part of KOSA shall be construed to require the disclosure of a minor’s personal data, including search history, contacts, messages, and location. Also stated is that a PRS for a minor is allowed under the condition that it only uses data publicly available, such as the language the minor speaks, or the minor’s age, and that covered platforms are allowed to integrate third-party systems into their platform, if they meet the requirements laid out in the bill. 

And now our train arrives at Section 5, “Disclosure”. This section includes rules regarding the disclosure of policies, rules, and terms to a user that is a minor or is reasonably believed to be a minor prior to their registration with a covered platform. 

Registration or Purchase: 

Prior to registration or purchase of a covered platform, the platform must provide clear and easily understood information on the policies of the platform, its rules, regulations, etc. As well as any PRS used by the platform, and information on how to turn it and the parental controls on and off. 

Notification: 

Notice and Acknowledgement, Reasonable Effort, and Consolidated Notices: 

In the case of an individual that a covered platform knows is a child, the platform shall additionally provide information about the parental tools and safeguards required under section 4 to a parent of the child and obtain verifiable parental consent (as defined in section 1302(9) of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 6501(9))) from the parent prior to the initial use of the covered platform by the child. 

A covered platform shall be deemed to have satisfied the requirement described in subparagraph (A) if the covered platform is in compliance with the requirements of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.) to use reasonable efforts (taking into consideration available technology) to provide a parent with the information and to obtain verifiable parental consent as required. 

A covered platform may consolidate the process for providing information under this subsection and obtaining verifiable parental consent or the consent of the minor involved (as applicable) as required under this subsection with its obligations to provide relevant notice and obtain verifiable parental consent under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.). 

Guidance: the FTC may assist covered platforms with compliance with the rules and regulations in this section. 

A covered platform that operates a personalized recommendation system shall set out in its terms and conditions, in a clear, conspicuous, and easy-to-understand manner: 

An overview of how such personalized recommendation system is used by the covered platform to provide information to users of the platform who are minors, including how such systems use the personal data of minors; and 

Information about options for minors or their parents to opt out of or control the personalized recommendation system (as applicable). 

Advertising and Marketing Information and Labels: 

A covered platform that facilitates advertising aimed at users that the platform knows are minors shall provide clear, conspicuous, and easy-to-understand information and labels to minors on advertisements regarding: 

The name of the product, service, or brand and the subject matter of an advertisement; 

If the covered platform engages in individual-specific advertising to minors, why a particular advertisement is directed to a specific minor, including material information about how the minor's personal data is used to direct the advertisement to the minor; and 

Whether media displayed to the minor is an advertisement or marketing material, including disclosure of endorsements of products, services, or brands made for commercial consideration by other users of the platform. 

Resources for Parents and Minors: 

A covered platform shall provide to minors and parents clear, conspicuous, easy-to-understand, and comprehensive information in a prominent location regarding: 

Its policies and practices with respect to personal data and safeguards for minors. 

How to access the safeguards and tools required under section four. 

Resources in Additional Languages: 

A covered platform shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that the disclosures required by this section are made available in the same language, form, and manner as the covered platform provides any product or service used by minors and their parents. 

That concludes Section 5, and now our next stop is Section 6: “Transparency”. This section includes protocols for public transparency for covered platforms, including public reports on the status of potential harm to minors on their platforms.  

Scope of Application: the requirements of this section shall apply to a covered platform if: 

For the most recent calendar year, the platform averaged more than 10,000,000 active users monthly in the United States. 

The platform predominantly provides a community forum for user-generated content and discussion, including sharing videos, images, games, audio files, discussion in a virtual setting, or other content, such as acting as a social media platform, virtual reality environment, or a social network service. 

Transparency: The public reports required of a covered platform under this section shall include: 

An assessment of the extent to which the platform is likely to be accessed by minors; 

A description of the commercial interests of the covered platform in use by minors; 

An accounting, based on the data held by the covered platform, of: 

The number of individuals using the covered platform reasonably believed to be minors in the United States; 

The median and mean amounts of time spent on the platform by minors in the United States who have accessed the platform during the reporting year on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis; and 

The amount of content being accessed by individuals that the platform knows to be minors that is in English, and the top 5 non-English languages used by individuals accessing the platform in the United States; 

An accounting of total reports received regarding, and the prevalence (which can be based on scientifically valid sampling methods using the content available to the covered platform in the normal course of business) of content related to, the harms described in section 3, disaggregated by category of harm and language, including English and the top five non-English languages used by individuals accessing the platform from the United States. 

A description of any material breaches of parental tools or assurances regarding minors, representations regarding the use of the personal data of minors, and other matters regarding non-compliance. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Risk of Harm to Minors: the public reports required of covered platforms under this section shall include: 

An assessment of the reasonably foreseeable risk of harm to minors posed by the covered platform, including identifying any other physical, mental, developmental, or financial harms. 

An assessment of how personalized recommendation systems and individual-specific advertising to minors can contribute to harm to minors. 

A description of whether and how the covered platform uses system design features that increase, sustain, or extend use of a product or service by a minor, such as automatic playing of media, rewards for time spent, and notifications. 

A description of whether, how, and for what purpose the platform collects or processes categories of personal data that may cause reasonably foreseeable risk of harm to minors. 

An evaluation of the efficacy of safeguards for minors under section 4, and any issues in delivering such safeguards and the associated parental tools. 

An evaluation of any other relevant matters of public concern over risk of harm to minors. 

 An assessment of differences in risk of harm to minors across different English and non-English languages and efficacy of safeguards in those languages. 

Mitigation: The public reports required of a covered platform under this section shall include, for English and the top 5 non-English languages used by individuals accessing the platform from the United States: 

A description of the safeguards and parental tools available to minors and parents on the covered platform. 

A description of interventions by the covered platform when it had or has reason to believe that harms to minors could occur. 

A description of the prevention and mitigation measures intended to be taken in response to the known and emerging risks identified in its assessment of system risks, including steps taken to: 

Prevent harm to minors, including adapting or removing system design features or addressing through parental controls. 

Provide the most protective level of control over privacy and safety by default. 

Adapt recommendation systems to mitigate reasonably foreseeable risk of harms to minors. 

A description of internal processes for handling reports and automated detection mechanisms for harms to minors, including the rate, timeliness, and effectiveness of responses. 

The status of implementing prevention and mitigation measures identified in prior assessments. 

A description of the additional measures to be taken by the covered platform to address the circumvention of safeguards for minors and parental tools. 

Reasonable Inspection: when conducting an inspection on the systemic risk of harm to minors on their platforms under this section, a covered platform shall: 

Consider the function any PRS on their platform. 

Consult relevant parties with authority on topics relevant to the inspection. 

Conduct their research based on experiences of minors using the platform that the study is being conducted on, including reports and information provided by law enforcement. 

Take account of outside research, but not outside data for the study itself. 

Consider any implied, indicated, inferred, or known information on the age of users. 

Consider the presence of both English and non-English speaking users on their platform. 

Cooperation With Independent, Third Pary Audit: To facilitate the report required by this section, a covered platform shall: 

Provide directly or otherwise make accessible to the third party conducting the audit all: 

Information and data that the platform has the access and authority to disclose that are relevant to the audit. 

Platforms, systems and assets that the platform has the access and authority to disclose that are relevant to the audio. 

Facts relevant to the audit, unaltered and correctly and fully represented. 

Privacy Safeguards: In this subsection, the term “de-identified” means data that does not identify and is not linked or reasonably linkable to a device that is linked or reasonably linkable to an individual, regardless of whether the information is aggregated. In issuing the public reports required under this section, a covered platform shall take steps to safeguard the privacy of its users, including ensuring that data is presented in a de-identified, aggregated format such that it is reasonably impossible for the data to be linked back to any individual user. A covered platform must also present or publish the information on a publicly available and accessible webpage. 

And now the next stop on our tour is Section 7: Independent Research on Social Media and Minors. This section details the interactions between the FTC and the National Academy of Sciences in the months following the passing of this bill, if and when it passes. It states that the FTC is to seek to enter a contract with the Academy, in which the Academy is to conduct no less that 5 separate independent scientific studies on the risk of harms to minors on social media, addressing: 

Anxiety, depression, eating and suicidal disorders. 

Substance use (drugs, narcotics, alcohol, etc.) and gambling. 

Sexual exploitation and abuse. 

Addiction like behaviors leading to compulsive usage. 

Additional Study: after at least 4 years since the passing of the bill, the FTC and the Academy shall enter another contract, in which the Academy shall conduct another study on the above topics, to provide more up to data information.  

Content of Reports: The comprehensive studies and reports conducted pursuant to this section shall seek to evaluate impacts and advance understanding, knowledge, and remedies regarding the harms to minors posed by social media and other online platforms and may include recommendations related to public policy. 

Active Studies: If the Academy is already engaged in any extant studies regarding the topics described above, it may base the studies required of this section off said study, if it is otherwise compliant. 

Collaboration: In conducting the studies required under this section, the FTC, National Academy of Sciences, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall consult with the Surgeon General and the Kids Online Safety Council (KOSC). 

Access to Data: The FTC may issue orders to covered platforms to gather and compile data and information needed for the studies required under this section, as well as issue orders under section 6(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 46(b)) to no more than 5 covered platforms per study under this section. Pursuant to subsections (b) and (f) of section 6 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 46), the FTC shall also enter in agreements with the National Academy to share appropriate information received from a covered platform pursuant to an order under such subsection (b) for a comprehensive study under this section in a confidential and secure manner, and to prohibit the disclosure or sharing of such information by the National Academy. 

