#Public Sector Employment

[jsrvanna]

Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) Recruitment 2025

January 31, 2025 Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) Recruitment 2025 is a Miniratna Category-I Public Sector Enterprise under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India. BDL has invited applications from eligible candidates for multiple positions in various disciplines. Important Post: Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited (BECIL) Recruitment 2025 Total Vacancies: 49 Job Post: Multiple…

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

* * * * *

"Less arguing and more doing."

November 25, 2024

Robert B. Hubbell

As we head into a holiday week that will (hopefully) see fewer political stories, I hope to publish shorter newsletters. We all need a break from the 24/7 news cycle—which has been unrelenting since November 5th. Whether the news cycle cooperates isn’t up to me, but I will do my best to be briefer and more selective in my coverage. But I will write (and record the audio version) every day over the holiday week. Despite the size of the newsletter community, you feel like part of our family—and the holiday wouldn’t be the same without you!

Trump's refusal to sign the transition ethics pledge is interfering with the transition!

To no one’s surprise, Trump's refusal to sign the transition agreements and ethics pledges required by Congress is hampering the transition process. Most importantly, Trump is free to accept money from anonymous donors who are “funding” transition activities—the very evil that the Presidential Transition Act is designed to prevent.

See NYTimes, Trump Is Running His Transition Team on Secret Money. (Accessible to all.)

Per the Times,  

Those seeking to curry favor with the incoming administration now have the opportunity to donate directly to the winning candidate without their names or potential conflicts ever entering the public sphere. And unlike with campaign contributions, foreign nationals are allowed to donate to the transition.

As noted by the Times, foreign nationals—like Vladimir Putin—could be funneling money to Trump under the guise of paying for office space, transportation, and computers necessary to prepare for the new administration. Is Putin funding Trump's transition? While the example is farfetched, we will likely never know because Trump's team has refused to enter into agreements that were supposed to be signed in September 2024.

Because the Trump team has failed to sign the required ethics and disclosure documentation, they have been denied access to federal agency briefings and secure email systems. See MSN, 'In the dark': Trump team reportedly getting 'blocked' after transition's ethics 'failure'

Per the MSN article, above,

For example, according to Politico, Trump's pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services has been "rebuffed" in efforts to communicate with outgoing government officials. Advisers to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reached out to the Health and Human Services Department multiple times after Donald Trump tapped him to lead the massive agency, hoping to jumpstart coordination before his takeover in late January. “They were rebuffed,” according to the report. "Kennedy’s inability to communicate with the agency he may soon manage . . . is just one consequence of the president-elect’s continued foot-dragging on signing the standard trio of ethics and transparency agreements with the federal government — something his team pledged to do shortly after the election.”

The failure of the incoming administration to sign ethics and disclosure documents is compounded by the failure of some nominees to submit to the typical FBI clearance process. As noted by CNN,

Critics say the intrusive background checks [by the FBI] sometimes turn up embarrassing information used to inflict political damage.

That’s the point of “intrusive background checks,” isn’t it? By turning up embarrassing information before the nominee is confirmed, the Senate has the opportunity to consider whether the nominee is fit for the job. Skipping the background checks is a way to obstruct the Senate—and creates the possibility that the nominee might by blackmailed by a foreign adversary.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy can’t keep their cost-cutting promises.

We should ignore the dog-and-pony show that is coming our way courtesy of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. They claim that they will cut $2 trillion from the annual budget—in large part from cutting the federal workforce. Both claims demonstrate a monumental ignorance of what portion of the US budget can be cut and how big the federal workforce is.

As explained by Vox, it will be impossible for Musk/Ramaswamy to cut $2 trillion from the budget in a way that would make it through Congress. See Vox, Why Elon Musk can never balance the budget, in one chart.

