#Isoc

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Defense (of the internet) (from billionaires) in depth

Picks and Shovels is a new, standalone technothriller starring Marty Hench, my two-fisted, hard-fighting, tech-scam-busting forensic accountant. You can pre-order it on my latest Kickstarter, which features a brilliant audiobook read by Wil Wheaton.

The only way to truly billionaire-proof the internet is to a) abolish billionaires and b) abolish the system that allows people to become billionaires. Short of that, any levees we build will need constant tending, reinforcement, and re-evaluation.

That's normal. No security measure (including billionaire-proofing the internet) is a "set and forget" affair. Any time you want something and someone else wants the opposite, you are stuck in an endless game of attack and defense. The measures that block your adversary today will only work until your adversary changes tactics to circumvent your defenses.

For example, mining all the links on the internet to find non-spam sites worked brilliantly for Google, because until Pagerank, there were zero reasons for spammers to get links to point to their sites. Once Google became the dominant way of finding things on the internet, spammers invented the linkfarm. This principle can be summed up as "Show me a ten-foot wall and I'll show you an eleven-foot ladder."

Security designers address this with something called "defense in depth": that's a series of overlapping defenses that are meant to correct for one another's weaknesses. Your bank might use a password, a 2FA code, and – for extremely high-stakes transactions – a series of biographical questions posed by a human customer service over a telephone line.

I've written extensively about defending a new, good internet from billionaire enshittifiers. For example, in this post, I described how Bluesky could be made enshittification-resistant with the use of "Ulysses Pacts" – self-imposed, binding restrictions on enshittification:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/02/ulysses-pact/#tie-yourself-to-a-federated-mast

A classic example of a Ulysses Pact is "throwing away the Oreos when you go on a diet." Now, it doesn't take a lot of work to devise a countermeasure your future, Oreo-craving self can take to defeat this measure: just drive to the grocery store and buy more Oreos. This even works at 2AM, provided you live within driving distance of an all-night grocer.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't throw away those Oreos. Depending on how strong your Oreo craving is, even a little friction can help you resist the temptation to ruin your diet. We often do bad things because of momentary impulses that fade quickly, and simply airgapping the connection between thought and deed works surprisingly well in many instances.

This is why places with fewer guns have fewer suicides of all kinds: there are plenty of ways to kill yourself, but none are quite so quick and reliable as a gun. People in the grips of a suicidal impulse who don't have guns have more chances to let the impulse pass (this is also why gun control leads to fewer all-cause homicides). So just because a measure is imperfect, that doesn't make it worthless.

If you're trying to give up drinking, you throw away all your booze, but you also go to meetings, and you get a sponsor who can help you out with a 2AM phone call. You might even put a breathalyzer on your car's ignition system. None of these are impossible to defeat (you can get an Uber to the liquor store, after all), but they all create friction between the thing you want, and the thing your adversary (your addiction) is trying to get. They strengthen the hand of you as defender of the sober status quo, against the attacker who wants you to relapse.

Critically, all these defensive measures also buy you space and time that you can use to organize and deploy more defenses. Maybe the long Uber ride to the liquor store gives you enough time to think about your actions so you call your sponsor from the parking lot. Defense is useful even when it only slows your adversary, rather than stopping your adversary in their tracks.

Scaling up from personal defense to societal-scale security considerations, it's useful to think of this as a battle with four fronts: code (what is technically im/possible?), law (what is il/legal?), norms (what is socially un/acceptable?) and markets (what is un/profitable?). This framework was first raised a quarter-century ago, in Larry Lessig's Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Code_And_Other_Laws_of_Cyberspace_Version_2_0.pdf

Lessig laid out these four forces as four angles of attack that challengers to the status quo should plan their strategy around. If you want to liberalize copyright, you can try norms (the "Free Mickey" campaign), laws (the Eldred v. Ashcroft Supreme Court case), code (machine-readable Creative Commons licenses) and markets (open access/free software businesses). Each one of these helps the other – for example, if lots of people believe in copyright reform (norms), more of them will back a Humble Bundle for open access materials (markets), and more lawmakers will be interested in changing copyright statutes (law), and more hackers will see reason to do cool things with CC licenses, like search engines (code).