Next is a short Section 8: Market Research.  

Market Research by Covered Platforms: The FTC, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall issue guidance for covered platforms seeking to conduct market- and product-focused research on minors. Such guidance shall include: 

A standard consent form that provides minors and their parents a clear, conspicuous, and easy-to-understand explanation of the scope and purpose of the research to be conducted, and provides an opportunity for informed consent in the language in which the parent uses the covered platform; and 

Recommendations for research practices for studies that may include minors, disaggregated by the age ranges of 0-5, 6-9, 10-12, and 13-16. 

The FTC shall issue such guidance no later than 18 months (about 1 and a half years) after the date of enactment of this Act. In doing so, they shall seek input from members of the public and the representatives of the KOSC established under section 12.  

As we pull off interstate 8 we come into Section 9: Age Verification Study and Report. This is where the writers evidently started pounding shots of tequila at their desks, as some of the regulations in this section are completely asinine. Here we are told about a mandatory age verification system. Gone will be the days of being born in 1427 as a kid, now our age will be known to any covered platform. Is that what you want? 

Study: The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, in coordination with the FCC, FTC, and the SoC, shall conduct a study evaluating the most technologically feasible methods and options for developing systems to verify age at the device or operating system level. 

Such study shall consider: 

The benefits of creating a device or operating system level age verification system. 

What information may need to be collected to create this type of age verification system. 

The accuracy of such systems and their impact or steps to improve accessibility, including for individuals with disabilities. 

How such a system or systems could verify age while mitigating risks to user privacy and data security and safeguarding minors' personal data, emphasizing minimizing the amount of data collected and processed by covered platforms and age verification providers for such a system. 

The technical feasibility, including the need for potential hardware and software changes, including for devices currently in commerce and owned by consumers. 

The impact of different age verification systems on competition, particularly the risk of different age verification systems creating barriers to entry for small companies. 

Report: No later than 1 year after the passing of KOSA, the agencies described in subsection (a) shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under such subsection to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives. 

Section 10: Guidance. 

No later than 18 months (about 1 and a half years) after the date of enactment of this Act, the FTC, in consultation with the KOSC established under section 12, shall issue guidance to: 

Provide information and examples for covered platforms and auditors regarding the following, with consideration given to differences across English and non-English languages: 

Identifying features used to increase, sustain, or extend use of the covered platform by a minor (compulsive usage). 

Safeguarding minors against the possible misuse of parental tools. 

Best practices in providing minors and parents the most protective level of control over privacy and safety. 

Using indicia or inferences of age of users for assessing use of the covered platform by minors. 

Methods for evaluating the efficacy of safeguards; and 

Providing additional control options that allow parents to address the harms described in section 3. 

Outline conduct that does not have the purpose or substantial effect of subverting or impairing user autonomy, decision-making, or choice, or of causing, increasing, or encouraging compulsive usage for a minor, such as: 

Minute user interface changes derived from testing consumer preferences, including different styles, layouts, or text, where such changes are not done with the purpose of weakening or disabling safeguards or parental controls, such as the following, are exceptions to this: 

Algorithms or data outputs outside the control of a covered platform. 

The establishing of default settings that provide enhanced privacy protection to users or otherwise enhance their autonomy and decision-making ability. 

Guidance to Schools: No later than 18 months (about 1 and a half years) after the date of enactment of this act, the SoE, in consultation with the FTC and the KOSC established under section 12, shall issue guidance to assist to assist elementary and secondary schools in using the notice, safeguards and tools provided under this Act and providing information on online safety for students and teachers. 

Guidance on Knowledge Standards: No later than 18 months (about 1 and a half years) after the date of enactment of this act, the FTC shall issue guidance to provide information, including best practices and examples, for covered platforms to understand the Commission’s determination of whether a covered platform “had knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances” for purposes of this act. 

Limitation on FTC Guidance: No guidance issued by the FTC with respect to this act shall: 

Confer any rights on any person, State, or locality; or 

Operate to bind the FTC or any person to the approach recommended in such guidance. 

Enforcement Actions: In any enforcement action made to a covered platform in violation of this act, the FTC: 

Shall allege a violation of this act. 

May not base such enforcement action on, or execute a consent order based on, practices that are alleged to be inconsistent with guidance issued by the FTC with respect to this aact, unless the practices are alleged to violate a provision of this act. 

And now we’re almost on the home stretch, with Section 11, otherwise known as Enforcement. This section outlines, you guessed it, the enforcement of this act. 

Enforcement by the FTC: 

Unfair and Deceptive Acts or Practices: A violation of this act shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 

Powers of the Commission: The FTC shall enforce this act in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this act. 

Privileges and Immunities: Any person that violates this act shall be subject to the penalties, and entitled to the privileges and immunities, provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.). 

Authority Preserved: Nothing in this act shall be construed to limit the authority of the FTC under any other provision of law. 

Enforcement by State Attorney General: 

Civil Actions: In any case in which the attorney general of a State has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of that State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by the engagement of any person in a practice that violates this act, the State, as parens patrie (de facto parent of any citizens unable to defend themselves) , may bring a civil action on behalf of the residents of the State in a district court of the United States or a State court of appropriate jurisdiction to: 

Enjoin that practice. 

Enforce compliance with this act. 

On behalf of residents of the State, obtain damages, restitution, or other compensation, each of which shall be distributed in accordance with State law. 

Obtain such other relief as the court may consider to be appropriate. 

Notice: Before filing an action, the attorney general of the State involved shall provide to the Commission: 

Written notice of that action. 

A copy of the complaint for that action. 

Exemption: Clause (i) shall not apply with respect to the filing of an action by an attorney general of a State under this paragraph if the attorney general of the State determines that it is not feasible to provide the notice described in that clause before the filing of the action. 

Notification: In an action described in subclause (I), the attorney general of a State shall provide notice and a copy of the complaint to the Commission at the same time as the attorney general files the action. 

Intervention: On receiving notice, the Commission shall have the right to intervene in the action that is the notice's subject. 

Effect of Intervention: If the Commission intervenes in an action under paragraph (1), it shall have the right: 

To be heard with respect to any matter that arises in that action. 

To file a petition for appeal. 

Construction: For purposes of bringing any civil action under paragraph (1), nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent an attorney general of a State from exercising the powers conferred on the attorney general by the laws of that State to: 

Conduct investigations; 

Administer oaths or affirmations. 

Compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documentary and other evidence. 

Actions by the Commission: In any case in which an action is instituted by or on behalf of the Commission for violation of this act, no State may, during the pendency of that action, institute a separate action under paragraph (1) against any defendant named in the complaint in the action instituted by or on behalf of the Commission for that violation. 

Venue; Service of Progress: 

Venue: Any action brought under paragraph (1) may be brought in either: 

The district court of the United States that meets applicable requirements relating to venue under section 1391 of title 28, United States Code. 

A State court of competent authority. 

Service of Progress: In an action brought under paragraph (1) in a district court of the United States, process may be served wherever the defendant: 

Is an inhabitant. 

May be found. 

And now we are going to hear about the Kids Online Safety Council we’ve been hearing so much about in the last few sections in Section 12: Kids Online Safety Council. 

Establishment: No later than 180 days (about 6 months) after the enactment date of this act, the Secretary of Commerce shall establish and convene the Kids Online Safety Council to provide advice on matters related to this act. 

The Kids Online Safety Council shall include diverse participation from: 

Academic experts, health professionals, and members of civil society with expertise in mental health, substance use disorders, and the prevention of harm to minors. 

Representatives in academia and civil society with specific expertise in privacy and civil liberties. 

Parents and youth representation. 

Representatives of covered platforms. 

Representatives of the NTIA, the NIST, the FTC, the DoJ, and the DHHS. 

(6) State attorneys general or their designees acting in State or local government. 

Educators. 

Representatives of communities of socially disadvantaged individuals (as defined in section 8 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637)). 

Activities: The matters to be addressed by the Kids Online Safety Council shall include: 

Identifying emerging or current risks of harm to minors associated with online platforms. 

Recommending measures and methods for assessing, preventing, and mitigating harms to minors online. 

Recommending methods and themes for conducting research regarding online harms to minors, including in English and non-English languages. 

Recommending best practices and clear, consensus-based technical standards for transparency reports and audits, as required under this a ct, including methods, criteria, and scope to promote overall accountability. 

And now for Section 13, Filter Bubble Transparency Requirements. Almost to the end! 

Definitions: In this section: 

The term “algorithmic ranking system” means a computational process, including one derived from algorithmic decision-making, machine learning, statistical analysis, or other data processing or artificial intelligence techniques, used to determine the selection, order, relative prioritization, or relative prominence of content from a set of information that is provided to a user on a covered internet platform, including the ranking of search results, the provision of content recommendations, the display of social media posts, or any other method of automated content selection. 

The term “approximate geolocation information” means information that identifies the location of an individual, but with a precision of less than 5 miles. 

The term “Commission” means the Federal Trade Commission. 

The term “connected device” means an electronic device that: 

Can connect to the internet, either directly or indirectly through a network, to communicate information in the direction of an individual. 

Has computer processing capabilities for collecting, sending, receiving, or analyzing data. 

Is primarily designed for or marketed to consumers. 