The chart published in the Vox article is from the Congressional Budget Office:

As Vox explains, even if Musk and Ramaswamy took an axe to the small portion of the discretionary budget, it would be painful in the extreme—and would save only $1.1 trillion. But those cuts would never make it through Congress:

Let’s suppose that Musk and Ramaswamy decide to really go for it. They’re going to cut non-defense discretionary spending in half, maybe by shutting down all scientific and health research and K–12 school aid. They’re slashing Medicare and Medicaid by a quarter, and they’re eliminating food stamps, ACA credits, and unemployment insurance entirely. These, to be clear, are all cuts that would require congressional approval and that Musk, Ramaswamy, and Trump could not achieve through executive action alone. Furthermore, they’re cuts that seem politically impossible to push through. For the sake of argument, let’s suppose this is the package. Doing the math, even this unbelievably ambitious package would amount to a little over $1.1 trillion annually. It’s barely halfway to Musk’s stated goal. In short, it isn’t possible mathematically or politically to achieve $2 trillion in cuts. Achieving $1 trillion would require massive cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and subsidies for the Affordable Health Care premiums. Each of those cuts would fall heavily on Trump's base—just before the 2026 midterms. It isn’t going to happen.

“Ah,” you say! “Musk and Ramaswamy will achieve their savings by cutting the federal workforce!” Wrong, again! The federal workforce peaked in size in 1970 and has remained relatively steady.

The chart below shows that the number of federal government employees has remained relatively constant since 1970, while state and local employees have increased significantly. (Thanks to Paul Krugman (@pkrugman.bsky.social) for flagging this chart.) The purple line at the bottom of the chart represents federal employees.

So, to cut significant numbers of federal employees, Musk and Ramaswamy would need a time machine to turn back the clock to pre-WWII America—when the size of the economy was about one-tenth of its current size. (US GDP in 1940 was about $2 trillion. In 2024, it was $23 trillion. See US Real GDP by Year.

The US economy is the largest in the world—by a large margin. Although Musk and Ramaswamy may not like it, the size of the US economy is due in part to the federal government, which creates stable marketplaces and economic conditions for growth.

If you demolish the federal regulatory framework by firing millions of federal employees, we devolve into a kleptocracy—like Russia, which has an economy smaller than that of Brazil. Indeed, Russia’s current GDP is smaller than that of the US before WWII. See World Bank Ranking of GDP 2023.

And in terms of public sector employment as a percentage of the workforce, the US is middle of the pack in the world rankings, below the following nations (in order): Russia, China, Australia, United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, France, Spain, and Italy. The US and Germany are effectively tied.

The myth that the US has a bloated federal bureaucracy is demonstrably false when compared to other developed economies. If Musk and Ramaswamy recommend cutting the US federal workforce by a million jobs, we will have a federal regulatory environment on the same scale as Haiti and El Salvador. That state of affairs might benefit robber barons and tech bros, but it won’t help working-class Americans.

Here’s the takeaway: We will hear an incredible amount of insufferable mansplaining and chest-thumping from Musk and Ramaswamy. But they will soon face the reality that government spending helps the American people (which is the point of having a government) and creates the conditions for a prosperous economy.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

Peter Steiner, The New Yorker

[firstoccupier]

The UK Economy: A Comprehensive Path to Recovery from COVID-19 in 2024/2025

As the UK continues to grapple with the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the journey toward economic recovery has been marked by both challenges and resilience. The ongoing impact of long COVID, public sector productivity issues, and evolving work dynamics all shape this complex narrative. In July 2021, Victoria Masterson’s article, Long COVID – what are the symptoms and how long does it…

[notayesmanseconomics]

UK Unemployment rises and remember the employment tax rises are yet to come

This morning brought us up to date with the latest news on the UK labour market. With the recent rise in employment taxes in the Budget from Chancellor Rachel Reeves most eyes will have been attracted to this bit. The UK unemployment rate for people aged 16 years and over was estimated at 4.4% in September to November 2024. This is above estimates of a year ago, and up in the latest quarter. Much…

[trendwireglobal]

Exciting Career Opportunities at The Urban Unit

The Urban Unit is seeking talented professionals to join its team in various roles for November 2024. This is a fantastic opportunity for individuals passionate about urban development and planning. Exciting Career Opportunities at The Urban Unit Available Positions: GIS Professionals Surveyors Other related roles Why Work with The Urban Unit? Impactful Work: Contribute to innovative urban…

[eldrytchcryptid]

A shout-out to my Gen Zers cause no one taught me!!!

Make sure you look into your employers Trade Union!!! Eg: the UK's two main ones are called Unison and Unite the Union!!

I think it's called a Labor Union in the US, but I was specifically researching for the UK so it might be a bit different.