But the four forces aren't just for attackers seeking to disrupt the status quo – they're just as important for defenders looking to create and sustain a new status quo. Figuring out how to "lock a system open" is very different from figuring out how to "force a system open." But they're both campaigns waged with code, law, norms and markets.

We're living through a key moment in enshittification history. Millions of people have become dissatisfied with legacy social media companies run by despicable, fascism-friendly billionaires like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg and are ready to leave, despite the costs (losing contact with friends who stay behind). While many of them are moving to group chats and private Discord servers,tens of millions have moved to new social media platforms that advertise (though they don't necessarily deliver) decentralization: Mastodon (and the fediverse) and Bluesky (and the atmosphere).

Decentralization is itself a defensive countermeasure (code). When a service has diffuse power, it's harder for any one person to take it over. Federation adds another defensive layer, because users who don't like the way one server is run can move to another server, with varying degrees of data- and identity-portability. That makes it harder for server owners to squeeze users to make money (markets), and gives them an out if server owners try it anyway.

Federation with decentralization is my favorite anti-enshittification defense. It's powerful as hell. It's the main reason I endorse Free Our Feeds, an effort to (among other things) build more Bluesky servers to decrease the centralization and give users dissatisfied with Bluesky management an alternative:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/20/capitalist-unrealism/#praxis

That said, decentralization and federation are not perfect, set-and-forget defenses. Take email – the oldest, most successful federated system of them all. Email is nominally decentralized, but most email traffic goes through a handful of extremely large servers run by a cartel of companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft, and a few ISPs). These companies collude (or, more charitably, coordinate) to block email from non-cartel companies, in the name of fighting spam. This makes running your own mail server so hard that it is nearly impossible (that is, if you care about people actually receiving the email you send them):

https://pluralistic.net/2021/10/10/dead-letters/

What's interesting about enshittified email is that it didn't start with corporate takeover: it started with volunteer-maintained blocklists of untrustworthy servers that most email operators subscribed to, defederating from any server that appeared on the list. These blocklists of bad servers were opaque (often, their maintainers would operate anonymously, citing the threat of retaliation from criminal scammers whose servers appeared on the list). They had little or no appeal process, and few or no objective criteria for inclusion (you could be blocklisted for how your email server was configured, even if no one was using it to send spam). All of this set up the conditions to favor large email servers, and also had the effect of immunizing these large servers from appearing on blocklists. I mean, once three quarters of the internet is on Gmail, no one is going to block email from Gmail, even if a ton of spam is sent using its servers.

The lesson of email doesn't mean email is bad, nor does it mean decentralization and federation are useless. It doesn't even mean that blocklists of bad servers are evil. It just means that federation and decentralization are imperfect and insufficient defenses against enshittification, and that blocklists are useful, but very dangerous. It means that we should strive to keep our systems federated and decentralized, and watch our blocklists very carefully, and not rely on any of this as the only defense against enshittification.

Likewise, both Mastodon and Bluesky are built on free/open code and standards. That means that anyone can fork them, fix them or mod them. What's more, the licenses involved are irrevocable, making them very effective Ulysses Pacts. No one – not a CEO, not a VC investor, not a court or a blackmailer – can order someone to make their GPL code proprietary. The license is perpetual and irrevocable, and that's that.

Free/open licenses are excellent Ulysses Pacts and great code-related defenses against enshittification, but they, too, are imperfect and insufficient. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft have all figured out how to enshittify services that are built on free/open code:

https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/libreplanet-2018-keynote

And then there are all the companies that use free/open code and defeat the freedom and openness by simply violating the license, on the grounds that a decentralized, federated development community can't figure out who has standing to sue, and also can't afford to pay for the lawyers to do so:

https://sfconservancy.org/news/2022/may/16/vizio-remand-win/

That's not to say that code-based antienshittification measures are pointless – only to say that they need other measures to backstop them, as defense in depth. Let's talk about law, then. Both Mastodon and Bluesky are governed by legal entities that are, nominally, organized by charters that oblige them to eschew enshittification and be responsive to their users (Bluesky is a B-corp, Mastodon's code is overseen by a US nonprofit).