Covered Internet Platform: The term “covered internet platform” means any public-facing website, internet application, or mobile application, including a social network site, video sharing service, search engine, or content aggregation service. Such term shall not include a platform that: 

Is wholly owned, controlled, and operated by a person that: 

For the most recent 6-month period, did not employ more than 500 employees. 

For the most recent 3-year period, averaged less than $50,000,000 in annual gross revenue. 

Collects or processes on an annual basis the user-specific data of less than 1,000,000 users (about the population of Delaware) or is operated for the sole purpose of conducting research that is not made for profit either directly or indirectly. 

Input Transparent Algorithm: The term “input-transparent algorithm” means an algorithmic ranking system that does not use the user-specific data of a user to determine the selection, order, relative prioritization, or relative prominence of information that is furnished to such user on a covered internet platform, unless the user-specific data is expressly provided to the platform by the user for such purpose. 

Data Provided for Express Purpose of Interaction with Platform For purposes of subparagraph (A), user-specific data that is provided by a user for the express purpose of determining the selection, order, relative prioritization, or relative prominence of information that is furnished to such user on a covered internet platform: 

Shall include user-supplied search terms, filters, speech patterns (if provided for the purpose of enabling the platform to accept spoken input or selecting the language in which the user interacts with the platform), saved preferences, and the current precise geolocation information that is supplied by the user. 

Shall include the user's current approximate geolocation information. 

Shall include data affirmatively supplied to the platform by the user that expresses the user's desire to receive particular information, such as the social media profiles the user follows, the video channels the user subscribes to, or other content or sources of content on the platform the user has selected. 

Shall NOT include the history of the user's connected device, including the user's history of web searches and browsing, previous geographical locations, physical activity, device interaction, and financial transactions. 

Shall NOT include inferences about the user or the user's connected device, without regard to whether such inferences are based on data described in clause (i) or (iii). 

Opaque Algorithm: The term “opaque algorithm” means an algorithmic ranking system that determines the selection, order, relative prioritization, or relative prominence of information that is furnished to such user on a covered internet platform based, in whole or part, on user-specific data that was not expressly provided by the user to the platform for such purpose. 

Exception for Age-Appropriate Content Filtering: Such term shall not include an algorithmic ranking system used by a covered internet platform if: 

The only user-specific data (including inferences about the user) that the system uses is information relating to the age of the user. 

Such information is only used to restrict a user's access to content on the basis that the individual is not old enough to access such content (i.e., not allowing a 13-year-old to access pornography). 

Precise Geolocation Information: The term “precise geolocation information” means geolocation information that identifies an individual’s location to within a range of 5 miles or less. 

Search Syndication Contract, Upstream Provider, Downstream Provider: 

The term “search syndication contract” means a contract or subcontract for the sale of, license of, or other right to access an index of web pages or search results on the internet for the purpose of operating an internet search engine. 

The term “upstream provider” means, with respect to a search syndication contract, the person that grants access to an index of web pages or search results on the internet to a downstream provider pursuant to the contract. 

The term “downstream provider” means, with respect to a search syndication contract, the person that receives access to an index of web pages on the internet from an upstream provider under such contract. 

User Specific Data: The term “user-specific data” means information relating to an individual or a specific connected device that would not necessarily be true of every individual or device. 

Requirement to Allow Users to View Unaltered Content on Internet Platforms: Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, it shall be illegal: 

For any person to operate a covered internet platform that uses an opaque algorithm unless the person complies with the opaque algorithm requirements. 

For any upstream provider to grant access to an index of web pages on the internet under a search syndication contract that does not comply with the requirements of paragraph (3). 

Opaque Algorithm Requirements: The requirements of this paragraph with respect to a person that operates a covered internet platform that uses an opaque algorithm are the following: 

The person provides notice to users of the platform: 

That the platform uses an opaque algorithm that uses user-specific data to select the content the user sees. Such notice shall be presented in a clear, conspicuous manner on the platform whenever the user interacts with an opaque algorithm for the first time and may be a one-time notice that can be dismissed by the user. 

In the terms and conditions of the covered internet platform, in a clear, accessible, and easily comprehensible manner to be updated no less frequently than once every 6 months: 

The most salient features, inputs, and parameters used by the algorithm. 

How any user-specific data used by the algorithm is collected or inferred about a user of the platform, and the categories of such data. 

Any options that the covered internet platform makes available for a user of the platform to opt out or exercise options under clause (ii), modify the profile of the user or to influence the features, inputs, or parameters used by the algorithm. 

Any quantities, such as time spent using a product or specific measures of engagement or social interaction, that the algorithm is designed to optimize, as well as a general description of the relative importance of each quantity for such ranking. 

The person makes available a version of the platform that uses an input-transparent algorithm and enables users to easily switch between the version of the platform that uses an opaque algorithm and the version of the platform that uses the input-transparent algorithm. 

Exceptions for Certain Downstream Providers: Subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to an internet search engine if: 

The search engine is operated by a downstream provider with fewer than 1,000 employees. 

The search engine uses an index of web pages on the internet to which such provider received access under a search syndication contract. 

Search Syndication Contract Requirements: The requirements of this paragraph with respect to a search syndication contract are that: 

As part of the contract, the upstream provider makes available to the downstream provider the same input-transparent algorithm used by the upstream provider for purposes of complying with paragraph (2)(A)(ii). 

The upstream provider does not impose any additional costs, degraded quality, reduced speed, or other constraint on the functioning of such algorithm when used by the downstream provider to operate an internet search engine relative to the performance of such algorithm when used by the upstream provider to operate an internet search engine. 

Prohibition on Differential Pricing: A covered internet platform shall not deny, charge different prices or rates for, or condition the provision of a service or product to an individual based on the individual’s election to use a version of the platform that uses an input-transparent algorithm as provided under paragraph (2)(A)(ii). 

Enforcement by FTC: 

Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices: A violation of this section by an operator of a covered internet platform shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)). 

Powers of Commision: Except as provided in subparagraph (C), the FTC shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section. 

Privileges and Immunities: Except as provided in subparagraph (C), any person who violates this Act shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.). 

Common Carriers and Nonprofit Institutions: Notwithstanding section 4, 5(a)(2), or 6 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 44, 45(a)(2), 46) or any jurisdictional limitation of the Commission, the Commission shall also enforce this act, in the same manner provided in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, with respect to: 

Common carriers subject to the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) and acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto 

Organizations are not organized to carry on business for their own profit or that of their members. 

Authority Preserved: Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any other provision of law. 

Rule of Application: Section 11 shall not apply to this section. 

Rule of Construction to Preserve Personal Blocks: Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or prohibit a covered internet platform’s ability to, at the direction of an individual user or group of users, restrict another user from searching for, finding, accessing, or interacting with such user’s or group’s account, content, data, or online community. 

Skipping over Section 14, as it is incredibly short (don’t worry, it’s one line, and I’ll say it at the end), we arrive at Section 15, or “Rules of Construction and Other Matters”. 

Relationships to Other Laws: Nothing in this Act shall be construed to: 

Preempt section 444 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g (about 2.72 lb), commonly known as the “Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974”) or other Federal or State laws governing student privacy. 

Preempt the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (15 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.) or any rule or regulation promulgated under such Act. 

Authorize any action that would conflict with section 18(h) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(h)). 

Fairly Implied on the Basis of Objective Circumstances: For purposes of enforcing this act, in making a determination as to whether covered platform has knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances that a user is a minor, the FTC shall rely on competent and reliable empirical evidence, taking into account the totality of the circumstances, including consideration of whether the operator, using available technology, exercised reasonable care. 

Protections for Privacy: Nothing in this act shall be construed to require: 

The affirmative collection of any personal data with respect to the age of users that a covered platform is not already collecting in the normal course of business. 

A covered platform to implement an age gating or age verification functionality. 

Compliance: Nothing in this act shall be construed to restrict a covered platform's ability to: 

Cooperate with law enforcement agencies regarding activity that the covered platform reasonably and in good faith believes may violate Federal, State, or local laws, rules, or regulations. 

Comply with a civil, criminal, or regulatory inquiry or any investigation, subpoena, or summons by Federal, State, local, or other government authorities. 

Investigate, establish, exercise, respond to, or defend against legal claims. 

Application to Video Streaming Services: A video streaming service shall be deemed to be in compliance with this act if it predominantly consists of news, sports, entertainment, or other video programming content that is preselected by the provider and not user-generated, and: 

Any chat, comment, or interactive functionality is provided incidental to, directly related to, or dependent on provision of such content. 

If such video streaming service requires account owner registration and is not predominantly news or sports, the service includes the capability: 

To limit a minor’s access to the service, which may utilize a system of age-rating. 

To limit the automatic playing of on-demand content selected by a personalized recommendation system for an individual that the service knows is a minor. 

To provide an individual that the service knows is a minor with readily-accessible and easy-to-use options to delete an account held by the minor and delete any personal data collected from the minor on the service, or, in the case of a service that allows a parent to create a profile for a minor, to allow a parent to delete the minor’s profile, and to delete any personal data collected from the minor on the service. 

For a parent to manage a minor’s privacy and account settings, and restrict purchases and financial transactions by a minor, where applicable. 

To provide an electronic point of contact specific to matters described in this paragraph. 

To offer clear, conspicuous, and easy-to-understand notice of its policies and practices with respect to personal data and the capabilities described in this paragraph. 

When providing on-demand content, to employ measures that safeguard against serving advertising for narcotic drugs (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), tobacco products, gambling, or alcohol directly to the account or profile of an individual that the service knows is a minor. 