I'll add a good link I found on my searching at the bottom.

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

[townpostin]

MGNREGA Workers Launch Indefinite Strike in Jharkhand

5,000+ Employees Demand Job Security and Better Benefits Indefinite strike by MGNREGA workers in Jharkhand threatens to disrupt crucial rural development schemes and wage disbursements. RANCHI – Over 5,000 MGNREGA workers across Jharkhand have initiated an indefinite strike, raising concerns about the continuity of vital rural development programs. The strike, which commenced on Monday, stems…

[goodyeartheshippycat]

RE: your comment... 7 hours from this ask on aye's blog. Yeah the benefits are great, very very flexible working hours, work from home. no one is horrible/insulting at all. no fights at all. so end of the day these benefits are good.

never stressed either from the work.

so yeah kinda benefits perhaps outweight other things.

Well I can see why you'd be loathe to leave, then, even if the pay/lack of raises or promotions situation isn't great. Hard to find a workplace that pleasant and flexible. I've definitely turned down recruiters offering higher paying jobs because I don't want to leave the good benefits and flexibility of my current workplace (especially to go somewhere they expect me to come into the office all the time and work well over 40 hours a week... fuck that). But I've also been promoted twice in five years and am making much better than minimum wage, so I'd still encourage you to at least look at some other options.

There will always be trade-offs in any workplace, but you might find one that has a better overall balance for you. It sounds like you're talented and diligent, and you might be able to find a company which is still a decent place to work but also recognizes the value you bring and compensates you accordingly. And worst case, you could probably return to your current employer after pursuing other opportunities if they don't work out the way you'd hoped. It sounds like your current place would be silly not to hire you back again, and if you're coming from somewhere else that paid you better, you could probably negotiate a higher rate when returning. ("Well I really loved working here, but my current position pays $X per hour. Is there any chance you could match that?")

Whatever you end up doing, I wish you luck Anon!

[solrazo]

SM Supermalls job fair paves the way for 2024 career opportunities

SM Supermalls, in collaboration with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), Public Employment Service Office (PESO), Local Government Units (LGUs), the Private Sector Advisory Council (PSAC) Jobs Group, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), Philippine Exporters Confederation, Inc. (PHILEXPORT), and SM Retail are set…

[firstoccupier]

The UK Economy: A Prognosis for Recovery Post-COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has left an indelible mark on economies worldwide, and the UK is no exception. As the country begins to pull together the pieces in 2024 and 2025, examining the journey from the depths of the pandemic to the current recovery provides insight into the challenges and triumphs along the way. In July 2021, Victoria Masterson highlighted the extent of long COVID in her article,…

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #38

Oct 11-18 2024

President Biden announced that this Administration had forgiven the student loan debt of 1 million public sector workers. The cancellation of the student loan debts of 60,000 teachers, firefighters, EMTs, nurses and other public sector workers brings the total number of people who's debts have been erased by the Biden-Harris Administration using the Public Service Loan Forgiveness to 1 million. the PSLF was passed in 2007 but before President Biden took office only 7,000 people had ever had their debts forgiven through it. The Biden-Harris team have through different programs managed to bring debt relief to 5 million Americans and counting despite on going legal fights against Republican state Attorneys General.

The Federal Trade Commission finalizes its "one-click to cancel" rule. The new rule requires businesses to make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it was to sign up for it. It also requires more up front information to be shared before offering billing information.

The Department of Transportation announced that since the start of the Biden-Harris Administration there are 1.7 million more construction and manufacturing jobs and 700,000 more jobs in the transportation sector. There are now 400,000 more union workers than in 2021. 60,000 Infrastructure projects across the nation have been funded by the Biden-Harris Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Under this Administration 16 million jobs have been added, including 1.7 construction and manufacturing jobs, construction employment is the highest ever recorded since records started in 1939. 172,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during the Trump administration.

The Department of Energy announced $2 billion to protect the U.S. power grid against growing threats of extreme weather. This money will go to 38 projects across 42 states and Washington DC. It'll upgrade nearly 1,000 miles worth of transmission lines. The upgrades will allow 7.5 gigawatts of new grid capacity while also generating new union jobs across the country.