These structures are very important. I've been a volunteer board member for several co-ops and nonprofits (I was even once a volunteer for a nonprofit co-op!) and I'm familiar with the role that good governance can play in defending a project from internal and external pressures to betray its mission. That means I'm also familiar with the limits of these governance measures.

Take nonprofits: nominally, nonprofits are legally bound to serve their charitable purpose, and technically, stakeholders have legal recourse if they stray from this. But you don't have to look far to find nonprofits that have violated their charter and gotten away with it. Take the Nature Conservancy, which has become a key player in the market for fake "carbon offsets" that are used to justify everything from fossil fuel extraction to SUV manufacture:

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

Or think of ISOC, who get tens of millions of dollars in free money every year from their stewardship of the .ORG registry, but who decided to hand over control of the nonprofits' TLD of choice to a shadowy cabal of hedge-fund billionaires:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/how-we-saved-org-2020-review

Co-ops, too, are powerful but wildly imperfect. REI is a member co-op that does lots of great things…and also busts unions:

https://prismreports.org/2024/07/17/rei-workers-unionizing-fighting-for-agreemment/

But REI is a paragon of social virtue compared to its Canadian equivalent, Mountain Equipment Coop, whose board was taken over by corrupt assholes who then sold the whole thing to a US private equity fund and change the name to "MEC":

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/16/spike-lee-joint/#casse-le-mec

B-corps are far from perfect, too: while they are nominally required to serve a positive social purpose, in practice, they can violate that purpose with impunity, whether that through greenwashing:

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240202-has-b-corp-certification-turned-into-corporate-greenwashing

Or Kickstarter insiders taking a $100m bribe to help Andreesen-Horowitz do a crypto pump-and-dump:

https://fortune.com/crypto/2024/03/11/kickstarter-blockchain-a16z-crypto-secret-investment-chris-dixon/

None of this is to claim that B-corps, co-ops, and nonprofits are useless. Maybe we should just give up on organization altogether and have some kind of adhocracy? If you're thinking this will help, then you need to read Jo Freeman's "The Tyranny of Structurelessness" and learn how a "leaderless" group is actually led by its least scrupulous, most Machiavellian schemers:

https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm

At this point, you might be mentally designing a new corporate structure, one that's designed to correct for both the tyranny of structurelessness and the brittleness of co-ops, nonprofits and B-corps. Please don't do this. Rolling your own corporate structure is like rolling your own cryptography or your own free software license. It always ends in tears:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openai-remove-non-profit-control-give-sam-altman-equity-sources-say-2024-09-25/

I like co-ops, nonprofits and B-corps. They're powerful – but insufficient – weapons against enshittification. They need to be backstopped by other measures, like norms. Normative measures are very powerful! Of course, mass revolts of angry users don't always keep companies from enshittifying:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/30/reddit-moderator-protest-communities-social-media

But sometimes they do. The C-suite of Unity was shown the door after enshittifying their flagship product:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/10/23911338/unity-ceo-steps-down-developers-react

As was the enshittifying CEO of Sonos:

https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/13/24342179/sonos-ceo-patrick-spence-resignation-reason-app

And of course, these defensive measures reinforce one another. The public outcry against the .ORG selloff (norms) led to California's Attorney General stepping in (law), and after that, we more-or-less romped to victory:

https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/17/icann_california_org_sale_delay/

Markets are the final antienshittificatory force. If a social network is designed to be surveillance-resistant, it will be (very) hard to implement behavioral surveillance advertising. If a network is designed to support a many clients, it will be easy to implement an ad-blocker. Both factors make advertising-based businesses very unattractive to individual server operators, spammers, and VCs who back companies that operate elements of a federated server.