And finally, we arrive at Section 16, the last Section, combined with Section 14, which I glossed over earlier. If any part of this act is deemed obsolete, ineffective, or unnecessary at any point in time, it may be removed from the act without any effect to the rest of it. Unless otherwise specified, all regulations in this act shall come into effect 18 months (about 1 and a half years) after the passing of this bill. 

As you can see, this bill makes an impressive amount of sense, and if it were simply used as intended, it would be wonderful. However, because we can never have nice things, legislators, politicians, and the common public have twisted this bill, warping it to serve their selfish desires. Firstly, Senator Blackburn, one of the people behind this whole thing, blatantly said to a camera that she was going to “use KOSA to protect kids from the transgender in this culture.” With the queer community already under fire from all sides, this is the last thing they need, as all it does is further demonize them, and paint them as evil, pedophilic freaks to be feared and hated. A lot of regulations outlined in this bill also provide a concerning amount of control over the children it claims to protect, and it isn’t giving it to the child. It’s giving it to their parents. The adults who, as much as we hate to admit it, don’t always have the best interests of their children at heart. And what’s more, now the conservative Republicans care about people with disabilities, but it’s only when they’re trying to push a different marginalized group off the net. However, as soon as we try to do something as simple as mandating wheelchair ramps for all government buildings, they say “we don’t have the money for that!”. Okay, since obviously you don’t understand basic common sense Mr. Conservative, let me explain this for you: let’s say that KOSA will be fully enforced on every single website out of the over 1 BILLION that currently exist. Let’s say that about half of those comply fully willingly with KOSA, just for the benefit of the doubt. That still lives 500 million noncompliant websites. Let’s say that with legal proceedings and other costs, it would cost 500 dollars in USD per website to bring those websites into compliance. It would cost 250 BILLION dollars in USD to bring 500 million websites into compliance. Now let’s do some math on the wheelchair ramp problem, I’ll use small businesses as an example, since that’s the main subject of complaints on this topic. There are 33,185,550 small businesses registered in the United States. With the average cost per linear foot of concrete ramp being 225 dollars in USD, and saying that every small business has 2 doors that need ramps that are 1 linear foot, that means that every small business would have to pay 450 dollars in USD to make their businesses accessible. Every 3-5 years, you’ll want to reseal that concrete, costing about 3-5 dollars in USD per square foot. That means that a one time expense of 450 dollars to build the original ramps (on average, grossly oversimplified, but you get it), with an recurring cost every 3-5 years of a mere 6-10 dollars in USD. It would cost 4e-9% of what it would cost to enforce KOSA to make every registered small business in the US accessible. That is less than 1% of the money it would cost to enforce KOSA. 

This bill would also enforce a strict “no horny” policy on damn near every website that you can think of. And as much as we like to demonize and vilify them, sex workers, porn actors, and hentai artists are people too, and some of them make a living off what they do. By enacting KOSA, you are driving the lives of more than 2 million people (about the population of Nebraska) into the dirt. KOSA places the value of a child’s innocence over those lives. Now, don’t get me wrong, I am absolutely against child pornography and exposing small children to porn, but we shouldn’t lock down everyone's access to explicit content to preserve 22.1% of the US population’s childlike innocence. KOSA also can lock those children into abusive and dangerous conditions and make the lives of orphans a living hell. By giving the parents of minors total control over their child’s account, you are allowing them to lock down their lives, and expose these children to, at best, harmful misinformation, extremism, and general naivety, and at worst, physical abuse and/or death. That’s another 600,000 lives ground into the dirt under the boot of “safety”. And that little bit about “parens patrie”? That basically means that if you can’t defend yourself (i.e. are homeless, an orphan, etc.), the government is your parent now. Growing up with a faceless, nameless entity in place of any parental figure is NOT a healthy way for a child to live. Again, that’s another 2,823,104 human beings crushed by KOSA. In total, out of just the three categories of people I listed here, over 4,883,104 human beings, with lives, emotions, thoughts, joys and pains, are being royally screwed over by this absolutely horrid bill. 

 We as a society are better than this. Come on people. What memo did I miss that decided that we only need equality for some people? Instead of bickering amongst ourselves like children, we should work together and solve our problems! Isn’t that what we all want!? But no, instead we fight over our inviolable rights as human beings like toddlers over a shovel in the sandbox, instead of behaving like civilized people. And what’s worse, it paints anyone who doesn’t fit the perfect ideal of an American citizen in shades of evil, demonizing and alienating them even more than they already are. What the hell are we doing here? Instead of waving our bureaucracy around, we should get off the chair and do something about it. How many times have we done something without taking a risk? That’s right, NEVER. 

If we claim to be champions of equality, yet only desire it for ourselves, we are just as bad as those whose actions we decry. So please, dear reader, I beg of you. Stop KOSA, stop censorship, stop tyranny if you value this world at all. 

[industrial-horror]

Skinny Puppy is a pioneering band in the industrial music genre, known for their dark, experimental sound and theatrical live performances. Formed in 1982 in Vancouver, Canada, by cEvin Key (Kevin Crompton) and Nivek Ogre (Kevin Ogilvie), Skinny Puppy blends elements of electronic music, punk, and performance art, crafting a unique and unsettling aesthetic that has significantly influenced the industrial and electronic music scenes.

Early Years

The band began as a side project for Key while he was a member of the new wave group Images in Vogue. However, Skinny Puppy soon became a primary focus, with the duo recording their debut EP, Back & Forth (1984), in Key’s home studio. They quickly gained attention for their experimental approach, incorporating samples, synthesizers, and abrasive rhythms to create a chaotic yet controlled soundscape.

Their first full-length album, Remission (1984), and its follow-up, Bites (1985), helped define the emerging industrial genre, alongside artists like Front 242 and Throbbing Gristle. Tracks like "Assimilate" and "The Choke" showcased the band’s fusion of ominous atmospheres and driving beats.

Themes and Style

Skinny Puppy's music frequently explores themes of dystopia, environmental destruction, animal rights, and the darker aspects of human psychology. They are noted for their confrontational approach to social and political issues, often challenging their audience with disturbing imagery and lyrics.

The band's sound is characterized by dense layers of electronic textures, distorted vocals, and innovative use of sampling. They are also known for their intense and theatrical live performances, which often feature elaborate visuals, costumes, and provocative stage setups.

Evolution and Influence

Throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s, albums like Mind: The Perpetual Intercourse (1986), Cleanse Fold and Manipulate (1987), and VIVIsectVI (1988) solidified their reputation as industrial trailblazers. Too Dark Park (1990) and Last Rights (1992) pushed their sound even further, diving deeper into noise and experimentalism.

However, internal tensions and personal struggles, including Ogre's battles with addiction, led to the band's initial breakup in 1995 after the release of The Process. The death of their longtime collaborator, Dwayne Goettel, from a heroin overdose added to the turbulence during this period.

Reformation and Later Years

Skinny Puppy reunited in the early 2000s, releasing new material, including albums like The Greater Wrong of the Right (2004), Weapon (2013), and HanDover (2011). These later works maintained their signature intensity while incorporating contemporary electronic influences. They continue to tour, delivering politically charged performances that resonate with fans old and new.

Legacy

Skinny Puppy's influence extends beyond the industrial genre. Artists ranging from Nine Inch Nails to Marilyn Manson, and even electronic acts like The Prodigy, cite them as a key inspiration. Their innovative approach to sound design and multimedia presentation has left a lasting mark on the music world.

To this day, Skinny Puppy remains an icon of industrial music, a symbol of uncompromising artistic vision, and a voice for those on the fringes of mainstream culture.

[genderoutlaws]

what's hole theory? the tag just has a punch of (really cool) multimedia posts, and when i googled it i got a bunch of stuff about physics? unless we've undergone some grand cultural uprooting when i turned my back, i can't say i particularly associate gay people with quantum mechanics

i think yr a bit confused in that it’s not like an inherently gay thing just bc i shared it to this blog lol, i shared the piece bc it happened to be by a trans artist. but yeah anyways i believe the tumblr obsession started with this post (? correct me if im wrong) from 2021 which mirrors the dirac hole theory in part but within a more philosophical realm — Hole Theory is also the name of a 2002 text by William Pope.L detailing a modality that largely defined his practice, that suggests that lack is also a source of value. i’m not sure if the tumblr strain of hole theory is at all inspired by this but it should be incorporated into it tbh.

William Pope.L’s piece ends on this note “…this theory could only come from someone who lacks something as a political condition. Hole Theory engages lack across economic and cultural and political boundaries. LACK IS WHERE IT’S AT.”

(i also really enjoyed this piece on the hauntology of holes by Kim Beil that mentions Pope.L’s work)

edit: Anne Carson had a theory of holes as well !

[denimbex1986]

'Try and explain the motivations or internal psychology of recent Marvel Cinematic Universe villains. If one engages in this exercise, one will be quickly disappointed to see that many of these foes have no real relevance to the world audiences inhabit. Dar-Benn from The Marvels, for instance, was justifiably mad about what happened to her planet and her response to that trauma was to suck up the sun(?). Kang in Quantumania was so vaguely defined that it was impossible to get a read on the character. Kro in Eternals, meanwhile, was such a throwaway baddie that even MCU diehards likely forgot he existed! Compare such subpar adversaries to Kevin "Kilgrave" Thompson (David Tennant), the villain of the first season of Jessica Jones.