The EPA announced $125 million to help upgrade older diesel engines to low or zero-emission solutions. The EPA has selected 70 projects to use the funds on. They range from replacing school buses, to port equipment, to construction equipment. More than half of the selected projects will be replacing equipment with zero-emissions, such as all electric school buses.

The Department of The Interior and State of California broke ground on the Salton Sea Species Conservation Habitat Project. The Salton Sea is California's largest lake at over 300 miles of Surface area. An earlier project worked to conserve and restore shallow water habitats in over 4,000 acres on the southern end of the lake, this week over 700 acres were added bring the total to 5,000 acres of protected land. The Biden-Harris Administration is investing $250 million in the project along side California's $500 million. Part of the Administration's effort to restore wild life habitat and protect water resources.

The Department of Energy announced $900 Million in investment in next generation nuclear power. The money will help the development of Generation III+ Light-Water Small Modular Reactors, smaller lighter reactors which in theory should be easier to deploy. DoE estimates the U.S. will need approximately 700-900 GW of additional clean, firm power generation capacity to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Currently half of America's clean energy comes from nuclear power, so lengthening the life space of current nuclear reactors and exploring the next generation is key to fighting climate change.

The federal government took two big steps to increase the rights of Alaska natives. The Departments of The Interior and Agricultural finalized an agreement to strengthen Alaska Tribal representation on the Federal Subsistence Board. The FSB oversees fish and wildlife resources for subsistence purposes on federal lands and waters in Alaska. The changes add 3 new members to the board appointed by the Alaska Native Tribes, as well as requiring the board's chair to have experience with Alaska rural subsistence. The Department of The Interior also signed 3 landmark co-stewardship agreements with Alaska Native Tribes.

The Department of Energy announced $860 million to help support solar energy in Puerto Rico. The project will remove 2.7 million tons of CO2 per year, or about the same as taking 533,000 cars off the road. It serves as an important step on the path to getting Puerto Rico to 100% renewable by 2050.

The Department of the Interior announced a major step forward in geothermal energy on public lands. The DoI announced it had approved the Fervo Cape Geothermal Power Project in Beaver County, Utah. When finished it'll generate 2 gigawatts of power, enough for 2 million homes. The BLM has now green lit 32 gigawatts of clean energy projects on public lands. A major step toward the Biden-Harris Administration's goal of a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

Bonus: President Biden meets with a Kindergarten Teacher who's student loans were forgiven this week

[cosmicpuzzle]

Venus ♀️ in Houses

Venus in 1st House

You have a keen sense of beauty and refinement and display a pleasant manner to others. You have an appreciation of the arts and music, with a sense of fashion and an ability to make yourself attractive. You like beautiful things in your environment and know how to dress well and make a good impression on other people. You are naturally charming and people generally like being in your company.

Venus in 2nd House

The good things in life appeal to you. You enjoy the things that money can buy and may spend freely on adornments, pleasures and social entertainment. You can tend to be somewhat extravagant, especially if you want to impress or please someone. Financial gain may come to you through the arts, the beauty or fashion industries or the entertainment sectors.

Venus in 3rd House

In love, you are attracted to people who stimulate you intellectually. You have a love of the arts, music, theatre and literature. Charming in your dealings with people, you desire peaceful relations with others and will go to great lengths to avoid arguments and disharmony. Relationships with relatives and neighbors are generally good.

Venus in 4th House

You desire peace and harmony in your domestic and family life. You appreciate fine furnishings and will make every effort to decorate your home tastefully or aesthetically. You enjoy entertaining at home and may be a good cook or a keen gardener.

Venus in 5th House

You have a strongly romantic nature and may experience many affairs of the heart. You know how to enjoy life's pleasures. You are easy-going, popular and well-liked. Other people are attracted to you for your infectious sense of fun. You appreciate the arts and are probably artistically talented in some form of creative expression, especially acting, dancing, music or singing.

Venus in 6th House

Harmony in your work environment is important to you and you seek to maintain positive relationships with the people you work with. You enjoy creative work, being of service to others or working in fields which are particular to the needs of women. In general, you like animals and benefit emotionally through keeping pets.

Venus in 7th House

You blossom and prosper through romantic partnerships or marital union. Partners tend to be attractive and companionable. You are suited to dealing with the public and could enjoy success in personnel work, the art or entertainment industries or the counseling sectors.