Same goes for systems that allow users to control the recommendations and other algorithmic aspects of their feeds (including switching these off altogether). The fact that Tiktok's users overwhelmingly use an algorithmic feed that they have no way to control or even understand is an anti-Ulysses Pact, an irresistible temptation for Tiktok to enshittify itself:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys

By contrast, it's much harder to pull those shenanigans with services that technologically devolve control over recommendations (code), making it less profitable to even try to attempt this (markets). And of course, if users refuse to tolerate this kind of thing (norms) and can hop to other servers (code), then any system that pulls that nonsense will lose lots of users and go broke (markets).

This defense-in-depth approach to decentralized social media pushes us to analyze both Mastodon and Bluesky through a tactical lens – to identify the weak parts in the defenses of each and shore them up.

Take Free Our Feeds and its attempt to stand up more Bluesky servers. This addresses one of the serious technical deficiencies in Bluesky (the lack of federation), and if lots of Bluesky users try it out, it will normalize the idea that Bluesky is a constellation of independently managed servers (norms). It also creates Bluesky alternatives with radically different commercial imperatives (markets), because the main Bluesky server is backed by venture capitalists, who are notorious for their enshittifying impulses.

But security isn't static – a tactic that works today won't work tomorrow if your adversary can figure out a way around it. Bluesky is a B-corp with an excellent board with some names I have profound trust for, but B-corps can abandon their public benefit purpose, and boards can be fired (and also even people you trust can talk themselves into doing stupid and wicked things, see .ORG).

If millions of Bluesky users flock to a rival service, one run by a nonprofit (markets), Bluesky's investors might be tempted to sever the link between Bluesky and that new server (code). That's what Facebook and Apple did to XMPP, an interoperable, federated messaging system that used to connect Apple users, Facebook users, and users of many other servers. They did this for commercial reasons (markets), to trap and lock in their users (code), and they got away with it because not enough users were outraged by this (norms) that they could get away with it.

When Bluesky's VCs fire the CEO, kick people like Mike Masnick off its board, and then defederate from Free Our Feeds' server, how do we make that more like Sonos or Unity (where the corporation capitulated to its users), and not like Reddit (where the user revolt was crushed)?

With social media, it's a numbers game. Social media grows by network effects: the more users there are in a system, the more valuable it is. It's not merely imperative to create alternative Bluesky servers, it's imperative to make them populous enough that cutting them off from the first Bluesky server will inflict more pain on the company than it inflicts on those other users. That's not a guarantee that Bluesky's future, enshittification-bent management won't go ahead and do it anyway, but it does increase the chances that if they press on, their users will take the hit to defect to free/open servers.

Bluesky has other problems besides its centralization, of course. The reason Bluesky is so centralized is that it's really expensive to run an alternative Bluesky server that provides a home for users who have left the main server (a "relay" in Bluesky-ese). Partly this is down to tooling: because no one has done it, Free Our Feeds will have to invent a lot of stuff to get that server up and running, but people who come later will benefit from whatever Free Our Feeds develops along the way.

But mostly, this isn't a tooling problem – it's an architecture problem. The way that Bluesky is structured demands a lot more of relays than Mastodon demands of "instances" (a loose Fediverse analog to relays):

https://www.techdirt.com/2025/01/21/the-technological-poison-pill-how-atprotocol-encourages-competition-resists-evil-billionaires-lock-in-enshittification/#comment-4253477

This is a code problem, and it's a hard one, but it's not insurmountable. The history of networked tools is the history of developers figuring out how to break apart large, monolithic, expensive services in cheaper, smaller, easier to develop. In other words, our defense in depth of Bluesky militates for more than one project – not just a "Free Our Feeds" but also a software development project to make it easier for anyone to free those feeds.