A man with the ability to control minds, Thompson kept detective Jessica Jones (Krysten Ritter) under his control for months on end. As a result of this experience, Jones struggles with PTSD and has withdrawn herself from the world. Throughout the first season of Jessica Jones, Kilgrave proves a terrifying foe and one who, despite carrying such heightened superpowers, perfectly embodies several terrifying elements of reality, such as male privilege. Kilgrave’s inability to see other people as human or even consider the humanity of those he controls is a stylized depiction of how often men in Western societies similarly refuse to gaze into the point-of-views of marginalized genders. His superpowers may have been rooted in comic books, but Kilgrave was decidedly a villain ripped from the real world. This is just one of many fascinating attributes of the character that make Kilgrave somebody who needs to return to the wider Marvel Cinematic Universe pronto.

Kilgrave Deserves to Be One of the Netflix Elements Brought to the Marvel Disney+ Shows

As Marvel Studios fleshes out its multimedia plans for the rest of the 2020s, it’s clear many elements of the Marvel/Netflix shows from 2015-2019 will be incorporated into the broader universe. When programs like Daredevil and Luke Cage were running, there was a bit of a divide between these shows and the larger movies. Characters on these Netflix entities would occasionally reference Captain America or Iron Man, but the first three phases of the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies never acknowledged these characters in return. Starting with Hawkeye and Spider-Man: No Way Home, though, certain actors and figures from the Netflix shows have been carried over into the bigger Marvel Cinematic Universe projects. It’s still unclear (though presumably unlikely) if the narratives of the Marvel/Netflix shows are still canon, but folks like Charlie Cox’s Daredevil are now fixtures of modern MCU media.

While that doesn’t mean Avengers: The Kang Dynasty will be focusing exclusively on Danny Rand/Iron Fist (Finn Jones) and Willis Stryker/Diamondback (Erik LaRay Harvey), it does mean a bevy of Marvel/Netflix characters are now at the disposal of future Marvel Studios programs. Kilgrave would be a fantastic character to incorporate into these forthcoming projects, especially since his presence as a more grounded figure would fit in with some of Marvel’s upcoming TV ambitions. Projects like Echo and Daredevil: Born Again are being marketed as adult-skewing programs that aren’t afraid to engage in thornier, more challenging material. Kilgrave, a man who commits murder and rape rather than pursue nebulously defined cosmic MacGuffin’s, would be a perfect villain to fit into this narrative landscape.

Plus, Kilgrave isn’t somebody who’s been seen in tons of other media beyond the comics. While he's shown up in a pair of video games and occasionally appeared in animated TV shows like The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes, Kilgrave has largely been restricted to the comics and his appearances across the three seasons of Jessica Jones. This isn’t a character like The Joker that’s been done to death in pop culture, there’s lots of new territory one could explore when it comes to Kilgrave. This could even include giving him his purple skin from the comics, a trait Jessica Jones hinted at with his default purple suits, but never went all-in on. That visual detail encapsulates how much there is still to do with Kilgrave.

It doesn’t hurt that Kilgrave is played by a beloved actor like David Tennant, whose fanbase only seems to grow as the years progress with his roles in post-Jessica Jones programs like Good Omens. Tennant is always a welcome presence in any capacity and getting him back for further MCU projects as one of his most famous and chilling characters would be an exciting development. It’s not like Tennant was a “nobody” before Jessica Jones (he had Broadchurch and Doctor Who, after all!) but he’s only become even more prominent since that Netflix show wrapped up its run. That uptick in notoriety has included a string of notable voice-over roles in Disney projects like Ducktales and Ahsoka, a sign that the parent company of Marvel Studios is keen on a good relationship with this performer. These qualities tied into the esteemed career of David Tennant would surely be another incentive to get Kilgrave back into the MCU picture.

David Tennant's Kilgrave Would Give the MCU a Tangibly Terrifying Villain Again

The most important facet of bringing Kilgrave into the MCU, though, would be finally bringing back tangibly terrifying villains back into this sprawling saga. Recent MCU titles haven’t been entirely devoid of solid baddies (The High Evolutionary in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 was an enjoyably over-the-top creation) but too many modern foes in this franchise leave something to be desired. Dar-Benn, Kang, Gorr the God Butcher, Kro; they’re all too removed from anything resembling discernible reality. While Thanos proved truly haunting because he was a big purple alien who acted like a weary human being, few recent cosmic MCU baddies have registered as remotely in touch with the real world.

Kilgrave would solve that problem and then some. This figure was truly terrifying in his nonchalant evil, while his ability to manipulate the minds of seemingly anyone Jessica Jones encountered provided a vivid visual metaphor for how omnipresent toxic men are in American society. They’re everywhere, even when they’re not physically in the room! Embracing such a terrifying baddie rooted in heavy real-world material (like the sexual trauma he inflicted on Jessica Jones) didn’t weigh down Jessica Jones as a show but rather gave it extra gravitas. That’s not the kind of praise one could offer recent MCU baddies obsessed with convoluted cosmic justice. David Tennant is always a welcome sight in any piece of pop culture, but him returning as Kilgrave would be especially helpful for the broader Marvel Cinematic Universe.'

[women-of-malevolent]

META - What "canon" is in Malevolent, for the purposes of this blog

TL;DR:

In order of most 'I accept this as meaningful to the story of Malevolent' to most 'do not bring me this crap'

Canon:

The podcast itself

The official podcast transcripts from the website (I edit out the emotion tags because I often find them redundant or disagree with their assessment /no offense; I super appreciate transcriptionist work! Thank you so much for providing the accessibility resource to fans who need and want it /genuine <3 )

I guess I'll hear you out if you think it's really important:

Call of Cthulhu lore

Original Lovecraft lore

Supplemental Q&A's on main podcast feed

Supplemental Q&A's on other social media

Just don't:

Patreon-locked content

Pay-locked content

Invictus stream / Patreon chats / Discord / speculation about author/writing choices

Malevolent is a weird story. I've seen it marketing itself as an ARG, or an alternate reality game. From Wikipedia -

"An alternate reality game (ARG) is an interactive networked narrative that uses the real world as a platform and employs transmedia storytelling to deliver a story that may be altered by players' ideas or actions. The form is defined by intense player involvement with a story that takes place in real time and evolves according to players' responses. It is shaped by characters that are actively controlled by the game's designers, as opposed to being controlled by an AI as in a computer or console video game. Players interact directly with characters in the game, solve plot-based challenges and puzzles, and collaborate as a community to analyze the story and coordinate real-life and online activities. ARGs generally utilize multimedia, such as telephones and mail, but rely on the Internet as the central binding medium."

So, what are the multiple media that make up Malevolent?

First of all, I want to explain for anyone who might not know all these details: Malevolent is a weekly podcast. Every week, ~15-20 minutes of story is delivered as a Chapter to the Malevolent Patreon Patrons. Each week, those Patrons vote on one big choice that the characters will make in the following week's episode. These Patrons are called The Voices. Every 4 weeks, those 4 story Chapters are collected into one episode called a Part and shared with the public. The Patreon also shares exclusive author interviews, commentary, silly songs/other miscellaneous bonus content, plus access to the Malevolent Patreon Discord channel, in which the author and his wife are moderators and off-and-on participants in fan discussions about the show (including commentary about character backstories, motivations, what ships are/are not canon, etc). Higher-paying tiers get access to more channels.

Most of Malevolent's listeners have access to the Parts as hour-long episodes, plus whatever supplemental material is shared on the podcast feed. A small contingent of highly financially supportive fans have access to everything.

With that legwork out of the way...

Below is a list what I understand to be all the possible layers of "canon" in Malevolent, followed by an explanation of how deeply this blog will consider it as a source. This list is in order from most canon (1) to least/not at all canon (9). More sources are added as they come up.

These numbers also (probably, maybe) roughly align with listener drop-off rates. Imagine funnel-like drop-offs in number of people who care enough to engage this ancillary of material. Also keep in mind the listeners who are tuning in for the first time, 20 years from now. How much will they get from this source?

The podcast itself - this will be the blog's prime canon source. This is the primary story source from which the vast, vast majority of all readers and listeners - now and decades in the future - have access to.

The podcast transcripts - this is its own category because the transcripts often editorialize (not a bad thing - just necessary product of translating one art medium into another). I've come away from episodes with a strong impression of one line delivery (ex: delighted), then find that in the transcript, it's described totally different (ex: disgusted). I will use the transcripts as my primary source for this blog. I usually delete the tone indicators. I also add MR. to Mr. Scratch's dialogue tags after he asks Arthur to call him that.

Call of Cthulu roleplay game - I'm not familiar with this and I don't think most listeners of the show will be, either. The relevance of this source will be considered on a touch-and-go basis.

H.P. Lovecraft extended universe - I have not read much Lovecraft and I don't want to start. The relevance of this source will be considered on a touch-and-go basis.

Supplemental interviews, episode commentary, Q&As available on main podcast feed - The author very regularly provides thoughts on the story and writing of Malevolent. I will consider this source as little as possible. If you have some information from here you think is important for me to hear, I will consider it; but please understand that 1) the VAST majority of listeners will not hear this, even if it's not cost-gated; and 2) not everyone who hears it believes/respects authorial self-reporting. No offense but no way

Twitter/X, Reddit, YouTube, or other social media commentary - similar to 5, with less weight because even fewer listeners will ever find this or seek it out. Also, social media is highly susceptible to internet decay.