Venus in 8th House

Financial benefits are possible through marriage, business partnerships and possibly inheritances. In love, you may be anxious and fearful about loss, which can cause turmoil and difficulties in your intimate relationships. Displays of jealousy and possessiveness by either you or a partner can be destructive.

Venus in 9th House

In love, you may be attracted to someone whose background or culture is different to your own. Romantic experiences can occur during travel. Intimate and social contacts can be made in learning, spiritual or religious environments. You may have an appreciation for the artworks of different cultures and possibly even enjoy religious art and music.

Venus in 10th House

You are socially ambitious and tend to receive the right sort of help from others. Significant personal unions can bring prosperity and social advantage. It is possible you may form an attraction to an employer or a superior in your vocational life. You can be suited to careers that involve the arts and if you have artistic talent you could have success and recognition. Prominent women can influence your professional life.

Venus in 11th House

Your social life is important and you will probably belong to a variety of groups or clubs. Romantic affairs and close friendships can be established through shared activities. In special circumstances, friendships can develop into love affairs, or vice versa. You attract cultured and artistically minded friends who appreciate good taste and refinement.

Venus in 12th House

You enjoy quiet and solitude and occasional periods alone to recharge your emotional batteries. You can be shy and reserved in the expression of your intimate feelings and may harbor unspoken romantic yearnings. Equally, you may have secret admirers or become involved in private love affairs. Be aware that sexual indiscretion can cause scandal and embarrassment.

For Readings/Reports DM

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Penguin Random House, AI, and writers’ rights

NEXT WEDNESDAY (October 23) at 7PM, I'll be in DECATUR, GEORGIA, presenting my novel THE BEZZLE at EAGLE EYE BOOKS.

My friend Teresa Nielsen Hayden is a wellspring of wise sayings, like "you're not responsible for what you do in other people's dreams," and my all time favorite, from the Napster era: "Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side."

The record labels hated Napster, and so did many musicians, and when those musicians sided with their labels in the legal and public relations campaigns against file-sharing, they lent both legal and public legitimacy to the labels' cause, which ultimately prevailed.

But the labels weren't on musicians' side. The demise of Napster and with it, the idea of a blanket-license system for internet music distribution (similar to the systems for radio, live performance, and canned music at venues and shops) firmly established that new services must obtain permission from the labels in order to operate.

That era is very good for the labels. The three-label cartel – Universal, Warner and Sony – was in a position to dictate terms like Spotify, who handed over billions of dollars worth of stock, and let the Big Three co-design the royalty scheme that Spotify would operate under.

If you know anything about Spotify payments, it's probably this: they are extremely unfavorable to artists. This is true – but that doesn't mean it's unfavorable to the Big Three labels. The Big Three get guaranteed monthly payments (much of which is booked as "unattributable royalties" that the labels can disperse or keep as they see fit), along with free inclusion on key playlists and other valuable services. What's more, the ultra-low payouts to artists increase the value of the labels' stock in Spotify, since the less Spotify has to pay for music, the better it looks to investors.

The Big Three – who own 70% of all music ever recorded, thanks to an orgy of mergers – make up the shortfall from these low per-stream rates with guaranteed payments and promo.

But the indy labels and musicians that account for the remaining 30% are out in the cold. They are locked into the same fractional-penny-per-stream royalty scheme as the Big Three, but they don't get gigantic monthly cash guarantees, and they have to pay the playlist placement the Big Three get for free.

Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/12/streaming-doesnt-pay/#stunt-publishing

In a very important, material sense, creative workers – writers, filmmakers, photographers, illustrators, painters and musicians – are not on the same side as the labels, agencies, studios and publishers that bring our work to market. Those companies are not charities; they are driven to maximize profits and an important way to do that is to reduce costs, including and especially the cost of paying us for our work.

It's easy to miss this fact because the workers at these giant entertainment companies are our class allies. The same impulse to constrain payments to writers is in play when entertainment companies think about how much they pay editors, assistants, publicists, and the mail-room staff. These are the people that creative workers deal with on a day to day basis, and they are on our side, by and large, and it's easy to conflate these people with their employers.