Which raises some important questions, the biggest being "Why bother?" After all, there's already a perfectly good Fediverse that could sure use the money and effort that Free Our Feeds is proposing to put into Bluesky. My main answer here is that the point of disenshittification is an enshittification-free internet, not a better Mastodon:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/20/capitalist-unrealism/#praxis

We want to set Bluesky users free because the problem with Bluesky isn't its users, it's the fact that there's no fire-exits those users can avail themselves of if Bluesky's VCs set it on fire:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/12/14/fire-exits/#graceful-failure-modes

But there's another good reason to do this, one that involves people who have no interest in using Bluesky: even if you don't want to use a better Bluesky, you likely have very good reasons to reach Bluesky users. Maybe you want them to help you organize against enshittification! Or maybe you just want to operate a real-world venue where people can gather and have a great time and support performers, and right now you're stuck advertising on Facebook and Instagram, and you don't want to end up being forced to use an enshittified, fire-exit-free Bluesky in the future:

https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2025/01/13.html

Of course, there's plenty of reasons to want to make Mastodon better. Many of Mastodon's features are absurdly primitive – the lack of threading support and quote-boosting sucks, and the supposedly opt-in system-wide search doesn't work, even if you opt in. Masto could sure use some of the money that Free Our Feeds is asking for to spruce up Bluesky.

This is true, but also irrelevant. Mastodon is stuck at around a million active users, while Bluesky has twenty times that amount. Crowdfunding a couple dollars per user to pursue software development is a reasonable goal, but raising twenty times that much is a lot harder:

https://mastodon-analytics.com/

The money being raised for Free Our Feeds isn't money that had been earmarked for Mastodon development, nor will abandoning Free Our Feeds redirect those funds to Mastodon development.

Which isn't to say that we shouldn't chip in to fund Mastodon development. I donated to the Kickstarter for Pixelfed, a Fediverse Insta replacement that has Meta so scared that they'll suspend your account if you even mention it:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pixelfed/pixelfed-foundation-2024-real-ethical-social-networks

Adding Insta-like features to Mastodon is great. Fixing search, quoting, and threading would be great, too. We probably need some kind of governance efforts to keep volunteer-run, good faith defederation blocklists from exhibiting the same dynamics that email went through during the spam wars. There's some Bluesky features I'd love to see on Mastodon, like composable moderation and user-controlled, user-tunable recommendations. We also probably need some kind of adversarial press that closely monitors the governance structure for the Mastodon codebase and reports on process in standardization (I cannot overstate how much fuckery can take place within standards bodies, under cover of a nigh-impermeable shield of boringness).

Breaking Bluesky open is a priority. Keeping Mastodon open is a priority. But neither of these are goals unto themselves. The point is to set people free, not set technology free. Willie Sutton robbed banks because "that's where the money is." Right now, I'm interested in anti-enshittification measures for Bluesky because "that's where the people are."

Check out my Kickstarter to pre-order copies of my next novel, Picks and Shovels!

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/2025/01/23/defense-in-depth/#self-marginalization

Image: Mike Baird (modified) https://flickr.com/photos/mikebaird/2354116406

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

[dailyrockman]

1574: Isoc

Patreon | Twitter | Ko-fi

[blue-skytan]

I’ll be the perfect daughter

[babacomic]

mazes and monsters

transcript

Fofo, It, Keke, and Me are staring at a game board. Fofo is wearing a costume. It: (I wonder how close I can get to breaking the fourth wall before the others start to notice?) Keke: Mage pulls a wand out of his hammer space. Me: The Monster inches closer. Fofo: As the Monster encroaches and approaches upon Mage, I stare down its gaping maw. I think for a moment, then roll a die, to observe my surroundings. Me: You got a 5.

[carsthatnevermadeitetc]

IsoCity, 1999, by Zagato. A city car concept powered by a 505cc Lombardini 2 cylinder engine with gullwing doors that might have revived the Iso marque but didn't. It was first presented at the Geneva Motor Show

[italiancarssince1946]

1999 Zagato Isocity

My tumblr-blogs:

www.tumblr.com/germancarssince1946 & www.tumblr.com/frenchcarssince1946 & www.tumblr.com/englishcarssince1946 & www.tumblr.com/italiancarssince1946 & www.tumblr.com/japanesecarssince1947 & www.tumblr.com/uscarssince1935

[oderu]

my deathless demon and white wolf... this game is eating me alive

[kinomiakai]

Hi, Kinomi!