Invictus CoC games - not considered. I might look into these later (WAY less thoroughly than the main WoM blog), but also I might not. These are Call of Cthulu games that were DM-ed by the author of Malevolent. There are some overlapping characters like Anna Stanczyk and Frank Uphill. Even if you're into these pls you have to admit that most of the Malevolent listening audience will not watch them.

Supplemental, Patreon-exclusive content - NO. If it can't be accessed without paying or signing up for a website, naw.

Semi-private discussions from heavily gated discord groups - NO. Let's not

Speculation about the author - NO. This includes speculation on whether or not ____ is intentional, or why writing choices were/weren't made.

[silmarillionwritersguild]

The SWG Hosts Tolkien Fanworks

Fandom creators may be looking for alternative and additional archives, in light of the multiple critiques currently being made of the OTW and AO3.

This is not intended as commentary on the many issues raised about the OTW and AO3 in recent weeks, although an unofficial position of our organization (as a small archive) has always been that it is ideal to archive your fanworks across multiple sites, and multiple options for archiving should exist. Rather, this post will provide information about who we are and the fanworks we accept so that Tolkien fanworks creators can decide if our archive is a viable option for them.

What is the SWG?

The Silmarillion Writers' Guild was founded in 2005 by @dawnfelagund, and our archive opened in 2007. Our mission is to provide an online archive and community for anyone interested in The Silmarillion that values civility and openness in discussing and making fanworks about Tolkien's legendarium. You can read the SWG's complete mission here.

We currently archive just over 5,000 fanworks by 414 creators. In addition, we offer monthly creative challenges, publish a weekly newsletter that features research by our members, maintain a reference library and beta-reader directory, compile a listing of Tolkien fandom events, and host events such as live readings, fanfiction book clubs, and collaborative creative sessions on our Discord.

What fanworks does the SWG accept?

The SWG is an archive for Silmarillion-based fanworks. We try to define the term "Silmarillion-based" as broadly and inclusively as possible so that we can welcome as many fanworks on our site as possible while maintaining our purpose as a Silmarillion group. Significant use of a source, character or character group, location, or time period featured in The Silmarillion, as long as it is not also covered in detail in The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings, qualifies a work for our site. Our detailed FAQ on how we define "Silmworks" can be found here.

We accept crossover, alternate universe (AU), and multi-age fanworks, as long as a significant component meets the "Silm fanwork" definition above.

Non-Silmarillion Tolkien Fanworks. We recently added a section to our site called Beyond the Silmarillion, which accepts all fanworks based on Tolkien's writings or Tolkien-based adaptations (films, shows, games, etc.) SWG members become eligible to post in this section once they have archived five fanworks or 10,000 words with us, whichever comes first.

Types of Fanwork We Archive. The SWG currently accepts the following types of fanwork: writing (fiction, nonfiction, plays/screenplays, and poetry), artwork, audio, video, link collections, playlists, series, and multimedia fanworks that include two or more of the formats above. If you need to archive a fanwork that doesn't match any of the above, the site moderators will help you archive your work with us, if it's possible to do so. With the exception of video, we host all fanworks on our server. (Videos must be posted to a video hosting site.)

Ratings and Adult Content. We accept all ratings of fanwork. The only adult-rated fanworks we cannot accept are images or videos that include "graphic depictions of sexual activity, sexualized nudity, and any representation of an underage character in a sexual situation" because these fanworks violate the Terms of Service of our webhost.

AI-Generated Fanworks. We do not accept fanworks entirely or partially produced through prompting an AI generator. Our AI policy can be found here.

What are the conduct expectations for SWG members?

Simply put, the SWG "is a positive-focused, open-minded space." We require civility in all interactions conducted on our archive and affiliated social sites. The SWG is a moderated site and community, so we do hold our members to our expectations. You can read our complete Site Etiquette and Terms of Service here.

How is the SWG governed?

The SWG was founded and is currently run by Dawn Felagund, assisted by a team of moderators. Active moderators are Russandol, Grundy, Lyra, Saelind, and Janeways; they make the ultimate decisions concerning the archive. Other volunteers aid other tasks needed to run the site and community and may contribute to decision-making as well.

The SWG is not a democracy in that we do not hold formal elections and there are certain aspects of our mission that we are unwilling to change, even under majority preference. However, we consider member feedback as part of our decision-making process whenever possible—especially with regard to decisions on controversial or impactful issues—and some of the policies and features we've implemented over the years have come about by member request.

Members who need assistance, have a concern, or wish to make a suggestion can contact the moderators directly or use the #town-hall channel in the SWG's Discord.

We aim (and are generally able) to reply to all communications from members within twenty-four hours.

Because we are a small organization with relatively few decision makers, we can generally implement change relatively quickly. Our recent AI policy offers a good example of how governance in our group works. The issue of AI-generated fanworks was raised in a discussion among the site and Discord moderators on May 5. In this discussion, the moderators shared information and came to a consensus on how they wanted AI-generated fanworks handled on the SWG. Dawn drafted an AI policy, which was put before the other moderators for feedback on May 9. By May 13, the site admins had researched and implemented a block on AI scraper bots using all known strategies. Also on May 13, the AI policy was opened for public comment through May 26, during which time members and other interested parties shared suggestions via email with the moderators and in discussion in the #town-hall channel on Discord. During this time, the draft policy was revised twice using those suggestions. On May 28, the finalized policy was announced on the SWG's site and social networks, and relevant documents on the site were updated to reflect and link to the new policy.

How does the SWG handle racism and other attacks on groups that have been historically marginalized in fandom and beyond?

As stated in our Site Etiquette, as an organization, we recognize that fandom and the Tolkien fandom specifically has historically been and continues to be hostile to and dismissive of fans from marginalized groups, including fans who are Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC); women; LGBTQIA+; and fans with disabilities. We believe strongly that, as a fandom organization that has benefited from the status quo, we must also be part of the solution to ensure that these inequities do not persist.

Specific solutions we have implemented on our group include:

Our Site Etiquette and Terms of Service strictly forbids "[a]ttacks on other members based on personal characteristics (such as race, color, religion, ethnicity, nationality, age, sexuality, gender identity or expression, disability, or medical condition)" and states that "[a]busive or derogatory behavior will not be tolerated at any time or in any part of the SWG. We do not welcome or allow any content in our group that is designed to be hurtful or insulting." While we generally observe a three-strike policy for rule violations, "[i]f moderators feel that someone is acting deliberately to harm SWG and/or its members … we reserve the right to suspend that person's account without prior warning." Our hope with this policy is to allow members who mess up the opportunity to improve while also having the ability to remove bad actors immediately.

We currently require fanworks on our site to be correctly labeled with warnings, including fanworks that include "in-universe intolerance," such as racism, homophobia, and misogyny. Creators have the option of labeling a fanwork as "Choose Not to Warn" if they do not want to label their fanwork. Our ratings and warnings policy is here.

We maintain an inclusivity focus group that we consult on policies and issues related to inclusivity or that may have a disproportionate impact on some groups of fans. Any SWG member who is part of a group historically marginalized in fandom is welcome to join this focus group and participate when and how they feel comfortable. Any member can request the input of the inclusivity focus group on a moderator decision.

If I want to archive my work with you, what is the best way to do this?

First, review the Site Etiquette and Terms of Service, and if you believe our group is a good fit for you and your work, register for an SWG account.

A moderator will approve your account before you can begin posting or commenting on the site. We aim to approve new accounts within twenty-four hours of registration; typically, it takes much less time than that to be approved.

Once you are approved, you can begin posting your fanworks! We do ask that new members who are archiving many older works with us to backdate these fanworks and exclude them from the Most Recent list to allow creators posting new work to have that spotlight.

Questions on how to use the site, SWG policies, or how best to archive past works with us are welcome via the site's contact form, by emailing the moderators at moderator@silmarillionwritersguild.org, or reaching out to the mods via any of the SWG's social media.

[dailyfatefigures]

Do you mind explaining what evillous is? It looks like miku, rin and len to me? is it just a vocaloid song that they were given unique identities in?

evillious (or the evillious chronicles but that's too much for me to be bothered to type out again and again) is a massive multimedia franchise made by the vocaloid producer mothy!

the vocaloids basically serve as actors in it which is why most characters look a lot like their corresponding voicebanks.... but also the close resemblance the characters can be 50/50 like on one hand you have michaela who looks JUST like miku but on the other hand you have ma who's a luka but looks.. nothing like a luka (tbf that is bc of bodyswapping but also like . come on . the girl she bodyswapped with was also a luka) and then there's characters like bruno who, despite being p fucking important, doesn't have a vocaloid at all

^^ michaela, ma, and bruno

but also i think the reason riliane, allen and michaela look so much like their vocaloids in those figures is bc they're meant as 'rin in this one song', 'len in this one song' and 'miku in this one song' and not 'riliane lucifen d'autriche, a character who has 5 light novels, a bunch of manga volumes, and too many songs to count that are all primarily about her' etc etc (i'm not calculating allen and michaela's appearances or the amount of manga volumes riliane is in you could not pay me to (actually you could and i know the exact price but no one's going to)). also the evillious characters all have p defined facial features that get ironed out when they get converted into generic anime figure style.