This class war need not be the central fact of creative workers' relationship with our publishers, labels, studios, etc. When there are lots of these entertainment companies, they compete with one another for our work (and for the labor of the workers who bring that work to market), which increases our share of the profit our work produces.

But we live in an era of extreme market concentration in every sector, including entertainment, where we deal with five publishers, four studios, three labels, two ad-tech companies and a single company that controls all the ebooks and audiobooks. That concentration makes it much harder for artists to bargain effectively with entertainments companies, and that means that it's possible -likely, even – for entertainment companies to gain market advantages that aren't shared with creative workers. In other words, when your field is dominated by a cartel, you may be on on their side, but they're almost certainly not on your side.

This week, Penguin Random House, the largest publisher in the history of the human race, made headlines when it changed the copyright notice in its books to ban AI training:

https://www.thebookseller.com/news/penguin-random-house-underscores-copyright-protection-in-ai-rebuff

The copyright page now includes this phrase:

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner for the purpose of training artificial intelligence technologies or systems.

Many writers are celebrating this move as a victory for creative workers' rights over AI companies, who have raised hundreds of billions of dollars in part by promising our bosses that they can fire us and replace us with algorithms.

But these writers are assuming that just because they're on Penguin Random House's side, PRH is on their side. They're assuming that if PRH fights against AI companies training bots on their work for free, that this means PRH won't allow bots to be trained on their work at all.

This is a pretty naive take. What's far more likely is that PRH will use whatever legal rights it has to insist that AI companies pay it for the right to train chatbots on the books we write. It is vanishingly unlikely that PRH will share that license money with the writers whose books are then shoveled into the bot's training-hopper. It's also extremely likely that PRH will try to use the output of chatbots to erode our wages, or fire us altogether and replace our work with AI slop.

This is speculation on my part, but it's informed speculation. Note that PRH did not announce that it would allow authors to assert the contractual right to block their work from being used to train a chatbot, or that it was offering authors a share of any training license fees, or a share of the income from anything produced by bots that are trained on our work.

Indeed, as publishing boiled itself down from the thirty-some mid-sized publishers that flourished when I was a baby writer into the Big Five that dominate the field today, their contracts have gotten notably, materially worse for writers:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/19/reasonable-agreement/

This is completely unsurprising. In any auction, the more serious bidders there are, the higher the final price will be. When there were thirty potential bidders for our work, we got a better deal on average than we do now, when there are at most five bidders.

Though this is self-evident, Penguin Random House insists that it's not true. Back when PRH was trying to buy Simon & Schuster (thereby reducing the Big Five publishers to the Big Four), they insisted that they would continue to bid against themselves, with editors at Simon & Schuster (a division of PRH) bidding against editors at Penguin (a division of PRH) and Random House (a division of PRH).

This is obvious nonsense, as Stephen King said when he testified against the merger (which was subsequently blocked by the court): "You might as well say you’re going to have a husband and wife bidding against each other for the same house. It would be sort of very gentlemanly and sort of, 'After you' and 'After you'":

https://apnews.com/article/stephen-king-government-and-politics-b3ab31d8d8369e7feed7ce454153a03c

Penguin Random House didn't become the largest publisher in history by publishing better books or doing better marketing. They attained their scale by buying out their rivals. The company is actually a kind of colony organism made up of dozens of once-independent publishers. Every one of those acquisitions reduced the bargaining power of writers, even writers who don't write for PRH, because the disappearance of a credible bidder for our work into the PRH corporate portfolio reduces the potential bidders for our work no matter who we're selling it to.

I predict that PRH will not allow its writers to add a clause to their contracts forbidding PRH from using their work to train an AI. That prediction is based on my direct experience with two of the other Big Five publishers, where I know for a fact that they point-blank refused to do this, and told the writer that any insistence on including this contract would lead to the offer being rescinded.

The Big Five have remarkably similar contracting terms. Or rather, unremarkably similar contracts, since concentrated industries tend to converge in their operational behavior. The Big Five are similar enough that it's generally understood that a writer who sues one of the Big Five publishers will likely find themselves blackballed at the rest.

My own agent gave me this advice when one of the Big Five stole more than $10,000 from me – canceled a project that I was part of because another person involved with it pulled out, and then took five figures out of the killfee specified in my contract, just because they could. My agent told me that even though I would certainly win that lawsuit, it would come at the cost of my career, since it would put me in bad odor with all of the Big Five.