Do you think Razzie will ever finish or continue it started over coffee?

I know this is out of the blue but it has been my favorite for more than a decade and it’s my dying wish at this point

Aww hey anon!! I have to admit, I read the first ISOC and never kept up with the dream bits and sidefics, so - in my head, it's been completed! I'm living in a dream world, I know hahaha. I'd love to see Rasengan22 come back to fic but mostly I just really hope they're doing well! We lost contact a bit ago, so I don't have any insider knowledge for you I'm afraid! <3 You have great taste in fics though ;)

[stevebattle]

ISOC the COSI robot (1986), Center of Science and Industry (COSI), Columbus, OH. ISOC was a mascot of COSI for several years. The first two photos show the radio-controlled version of ISOC. "1986, Richard Whiteside, 4, from John 23rd Head Start Fair Ave. Center gives ISOC the robot a hug at COSI." – The Columbus Dispatch. The remaining photos show the earlier, ISOC 256, a simple mechanical manned-robot introduced in 1979.

[spinningbuster98]

What Mega Man title from any of the subseries do you think has the worst story overall? personally I think Command Mission is a disaster that fails with everything it's trying to say.

I'd say that X6 overall takes the cake

Sure it's got some neat ideas going on with Gate and Alia...but that's all they are: ideas, with barely any fleshing out. The story itself, even ignoring the hilariously abysmal localization, is effectively just one giant messy retcon whose only real goal is resetting the ending of X5 just so the series could get milked some more

Zero coming back? No explanation! Which not only makes little sense logically but also from a character pov, since Zero was fine with dying in X5 if it mean peace in the world

The endings of X5 took place 3 years later? Nah it's 3 weeks

The good ending of X5 kinda implying that, following Zero's death, X is getting a bit edgier and more lethal, which may have served as an initial lead in to his original character change in the Zero series? Completely scrubbed out if existence

Eurasia either gets destroyed by Zero's attack, saving the planet, or the attack fails and the Earth gets thrown into an apocalyptic setting? Nah let's do both for some reason

The Wily subplot teased by X5? Let's add Isoc for some vague lip service to it and then abrubtly end it with no real payoff

Gate? He mostly only served to bring Sigma back for future games, and his backstory is really just Wily's when you think about it

X7 is also very close,in fact it's actually worse from a character standpoint, with X suffering the mother of all character assassinations, Axl being obnoxious, Red being an insurmountable dumbass, but at least that story's overall content is harmless, unlike X6's whose sheer existence reeks of corporate meddling and even forced some last minute rewrites for the Zero series

[randomblognumberfuck]

Some doodles and texts from GYM schoolshit time

1)Bit and Vile(+Cache) headshot

2)Zero L

3)Bit Tit

4)Isoc swap logo based on my au shit

(yeah Sigma is Scientist now🧍‍♀️)

[tulipselfships]

Mega Man X Masterlist

(These are not all the available characters. All Maverick bosses are able to be suggested.)

Agile:

Nothing Yet!

Alia:

Nothing Yet!

Axl:

Nothing Yet!

Bit:

Nothing Yet!

Byte:

Nothing Yet!

Colonel:

Nothing Yet!

Douglass:

Nothing Yet!

Dr. Cain:

Nothing Yet!

Dr. Doppler:

Nothing Yet!

Dynamo:

Nothing Yet!

Gate:

Nothing Yet!

General:

Nothing Yet!

Iris:

Nothing Yet!

Isoc:

Nothing Yet!

Layer:

Nothing Yet!

Lumine:

Nothing Yet!

Pallette:

Nothing Yet!

Red:

Nothing Yet!

Serges:

Nothing Yet!

Sigma:

Nothing Yet!