^^ maybe my perception is warped as an evillious fan but i do not ever see ichika's illustrations of riliane and think 'that's kagamine rin'

in regards to what evillious actually is though, it's also known as story of evil and the seven deadly sins series, and if you're into vocaloid (esp if you've been into vocaloid for any decent amount of time) whether you know it or not, you are very, very familiar with at least a little bit of evillious. and by that i mean you've heard daughter of evil at least once, and also probably servant of evil, the tailor of enbizaka, the lunacy of duke venomania and judgement of corruption. the story basically follows this world known as the third period from its creation to its destruction (and a bit before and after). the seven deadly sins series makes up the bulk of evillious and follows seven people at different times and locations throughout this world's history and those around them as they get possessed by the seven deadly sins and uhm . well it should be p obvious that nothing good comes of that. story of evil is a colloqiual name given to the pride arc bc daughter of evil, servant of evil and regret message were the first songs mothy released that were explicitly meant to be tied together upon release (he likes to drop a song and then be like 'teehee this was part of the evillious canon all along' years later) and the evillious name wouldn't come around til much later.

if you want to actually get into evillious, you really have to go by release order or you will get very confused very quickly (gasp! the guy who likes fate enough to run a daily blog based around it for over a year has strong opinions on that age old issue of watch order (not the right phrase bc i am a fate anime adaptation hater til the day i die and the evillious anime never actually got made but. you know what i mean)!) mainly bc of the sheer amount of body swapping and reincarnation that goes on and the scifi fantasy concepts that get explained when they first appear and then never again. the songs all have translated pvs up on youtube (a lot of pvs are fanmade and may have aged poorly w noncanon visuals so don't fully let your guard down) and most if not all written materials have tls by @/pricechecktranslations here on tumblr. obligatory warning for a lot of incest and also everyone fucking dying goes here, there are more cws that should be attached to it but we'd be here literally for fucking ever if i were to list all of them bc it's huge and every bad thing happens at least once but those are the two big ones that happen in most if not all arcs.

[rohitdigitalsblog]

 Best Multimedia Iinstitute in Rohini 

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Portraits of Queen West

Tomorrow (September 14), I'm hosting the EFF Awards in San Francisco. On September 22, I'm (virtually) presenting at the DIG Festival in Modena, Italy.

Portraits of Queen West is Kevin Steele's extraordinary photo-book, a work of "sequential art" featuring time- and space-series of a single – rather glorious – stretch of Toronto's Queen Street West:

https://crowdfundr.com/queenwest

Steele himself is as extraordinary as his book. I first ran into him through Mackerel Multimedia, the pioneering Canadian multimedia shop that he co-founded in the early 1990s – one of those art-school kids who discovered the Mac, fell in love with the radical possibilities of digital art, and changed the world:

https://craphound.com/nonfic/mackerel.html

Steele's pioneering work – in Hypercard, then CDROMs, then Flash – helped define the look-and-feel of the old, good internet; an urbanist feel that owed a debt to Toronto's most beloved adopted urbanist, Jane Jacobs. Steele and Mackerel made things that were beautiful and human-centered, human-scaled and human-adaptable.

Not for nothing, Hypercard presaged the web's critical "view source" affordance, which allowed people to copy, modify, customize and improve on the things that they found delightful or useful; this affordance was later adapted by other human-centered projects like Scratch, and is a powerful tonic against enshittification.

Mackerel didn't survive the first great multimedia mass-extinction, but it launched the careers of a whole generation of talented web-writers and builders, and not just its former employees, but also the millions who were touched by its work.

I haven't seen Steele in person in decades, but I follow his work – not as a multimedia artist, but as an urban photographer. Kevin and I follow each other on Flickr – the once great and great again photo-sharing site that survived decades of abuse from Yahoo and Verizon before being taken indie and rescued by the Smugmug folks.

Back in November 2010, Kevin started posting photos of individual storefronts on Queen Street West to Flickr. They were painstakingly labeled and dated, and they multiplied. By the end of the year, there were a couple dozen of them:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-posted-desc&safe_search=1&tags=queenstreetwest&user_id=92518741%40N00&view_all=1&min_upload_date=1073368800&max_upload_date=1294552799

A year later, there were hundreds:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-posted-desc&safe_search=1&tags=queenstreetwest&user_id=92518741%40N00&view_all=1&min_upload_date=1073368800&max_upload_date=1326088799

Today, there are over 1,200 of these:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=queenstreetwest&user_id=92518741%40N00&view_all=1

Now, I know Queen Street West very well. It was once one of Toronto's most bohemian neighborhoods, where my paternal grandfather's fellow refugee Benny Yacht has his schmata shop and where my maternal grandfather took my mother and her siblings to trade in their comics for credit at cramped, crammed used bookstores.

I discovered Queen West as a pre-teen, thanks to Bakka Books – now Bakka Phoenix – the oldest science fiction bookstore in the world. I haunted Bakka, and, on the way, found myself drawn into the other stores around it:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/doctorow/48476314831/in/photolist-2gRFMvz-2oJJDCY

There was Silver Snail, a massive comics shop, but a bounty of used bookstores, vintage clothing stores, thrift shops, the indescribably great electronics store Active Surplus and, later, nightclubs like the Rivoli, the Diamond, the Bovine Sex Club and the Zoo Bar.

For a critical decade of my life and more, the stretch of Queen Street that Steele obsessively documented in his Flickr feed had been the center of my life. I watched it thrive and grow – and then collapse into a kind of self-parody, as the original landlords (like Bakka's landlord) died, and their failsons and faildaughters kicked out longstanding tenants and replaced them with multinational "brands" that turned Queen West into a less-convenient, open-air version of the sterile Eaton Centre mall.

Steele, it turns out, was having similar feelings of dismay as the organic, grown, chaotic delight became groomed, sterile and homogenized. After a 2008 fire wiped out an entire block of Queen West – including Duke's Cycle, a city institution that eventually shuttered after more than a century of service – Steele began his documentation project.

Steele had started documenting the street in 2001, but that fire turned a hobby into a project. Over and over again, Steele returned to the street, meticulously photographing the same storefronts, capturing a time-series that eventually spanned 16 years, from 2001-2017. Steele gradually stitched these photos together into panoramic collages, reproducing whole blocks:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=linearpanorama&user_id=92518741%40N00&view_all=1

It is these "linear panoramas" that form the backbone of Portraits of Queen West. The book runs 162 pages, and it meant to be read forwards and backwards – start from the front cover and turn the pages to see the north side of the street, along with insets showing details (like the storied Graffiti Alley), and then flip the book over and start again, seeing the south side.

For more than a decade, I've thrilled to my unexpected trips through Steele's time-machine, as he posted his space-and-time-series images of a vanished urbanism, an old, good city that paralleled the old, good web. I got a peek at a PDF of the new book that collects these extraordinary image and immediately pre-ordered a copy.

Steele and his publisher Black Eye Books are crowdfunding presales of the book on Crowdfundr; the book is CAD40 with shipping (there's also a deluxe edition at CAD55, which comes with a signed bookplate and six postcards):

https://crowdfundr.com/queenwest

After a string of ghastly mayors – each finding new depths of depravity, selfishness and mismanagement to plumb – Toronto just elected its first progressive mayor in a generation, the wonderful Olivia Chow, for whom I used to ring doorbells support of her city council campaigns:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/27/olivia-chow-wins-election-as-torontos-first-chinese-canadian-mayor

Anything that can't go on forever eventually stops. The enshittification of the old, good web continues apace, but there has never been more energy to build a new, good internet – and banish the enshitternet of Big Tech to the scrapheap of history.

In the same way, Toronto's much eroded urbanism, pluralism and liveability are both at their lowest ebb in my lifetime – and also at their most hopeful moment of the century. In 1998, the dead-eyed Romneyoid Premier of Ontario Mike Harris "amalgamated" Toronto with its suburbs, putting it at the mercy of car-addled out-of-towners in an act of gerrymandering that all-but-guaranteed that city residents' political choices would be swamped by suburbanites who could be convinced to vote for laughable Tory bumblefucks like Rob Ford.

Overcoming the gerrymander required a massive turnout – not merely a supermajority, but an ultramajority of politically motivated, organized, committed, pissed off Torontonians; Chow's election is a minor miracle that part of the wave of other historic reversals, like the DoJ awakening from its coma to drag Google into court on antitrust charges.

We are a long way away from making a new, good internet that's a worthy successor to the old, good internet, and at least as far from a new, good Toronto that the people of the old, good Toronto would have built but for Tory wreckers and the Christmas-voting turkeys who elevated them to office. But both are possible – and both demand that we fight for them.

Steele's beautiful photodocumentary of one slice of that old, good city doesn't just memorialize the world we lost – it is inspiration for a world that is ours to win.

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

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/13/spadina-to-bathurst/#dukes-cycle

EFF Awards, San Francisco, September 14

[imasloid]

SHINY COLORS FASHION ANALYSIS: Kiriko Yukoku (幽谷霧子)

"It's not that I have an injury, but... the reason I'm wearing these bandages is… a secret."

This is a project analyzing and taking a look at the fashion design and application in the multimedia series, The IDOLM@STER: Shiny Colors. This section is about the mysterious and soft-spoken bandaged girl of the series, Kiriko Yukoku! If you want to jump to a specific section, go here!

(This is a reprint of my thread on Twitter. I put it on Tumblr for easier reading and for archiving purposes. Enjoy!)