The writers who are cheering on Penguin Random House's new copyright notice are operating under the mistaken belief that this will make it less likely that our bosses will buy an AI in hopes of replacing us with it:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/09/ai-monkeys-paw/#bullied-schoolkids

That's not true. Giving Penguin Random House the right to demand license fees for AI training will do nothing to reduce the likelihood that Penguin Random House will choose to buy an AI in hopes of eroding our wages or firing us.

But something else will! The US Copyright Office has issued a series of rulings, upheld by the courts, asserting that nothing made by an AI can be copyrighted. By statute and international treaty, copyright is a right reserved for works of human creativity (that's why the "monkey selfie" can't be copyrighted):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/20/everything-made-by-an-ai-is-in-the-public-domain/

All other things being equal, entertainment companies would prefer to pay creative workers as little as possible (or nothing at all) for our work. But as strong as their preference for reducing payments to artists is, they are far more committed to being able to control who can copy, sell and distribute the works they release.

In other words, when confronted with a choice of "We don't have to pay artists anymore" and "Anyone can sell or give away our products and we won't get a dime from it," entertainment companies will pay artists all day long.

Remember that dope everyone laughed at because he scammed his way into winning an art contest with some AI slop then got angry because people were copying "his" picture? That guy's insistence that his slop should be entitled to copyright is far more dangerous than the original scam of pretending that he painted the slop in the first place:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/artist-appeals-copyright-denial-for-prize-winning-ai-generated-work/

If PRH was intervening in these Copyright Office AI copyrightability cases to say AI works can't be copyrighted, that would be an instance where we were on their side and they were on our side. The day they submit an amicus brief or rulemaking comment supporting no-copyright-for-AI, I'll sing their praises to the heavens.

But this change to PRH's copyright notice won't improve writers' bank-balances. Giving writers the ability to control AI training isn't going to stop PRH and other giant entertainment companies from training AIs with our work. They'll just say, "If you don't sign away the right to train an AI with your work, we won't publish you."

The biggest predictor of how much money an artist sees from the exploitation of their work isn't how many exclusive rights we have, it's how much bargaining power we have. When you bargain against five publishers, four studios or three labels, any new rights you get from Congress or the courts is simply transferred to them the next time you negotiate a contract.

As Rebecca Giblin and I write in our 2022 book Chokepoint Capitalism:

Giving a creative worker more copyright is like giving your bullied schoolkid more lunch money. No matter how much you give them, the bullies will take it all. Give your kid enough lunch money and the bullies will be able to bribe the principle to look the other way. Keep giving that kid lunch money and the bullies will be able to launch a global appeal demanding more lunch money for hungry kids!

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

As creative workers' fortunes have declined through the neoliberal era of mergers and consolidation, we've allowed ourselves to be distracted with campaigns to get us more copyright, rather than more bargaining power.

There are copyright policies that get us more bargaining power. Banning AI works from getting copyright gives us more bargaining power. After all, just because AI can't do our job, it doesn't follow that AI salesmen can't convince our bosses to fire us and replace us with incompetent AI:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/11/robots-stole-my-jerb/#computer-says-no

Then there's "copyright termination." Under the 1976 Copyright Act, creative workers can take back the copyright to their works after 35 years, even if they sign a contract giving up the copyright for its full term:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/09/26/take-it-back/

Creative workers from George Clinton to Stephen King to Stan Lee have converted this right to money – unlike, say, longer terms of copyright, which are simply transferred to entertainment companies through non-negotiable contractual clauses. Rather than joining our publishers in fighting for longer terms of copyright, we could be demanding shorter terms for copyright termination, say, the right to take back a popular book or song or movie or illustration after 14 years (as was the case in the original US copyright system), and resell it for more money as a risk-free, proven success.

Until then, remember, just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side. They don't want to prevent AI slop from reducing your wages, they just want to make sure it's their AI slop puts you on the breadline.

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER stories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; and SPILL, about oil pipelines and indigenous landback.

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/2024/10/19/gander-sauce/#just-because-youre-on-their-side-it-doesnt-mean-theyre-on-your-side

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en