Signas:

Nothing Yet!

Vile:

Nothing Yet!

Violen:

Nothing Yet!

X:

Nothing Yet!

Zero:

Nothing Yet!

[mywifeymax]

Sadgirl(Kit walker x reader) Part 4

Y/n pov:

waking up I found myself in a room I looked over to see a pure looking nun "where am I?"I asked "Briarcliff you got into a bad accient but luckly we found you"The nun said I looked around "I need to leave"I said "I'm afraid not your not well It caused some truma on the brain so we going to have you treated here" She said

Leaving the room the next day I went into the common room and looked around and I walked to the couch as I hide my face away from everyone "Hi"A female voice said I looked up to see two women standing there "HI?"I asked "I am grace and this is lana"The girl said "I am y/n"I said Grace widen her eyes "wait as in the y/n kit talks about like his bestfriend?"Grace asked I nodded

The girls told me everything about Briarcliff how horrible it is how kit got throw into isocation because he got into a fight with another person"Grace said I sighed to myself "That's not even the worst part I was a victim of bloodyface last night luckly I got away but then I woke up here the sisters said that when I woke up I went completely insane"I said "The sisters here are not what you think they are y/n"Lana said "what do you mean by that?"I asked "They keep you here to do curel things to you and make you go more insane"Lana said I sighed "when kit get's out we need to leave"I said "I agree"Grace said "Okay then we leave when kit get's out in 3-4 days"Lana said I nodded "we need a plan"I said

The first three nights here was toture Lana and grace was right about all of it they keep you here so they have the sick pleasure to hurt you Today will be better though because kit is set to get out of isocation and tonight is movie night so we are planner our escape during then I got up and walked out of my room and saw grace and lana I walked to them "We need to tell kit the plan"Lana said I nodded "I can do it if anyone he can trust out of us it's me"I said "I agree"Lana said

Getting to the common room I saw kit I quickly went over to him and tapped his shouder and he turned around and widen his eyes "Y/n what are you doing here?"He asked "I became bloodyface victim luckliy I got away and then I got away in this car and he was so angry he shot himself infront of me and then I woke up here the sisters said I went crazy in the hostpital"I said "Your not crazy y/n"Kit said I smiled "I know and neither are you which is why we are leaving this place tonight"I said "that's really risky y/n"Kit said "it's either we leave this place or we be held here for the rest of our lives"I said "Your right"Kit said "The plan starts during movie night tonight"Grace said "And then when we get you out I can prove your innocent because I got a tape of bloodyface"I said "Your a geneius y/n"Kit said I smiled "No I'm just trying to prove that your innocent kit because I know you since I was 7 years old"I said I smiled and then we sat down on the couch

We all know that the plan will be risky but it's better than staying in this place for the rest of our lives I'm just happy I was able to be by kit's side again even after the huged agurement My feelings for him never went away but right now isn't the place for that not until we are out of this horrible place

As we we're talking I saw the doors open and I saw bloodyface walk in and he stared around and then his eyes fell on us and he smirk He was an evil man I will expose him for who he really is and then I will get this place shut down with along side of lana as she planned to do the same we will just do it together.

-To be continued-

[morbid-dreamzz]

do u think the thing under Douglas' chin is a beard or something else

It's just another part of his helmet (some characters in Megaman have things covering their chins too, these things are always clearly part of their helmets)

But perhaps it was added into his design to simulate a beard? Not sure, but it doesn't sound like a weird idea at all.