-----

INTRODUCTION

“Kiriko is a silver-haired girl who exudes a mysterious atmosphere, most notable by her ephemeral nature and being wrapped in bandages. Soft-spoken but kind-hearted. She is very empathetic, sensitive, and interacts with the world around her in a very peculiar way. ”

---

Profile

Age: 17

Birthday: September 23rd

Height: 160 cm

Weight: 51 kg

Blood Type: AB

Hometown: Fukushima

Hobbies: Collecting cute things, handcrafts, blood donation

Special Skills: Wrapping bandages beautifully, stepping silently, peeling apples

CV: Yuina Mizuki

---

Before starting the analysis, I would suggest if you haven’t already, read her W.I.N.G. (introductory) commu (through the broswer game's English patch or on YouTube). If you don’t play the game, I would listen to her image song and read the lyrics to get a better sense of her character.

-----

STYLE BREAKDOWN

Kiriko’s fashion style takes great influence from girly-kei fashion, a feminine style that emphasizes cuteness. However, Kiriko turns it into her own by making it more casual, desaturated, and minimalistic, fitting her mysterious, dollish, ghost-like first impression.

Before going into fashion influences, Kiriko has doll-like qualities that aren’t clothing-related that synergize well with her simple design like porcelain skin & light, natural makeup. The attributes listed here combine with her dolly clothing to make her look like a mannequin.

Girly-kei fashion is the main influence on Kiriko’s style, following a common silhouette and typical elements of the style, like ribbons, lace, and heeled dress shoes. She makes it her own by dressing the style down as well as simplifying the outfit composition and silhouette.

Many of Kiriko’s coords take common elements from other girly-kei subtypes leading to a versatile but reined-in wardrobe. Though the style inspirations are varied, a consistent silhouette and repeated bijou elements like ribbons, frills, and ruffles unite her looks.

Another prominent influence on Kiriko’s style is “classical,” an adult, elegant fashion inspired by film actresses of the 1940s-1970s. It comprises of layering basics and a balance of both bold and natural colors, bringing out Kiriko’s mysterious elegance in a less dollish way.

Preppy influence in Kiriko’s wardrobe is easily seen in the her early outfits and forms her usual silhouette & outfit composition that’s seen as the foundation of many of her outfits. Though it really defines her early wardrobe, the influence is more subtle in her later outfits.

Her bandages are a huge part of her identity & how she presents herself. Kiriko doesn’t wear them for fashion reasons or having a fragile body, but they act as a “good luck charm” for her extreme anxiety. It also ties back to her dollish demeanor and how she lives at a hospital.

Kiriko’s image color is an icy light blue, perhaps relating to her mental fragility and her use of bandages. It’s a very dreamy and ephemeral color and synergizes with her doll-like lightness and girly elegance.

Kiriko’s color palette comprises primarily of dull & light neutrals used as a foundation for most of her outfits. This palette often either colors the whole outfit or takes a back seat to a secondary palette of vibrant cool tones and grays.

-----

STYLE ANALYSIS

Kiriko auditioned at the production to be an idol to “boost her self-confidence” and improve her timid nature. When Producer asks her about her bandages, she lies and said she “bumped into something.” Kiriko says putting them on makes her feel at peace.

Kiriko’s name in kanji (幽谷霧子) contains the character “幽 (yu)” commonly attributed with the word for ghost “幽霊 (yuurei)” and the character “霧 (kiri)” meaning “fog” or “mist.” As such, Kiriko is most known for her fragile and ephemeral appearance.

As touched on in the last section, Kiriko has many qualities that make her feel like a living doll. This sentiment is shared by the other members of L’antica, often complimenting her and how just looking at Kiriko makes them feel “at peace.”

Many of her earlier outfits had her outfits in the same silhouette, like a fashion mannequin, with a collared top and flared above-the-knee-length skirt. Before major development, she was characterized with this dollish silhouette in the beginning.

Also mentioned in the previous section, Kiriko is a huge worrywart: constantly anxious about other’s physical and emotional states and very sensitive to how others interact with her. She tends to bite her tongue and finds it hard to speak freely to others.

Her extreme anxiety isn’t limited to just people, but also real-life events and even inanimate objects’ feelings. As stated before, her bandages are a “talisman” Kiriko uses to calm herself down and “protect” her before she gets “injured” by her pangs of unease.

The frequency and size of her bandages have a direct relation to how much her anxieties are hindering her, bigger size & higher frequency relating to a weaker mental state. Kiriko wore them constantly, but as her character got developed she started relying on them less & less.

She only wears her forehead bandage and sometimes even doesn’t wear any at all in her most recent cards, showing her growth in how she interacts with her anxiety. To add, Kiriko has never been “ashamed” of her bandages either and considers them a part of her identity.

Her bandages also relate to her medical background with both of her parents being doctors, living in hospital dormitory housing, having a hobby of donating blood, and often volunteering at said hospital. Her main color palette of whites/light grays also relate to this.

Kiriko is also very smart to where her career advisor encouraged her to become a medical professional. She is a methodical person with a sharp memory; her preppy influences in her fashion also call back to this as well.

Another trait about Kiriko is her “ephemeral” and “fantastical” aura like that of a fairy-tale character. Some things she does are personify inanimate objects, have vivid daydreams that tend to bleed into reality, and having a very surreal sense of humor.

Though she has notable anxiety, Kiriko’s personality is simple, positive, and tends to see the good in the world and in others (which is why she worries so much about everything). She is easily awestruck and has a high sense of wonder for the world.

Her fashion really suits that side of her personality well with lots of hazy, muted colors, soft fabrics, light textures, bijou detailing, and flowy and oversized clothing pieces. It makes the viewer feel like they’re also in one of her daydreams.

Kiriko’s fashion evolution is subtle, but you can see how her style influences change in the beginning, middle, and end as her character develops. Though her fashion changes, her dollish, plush, mysterious, and dreamy aura stays intact.

-----

This is it for Kiriko Yukoku!

If you liked this thread, check out my Twitter and give me a tip on Ko-Fi so I can do more things like this with other idol series! Thanks for reading <3

Next section: Houkago Climax Girls

[saiintvalentiine]

what's unfiction?

the word comes from the now defunct unfiction forms where people used to go to talk and play alternate reality games (ARGs). It's come to define unconventional storytelling methods. I really like the definition NightMind has up on the index, which is:

a form of fictional storytelling that utilizes varying measures of interaction, immersion, or multimedia delivery beyond traditional bounds of the mediums used to conduct an experience under the roleplaying premise, “this is (not) a game”

this encompasses ARGs, though not all unfiction works are ARGs. ARGs require audience interaction— a "game" aspect— to be an ARG. so things like oldroot are ARGs, where audience code cracking is required to tell the story, but what zeemyth does for example falls under unfiction but has no game aspects so it's not an ARG. we're supposed to take zeemyth videos as not being a game— the roleplay and reality of it must be taken as real to fully engage with it.

[bundeslihaha]

Bundeslihaha's 10th Anniversary Retrospective

Yes, Bundeslihaha, the multimedia football gijinka/personification series centering on German football, is a decade old now: 14 September 2014 - 14 September 2024 (and counting!)

Bundeslihaha: Where Fussball Meets Fun, Bundeslihaha Redux, and all its many spin-offs and AUs is truly a defining part of my life. It has been fun, funny, joyful, awful, valuable, shocking, and more - bringing me to the entire spectrum of emotions. I've learned art, writing, and also how (not) to interact with fandom, especially the football fandom. I also had a few original stories being directly inspired by this lovely personification series~ it's that powerful! ;D

Thank you, all of you, for following, reading, commenting, liking, reblogging, and even just lurking around my work for the past ten years! Not just Tumblr or AO3 - I know some people also followed me on Facebook, Deviantart, and even read my non-fiction work on several football websites.

I wish I could make a longer and more eventful (with comics/pictures) retrospective post - I would love to! Perhaps when the responsibilities subside a little bit, but that might take years. Ten years is a huge deal, after all, and no other project of mine has lived this long (hiatuses notwithstanding).

However, here's some stuff I want you all to know:

One: I am truly, eternally grateful for people who have become my mutuals and friends through this story. I am also beyond touched that this series could inspire other people to make their own football club personifications! I encourage you all to keep going as long as it brings you joy <3 Feel free to send me your football gijinka art (yes, even your own - I'm not only interested in Bundeslihaha), it always gets me so excited! :D

Two: I am proud of myself. I remember Bundeslihaha fondly - the good and the bad. I cherish everything that's been drawn, written, thought, brainstormed, roleplayed, discussed with friends, etc. for the past decade.

Three: I do not regret the long hiatuses. They had to happen, for the sake of my physical and mental well-being.

Four: I am still alive and kicking (metaphorically). This also means that I've matured somewhat, not just in art quality, but also personally. So I have different priorities now - and posting for an audience has grown very low on that list. The good thing about not posting (especially with the matchday schedules as deadlines) is that there's no more pressure - it's great! Especially with the fact that I can't decide on club designs, backstories, etc.... Bundeslihaha canon is very flexible and malleable nowadays. As a result:

Five: Bundeslihaha is now a mostly-personal affair: shared with friends and mutuals in a back-and-forth in private messages. This may change a few years down the line, and I may still post here or on Instagram from time to time, but I make no promises. If you want to DM me, feel free! We don't even have to become friends and get personal - I don't mind talking to mutuals solely about this (and your own work, personification-related or not).

Six: I have neither the time nor energy to follow the Bundesligen (women's 1. and men's 1. and 2.) regularly, much less European matches, but SC Freiburg is still the most special in my heart. <3

Thank you once again, not just for supporting me through this, but also for reading this post. Take care! :D