But like I said, I'm not sure, since some characters (Like Serges and Isoc) have explicitly implemented "beards" into their designs?? Idk if that makes sense

[alittleuniofmuses]

A little note to the comic post below;

Something I always feel is that I always fail to describe just how many Exo bots Rium has at her disposal. She may be a whiny, entitled, narcissistic bitch half the time, but she is a genuine threat when push comes to shove. Also, she and Isoc have an argument on a weekly basis, its cannon now :)

[currykitty]

1. To overcome my ED/body dismorphia / to be able to help my friends when they need me / to be able to create art for a long time

2. Kiki’s delivery service / pride and prejudice/ the devil wears Prada

3. You’ll be in my heart / moon river / lost without you

4. Biology / mythology / philosophy

5. Pink / teal / yellow

6. Itadori Yuuji / Mash / the grandma from Nora from Queens

7. Strawberries / mango / oranges

8. Schitts Creek / The Good Place / Parks and Rec

9. Reading / drawing / napping

10. Cake (moms banana cake specifically) / toast with butter and apricot jam / chocolate chip protein bar

11. Food Isn’t Medicine / Blue Period (does manga count??) / court of thorns and roses series (if they’re erm… horny 🤣)

12. Social media apps - YouTube / Tumblr / Pinterest

Non social media - Moonly / HRV4TRAINING / Balanced

13. Maths / Geometry ( my teacher was a sadist) / PE because of not getting picked or being afraid to not get picked

14. Librarian / museum curator / gallerist

15. “When you know better, do better” / “what you want my dear, frightens you to death - which is why you fail to comprehend yourself” / “freedom from approval is the birthplace of authenticity”

16. Coffee with soy milk / sleepy time tea / Moscow mule

17. Andy and April / Alexis and Ted and David and Patrick / Eleanor and Chidi

18. Singer / artist / archeologist (bc I had a crush on Lara Croft)

19. Cats / dogs / raccoons

20. Kind / silly / secretly dark

21. Movement / art / community

22. Movies - Everything Everywhere All At Once / any Disney movie (Toy Story 2 in particular) / Spirited Away

Books - Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince / Hunger Games / The Last Song

Tv Shows - The Good Place / Schitts Creek / Handmaids Tale

23. Mostly listen to podcasts when cleaning - Conspirituality Pod / Sounds like a Cult / Writing Excuses

24. Peggy’s Cove (anywhere in NS really) / Beaches / Serra Negra

25. Tim / Mari / mom

26. Indonesia / Australia / Scotland

27. Game nights with friends / go on walks / let things go

28. Chili / pasta / rice w strogonoff

29. Brave / unabashed / shiny

30. Letting Swarley go / moving to the US to be with Tim / a lot of moments from ISoC

31. Sunflowers / dandelions / poppies

32. July / October / August

33. Tobacco / sandalwood / linen

34. Van Gogh / Leonardo DaVinci / Jane Austen

35. Green beans / broccoli / zucchini

36. car / bicycle / cruise

37. Japanese / Korean / Russian

‘3 things....’ asks!

1. 3 things you wish for

2. 3 movies you have rewatched many times

3. 3 songs that mean something to you

4. 3 topics you’d love to learn more about

5. 3 colors to paint your room

6. 3 characters that inspire you

7. 3 fruits that you love the most

8. 3 tv shows that you never get bored of

9. 3 things you like doing on a rainy day

10. 3 things you like eating with coffee

11. 3 books that you would recommend everyone to read

12. 3 apps you use the most

13. 3 classes you used to hate in middle school

14. 3 professions that you would like to try

15. 3 quotes that have a special place in your life

16. 3 drinks you consume the most

17. 3 tv couples you adore the most

18. 3 dream jobs you’ve had in your childhood

19. 3 animals you’d love to take care of in your house

20. 3 adjectives that you’d use to describe yourself

21. 3 things you are the most passionate about

22. 3 movies/books/tv shows that made you cry

23. 3 songs you listen to while cleaning

24. 3 places that makes you feel peaceful

25. 3 people you’d never get tired of

26. 3 countries you’d love to visit

27. 3 things you wish you did more often

28. 3 things you love cooking/baking

29. 3 characteristics of the person you aspire to be

30. 3 moments you could never forget

31. 3 types of flowers you love the most

32. 3 months you enjoy the most

33. 3 scented candles that you love the most

34. 3 people in history that inspire you the most

35. 3 vegetables that you like the taste of

36. 3 ways of traveling that you enjoy the most

37. 3 languages you would love to learn